Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump approaches ramming speed: Will go straight at Bill and Hillary in debate

Trump approaches ramming speed: Will go straight at Bill and Hillary in debate

Taking Hillary down with him in the hope the public will put a pox on both their houses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47B8LsVOzAU

By any conventional wisdom, Donald Trump’s polling numbers should crater as a result of the release of a 2005 video in which he disparages women and boasts of hitting on married and other women in a manner that suggests non-consensual sexual contact. But so much of what seems logical to me has been wrong when it comes to Trump’s ability to weather political storms.

Put aside the rank hypocrisy of the politicians and media who to this day defend Bill Clinton, who is alleged by numerous women to have done far worse.

Precisely because the media would want any Republican to lose, no moral equivalence will be drawn much yet used as an excuse. After all, the media painted Mitt Romney as a virtual sexual deviant because of the “binders of women” comment during a debate, so yes, the mainstream media is disgusting and dishonest.

Trump’s apology seems to signal that he will respond by putting Bill and Hillary in the dock, going squarely at Bill’s allegedly more serious conduct and Hillary’s attack on Bill’s paramours and accusers.

Trump says he’s not dropping out:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/784840992734064641

And his wife is standing by him:

There will be a huge audience Sunday night at the second debate, maybe larger than the first debate. If Trump is to turn the corner, that’s the best (and maybe last) time to do it.

Seems that Trump is approaching ramming speed:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Henry Hawkins | October 8, 2016 at 7:11 pm

At which point during the debate Hillary will point out that Trump nonetheless attended a Clinton wedding and other Clinton family events, donated to the Clinton campaigns, supported the Clintons in every election, and advised Bill not to apologize or back down in the face of sexual assault allegations, the old ‘were you lying then or are you lying now?’ gambit.

This sounds more like a final seconds Hail Mary play than a thought out debate tactic.

    DieJustAsHappy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 8, 2016 at 7:17 pm

    Actually, I think I’d allowed Hillary to have her full say, accusations and all. When she finished, I’d indicate to whom I’d already apologized, then look squarely in the camera and apologize to the American people. Turning to Hillary I would ask her if she and Bill were prepared to do the same.

DieJustAsHappy | October 8, 2016 at 7:11 pm

For you “Ben Hur” fans, recall this “ramming speed’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXh1tW16V-8

There is no comparison between “Trump likes girls and talks like a man” and Hillary’s total corruption. Not even close.

    fscarn in reply to Kaffa. | October 8, 2016 at 8:07 pm

    “Oh, Trump said a naughty word. I guess I’ll now have to reconsider my vote and be happy to install someone in the WH who’s enriched herself by selling what she never owned (i.e., American sovereignty, Independence, and safety), will accelerate globalism which will increase her net worth, will further degrade the work prospects of even more Americans, and will bring even more free-loading Muslims to America. Among lots of other undesirable objectives using her demonstrated lack of judgment and care for others.”

    “Oh, those naughty words. Bending the arch of history.”

      Ragspierre in reply to fscarn. | October 8, 2016 at 8:32 pm

      I really wish the T-rump suckers here would stop with that deminimus bullshit.

      He BRAGGED about a colorable sexual assault or several.

      Trying to minimize that as “bad words” just makes you sound stupid.

      Plus, you are no James Carville. He did it much better.

    GrumpyOne in reply to Kaffa. | October 9, 2016 at 1:00 am

    I think that Nigel Farage, (Brexit architect), coined this whole bruhaha nicely this morning while chatting with Neil Cavuto when Nigel quipped, “Trump said what Bill actually did.”

    Talk about summing it up in a nutshell…

Who said he hits on married women? Proof

The second part. Where was it suggested that he engaged in nonconsentual sexual contact?

In the third part he expresses amazement that women encouraged consentual contact when you were a star. He also seems to suggest a disregard for such women. To me “let you” seems to suggest consent.

A few days ago, you said that fewer people would be watching the other debates than were watching the first. Now you think that it is possible more people will be watching this debate.

Do you really believe that there will be a sharp falloff for number 3?

This clip pretty much sums up how I feel at this point in the 2016 election cycle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsqJFIJ5lLs

    It is a sort of tumultuous cycle. The Republican has been rumored to be relieved twice after the nomination, the Democrat once ( at this point). I don’t think there has ever been one such rumor in any previous cycle.

    OTOH, it could have been a much calmer election if Jeb! had gotten the nomination. I’ll live with the excitement.

    I”m definitely NOT here to be entertained. I want a better future for my kids.

Keep in mind that within 4 years of Hillary’s election, better than 80% of America’s gun owners will be de facto felons for refusing to disarm. And, if US troops refuse to disarm our citizens, the UN will be more than happy to use its troops to do so.

    Barry in reply to MSO. | October 8, 2016 at 10:36 pm

    We outnumber the feckless UN “troops”. Plus, without lots of impoverished children to sexually exploit, I doubt any troops will volunteer.

WASH POST: GOP Donors Robert and Rebekah Mercer Stand by Donald Trump
We are completely indifferent to Mr. Trump’s locker room braggadocio.

SHOCKING VIDEO RECOVERED=> Bill Clinton Grabs Stewardess P*ssy

If the Clinton’s want war, Trump has lots of ammunition.

    OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to Kaffa. | October 8, 2016 at 7:57 pm

    The bookies now have Trump as a 4-1 underdog. Do you think more of the same is going to help him? Please, please don’t throw me into the briar patch.

I really don’t care what Trump said in a private conversation. Trump has never had a filter between his brain and his mouth and anyone who didn’t know he was a pig wasn’t paying attention.

Let me know when he sends an Ambassador out with inadequate protection in a unstable Muslim country on the anniversary of September 11th and then withholds assistance from the people who are trying to rescue him. Let me know when he deletes 33K emails, many of them highly classified, from a private server that he knew was illegal. A bunch of vulgar trash talk doesn’t even compare to what Hillary has actually done so let’s not all run around with our hair on fire and usher in the destruction of this nation via virtue signaling.

Trump just has to say, “I apologize for my language, but it’s a fact that many men and women speak crudely in private about the opposite sex. Real grown-ups know this. On the other hand, not all men are rapists, never mind serial rapists, and very few of them have wives who defend them and do so by smearing their husbands’ accusers. What should voters find more disturbing, my vulgar language in private, or Hillary Clinton’s manipulation of the electorate by saying one thing in public and another in private on matters of substance?”

    OnlyRightDissentAllowed in reply to DaveGinOly. | October 8, 2016 at 7:54 pm

    Being that he is such a pro, you would think he would know about open mics.

    Arminius in reply to DaveGinOly. | October 8, 2016 at 10:15 pm

    You and Sanddog have a strange idea of “private.” Have you seen the video before you declared video before you declared Trump’s conversation “private?” You couldn’t have. He’s on and Access Hollywood tour bus with undetermined number of people. Trump is talking as the bus is pulling up to its mark in a TV studio parking lot. There’s a camera at the mark where the bus is filming the approach. When the bus finally stops four or five guys including the driver. It’s hard to tell because the picture is distorted. It could even have even been six. It’s also impossible to tell if any others besides Trump and Bily Bush remain on the bus. The guys who got out scatter to get out of the shot as clearly the video is going to be edited; the distortion won’t matter as far as Access Hollywood is concerned. An actress walks up to bus,Trump and Billy Bush get off, and, action!

    So, let’s review. Trump is on a bus owned by one company, that has been leased by a TV production company, and it has several people besides Trump on the bus many of whom are clearly employees of those two companies and are not Trump’s friends. All of those people could have have been complete strangers to Trump before he got on that bus, and could have still been complete strangers when he got off the bus. I doubt he said more than five words to the driver.

    There’s a technical term for the kind of conversation he had on that bus and it’s not “private.” It’s called “public.” He was having a public conversation within earshot of complete strangers. Since he had no expectation of privacy he wouldn’t even had to have seen those microphones. I doubt leased bus is permanently wired for sound, though. And considering he’s lawsuit happy Donald Trump I’m sure it would have had to have been in the contract when Access Hollywood was going to start recording him.

    Oh, yeah, and he sounded like he was really grown up. There’s another technical term for what he sounded like. Juvenile.

    Your attempted defense of Trump is really, really stupid. Particularly because he talked this way on several occasions on the Howard Stern show. Here’s another gem he’s going to have to deal with.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/08/politics/trump-on-howard-stern/index.html

    “…In more than one interview with Stern, Trump took part in conversations about Ivanka Trump’s appearance, including one about the size of her breasts.
    In an October 2006 interview, Stern remarks that Ivanka “looks more voluptuous than ever,” and asked if she had gotten breast implants. Trump is willing to engage in the discussion about his own daughter, telling Stern that she did not get implants.
    “She’s actually always been very voluptuous,” Trump responds. “She’s tall, she’s almost 6 feet tall and she’s been, she’s an amazing beauty.”

    In another interview, from September 2004, Stern asks Trump if he can call Ivanka “a piece of ass,” to which Trump responds in the affirmative.
    “My daughter is beautiful, Ivanka,” says Trump.
    “By the way, your daughter,” says Stern.
    “She’s beautiful,” responds Trump.
    “Can I say this? A piece of ass,” Stern responds.
    “Yeah,” says Trump. ”

    So what are you going to do with this? Claim Trump doesn’t know how radio works, and this is how “real grown ups” talk about what a nice piece of ass there own daughters are when having private, intimate conversations with their good friend Howard Stern and the sound room crew?

      Sanddog in reply to Arminius. | October 8, 2016 at 11:17 pm

      Are you going to feel all moral and righteous if Hillary wins the White House? You remember her… the bitch who loathes the military is going to be their Commander in Chief. But hey, that’s okay because you took offense at comments that WERE NOT made with the intention of them being broadcast across the freaking planet.

      I gotta say, putting Hillary in the oval office is far more morally objectionable than anything Trump said.

I’m sorry to have missed part of the action. I stepped away to make a late lunch. There was a TV on in the other. I got to watch the end of the Quiet Man. You know the part where John Wayne drags Maureen O’Brien and gives her back to her brother for not paying her dowry.

Oh wait …

    Ragspierre in reply to RodFC. | October 8, 2016 at 8:11 pm

    It’s Maureen O’Harah, and that’d work swell with Melimine or whatever her name is. She’d crush Der Donald, and Ivanka would just sweep up the remains.

Well, Sooprise, Sooprise:

“making off-color comments about women while with George H.W. Bush’s nephew, Billy Bush. were leaked.”

Well, we know where the tape came from. Paranoid? Not nearly enough.

There will be lot of very serious thinking tonight and tomorrow, as office-holders have to decide when and how fast to distance themselves from this Toxic T-rump.

I don’t think there’s a chance in hell he can do what has to be done to recover. He’s constitutionally incapable. And one of the many things he can do wrong is to be too defensive and run at Hellary too hard.

We’ll watch and see, but remember, “preference cascade”…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Bush

Hmm. Nephew of GHWB. Something smells here.

I wish I had my 1988,1992,2000,2004 votes back. Both primary and general elections.

    Ragspierre in reply to RodFC. | October 8, 2016 at 8:37 pm

    I’ll tell you what smells…Toxic Don.

    He knew this stuff was out there, and there’s NO indication he made any plans to meet it.

    He’s either the most arrogant or stupidest son-of-a-bitch ever to run for POTUS.

    Oh, and Dr. Carson says there’s more on the way…

    His second wife was probably the source of his tax return leak. The Don certainly knows how to make enemies.

      CloseTheFed in reply to edgeofthesandbox. | October 9, 2016 at 7:26 am

      That doesn’t make sense to me. All his wives, Marla Maples included, have children with them. What better way to set your children for life than to have them have a father that is president of the U.S.A.?

      You’d not sabotage that.

Question for voters:
Would you rather have a president who calls a vagina a “pussy” (like we haven’t had one already – I’m thinking LBJ) or another president who can’t say “Islamic terrorist”?

I like cats.

Hey Hey don’t forget Truman and Nixon.
Just saying.

    Ragspierre in reply to RodFC. | October 8, 2016 at 9:16 pm

    Did they brag about sexually assaulting women too?

    Somehow I missed that. Because it didn’t happen, mostly.

      RodFC in reply to Ragspierre. | October 8, 2016 at 9:18 pm

      Where is there any indication that he engaged in sexual assault?

        Ragspierre in reply to RodFC. | October 8, 2016 at 10:19 pm

        “I moved on her, and I failed. … I did try and f*** her. She was married,” Trump says in the recording from 2005, which was taken aboard the “Access Hollywood” bus and obtained by the Washington Post. Trump continues to discuss the woman in question, “Access Hollywood” host Nancy O’Dell, claiming she enhanced her breasts. Then, when Trump and a fellow passenger spotted a woman outside, Trump says, “I’ve got to use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her. You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait.” Moments later, Trump adds, “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab them by the p***y. You can do anything.”

        Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/440867/trumps-legacy-will-haunt-gop-beyond-2016

        Your ignorance of this is appalling…yet typical.

          “Your ignorance of this is appalling…yet typical.”

          Your twisting of salty language is appalling…yet typical.

          A lawyer? Really?
          “I moved on her, and I failed”
          Sounds like he took no for an answer. No assault there.

          “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait.” A kiss assault? Unless he does something like grab her arms, I doubt it.

          “And when you’re a star, they let you do it.” Didn’t they teach you about this thing called consent in law school? Aren’t there questions about it on the bar exam?

          Arminius in reply to Ragspierre. | October 8, 2016 at 11:37 pm

          Get a clue Barry. Rags isn’t twisting anything. He’s telling you how the MSM is reporting it. You can shoot the messenger and you close your eyes and put your hands over your ears and shout at the top of your lungs, “LALALLALALALA! I can’t hear you. But just because you won’t look at it or listen to it that won’t make reality go away.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | October 8, 2016 at 11:39 pm

          Yep. On the bar exam, any unwanted touch is assault. Same in criminal court, BTW.

          If it’s sexual in nature, it’s sexual assault.

          If Dim Jim Hoft came up and stated kissing and slobbering on you, that would be a sexual assault.

          I hope that dispels your awful ignorance and stupidity. But I doubt I dented it…

          Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 1:28 am

          Name one woman that has claimed any sexual assault perpetrated by Trump.

          That’s right, you can’t. Talk, trashy or otherwise, doesn’t make for a sexual assault.

          Mr. Lawyer. Apparently not a very bright one. There would need to be a victim, not your imagination.

          How about two women? Here ya go: http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-words-echo-womans-allegations-507763

          And that’s just so far. Be wary of being too blase about this . . . a Bill Cosby-sized avalanche of such allegations is not out of the realm of possibility.

          As to whether grabbing a woman by her genitals is a crime (this isn’t to Barry, it’s to those of you who seem to think it’s not a criminal act):

          If you really think that grabbing a woman’s lady parts is not assault, why don’t we try a little experiment. You go out in the street, grab the first woman you see by the p***y, and report back to us what crime you are charged with.

          No takers? Well, of course not! Why would you go out and commit what you know to be a sexual assault? Or is it just a sexual assault if the man doing it is not rich and famous? Is that what is being argued in these threads? By people who are incensed that Hillary and a host of other Democrats get away with all sorts of criminal activity because they are rich and famous? Really?

          Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 1:33 am

          “Get a clue Barry. Rags isn’t twisting anything. He’s telling you how the MSM is reporting it.”

          No Arminius he is not. It is how he is twisting it as sexual assault. Since now women have accused Trump of any such thing, it is still just trash talk, nothing more. You may not like it, I don’t, but sexual assault it is not. The media twists everything. That does not excuse rags or anyone else form doing it.

          ” Be wary of being too blase about this ”

          Fuzzy, yes that is a possibility. I have witnessed way too many “allegations, unsubstantiated” by operative of the democrat party. It doesn’t matter if it is Trump or any other republican nominee, they always dig up some woman to make allegations, see Clarence Thomas.

          I stand corrected since I did say any allegation. What I intended was any legal allegation of substance, but I did not state it that way.

          It’s possible Trump is what you think. I remain cognizant of that fact. It’s also possible it is the same smear job, orchestrated by the left, that we always see. Aided and abetted by Trumps trash talk of course.

I believe that his only out for him is to state at the debate that “I said offensive things about women among a group of men who were acting like big shots and for that I apologize. But hillary has lied about everything in her life and protected bill from his many ACTUAL sexual aggressions against many women. She has been derelict in her performance as Sec of State and caused the death of four loyal Americans. She has lied about her support for the TPP and she wants open borders with international control of all business activity. She opposes the 2nd amendment and wants to keep the failing obamacare. I am a flawed man who has made and lost billions of dollars but I have created many thousands of jobs and know how to put this country back to work. If you like the last eight years then vote for hillary. If you are ready for change and an improving way of life then vote for me”.
If he gets into the weeds like he did with his tax returns he is toast. He needs to make it a referendum on the future of our country. If he gets into bill did worse than I did or hillary was his enabler, all true, he will lose the debate. He has to stay focused on the issues that most voters want resolved like unlimited muslim immigration and open borders.

"If American women are so outraged by Donald trumps naughty words …Who the hell bought 80 million copies of 50 Shades of Grey?" pic.twitter.com/HdGpTfJh7j— Burnie Thompson Show (@burniethompson) October 8, 2016

    RodFC in reply to Kaffa. | October 8, 2016 at 10:12 pm

    Who watched Sex in the City?

    Valerie in reply to Kaffa. | October 8, 2016 at 10:21 pm

    I wouldn’t be a bit surprised is most of the “women” who are “outraged” are some combination of paid shills and sock puppets.

    I find it very hard to believe that anybody in America really expects an American businessman to be unable to tell a dirty joke.

    What’s important is something else, entirely, namely their pay.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/AskThe_Donald/comments/56auyy/did_you_know_trumps_support_for_women/

    …that Trump hires aproximately equal numbers of men and woman yet more woman are promoted to executive roles in his company?
    …that he has been doing this since the 70s well before it was a popular thing to do and helped pioneer the construction industry to include female executives?
    …that his company offers woman paid maternity leave and female employees say they feel supported rather than shut-out when they have a baby?

    Isn’t this kerfluffel strongly reminiscent of the “racist” kerfluffel, that ran on until people realized that Bill Clinton really did play golf at a whites-only golf course while Donald Trump filed suit to allow his own private club to admit Jews and blacks?

    The Obama administration had a piss-poor record for number of women and pay rates, but the greedy businessman, like most businessmen, cares only about the best, most capable person, and is willing to pay.

      Ragspierre in reply to Valerie. | October 8, 2016 at 11:44 pm

      Huh.

      One of the “women” (your scare-quotes, fan-gurl) who deplored Donald “Da Pig” T-rump’s comments was his wife.

      But she forgives him. For what, according to your crazy apologetics?

      Ragspierre in reply to Valerie. | October 9, 2016 at 12:25 am

      “The words my husband used are unacceptable and offensive to me. This does not represent the man that I know. He has the heart and mind of a leader. I hope people will accept his apology, as I have, and focus on the important issues facing our nation and the world. ”

      Note carefully that…like Donald “Da Pig” T-rump’s “apology”…the emphasis is on WORDS, not the sexually assault behavior.

      Like someone was managing messaging or something…

      I can’t say I’m outraged because I’m not surprised. However, your scare quotes around the word woman betray intolerance. So, if we don’t like Trump, we are not women enough?
      …Either that or we are only attracted to alfas.

    gospace in reply to Kaffa. | October 8, 2016 at 11:07 pm

    I don’t twit, but that’s an absolutely great twitter comment. I suspect that most, if not all, of the female supporters of Monica Lewinsky’s ex-boyfriend’s wife, Communist Party candidate for president and corrupt alcoholic enabler of her sexual predator husband own a copy. None of the women I know closely who are voting for Trump have a copy nor have they read that particular piece of trash.

      CloseTheFed in reply to gospace. | October 9, 2016 at 7:44 am

      I was surprised Trump didn’t mention his suit to open his club in Florida to Jews and blacks during the debate. He really failed to highlight his impressive achievements and to tie things together.

      As for “50 Shades of Grey,” I heard a Stefan Molyneaux review of the movie on YouTube and he said it wasn’t bad. When the book came out 5 years ago, I refused to buy it assuming it was trash. After Molyneaux’s movie review, I decided to read it.

      The reason I didn’t read it to begin with was I assumed it was your basic romance novel (it is) with the BDSM thrown in for titillation and appeal to prurient interest, and I assumed it whitewashed the things that cause people to be interested in BDSM.

      When I actually read the book (I read the entire trilogy), I was EXTREMELY happy that she did NOT whitewash why people are interested in those practices. She made it clear in the book the man had been neglected and abused as a very young child, that his mother had neglected him and not prevented abuse that she knew was happening, and that he lived with it every day of his life.

      His relationship with the main female character involved the process of addressing and dealing with the trauma and changing how he behaved. Interestingly, this character also mentioned many therapies he had tried, but she must not have done much research on that topic because she did not mention some of the better techniques, such as E.M.D.R. (Eye Movement Desensitization & Reprocessing).

      I am very interested in this topic because some years ago,I met a man who was abused as a very young child and he had the same challenges, except more of them. His abuse was quite severe. So I actually related to the story. And it is very common for such people to arrange to become workaholics, so they remain so busy they don’t have time to think about their abuse. Camile Paglia has written the same thing, and has speculated this may motivate Clinton, she’s such a workaholic.

      All this said, the book was annoying to read, as her writing style with regard to the main female character was extraordinarily tiresome. I skipped large sections, just trying to get to how she dealt with causes and healing.

So long as the Republican hierarchy stays the way it is, so-called independents and other Democrats will continue to vote in the Republican primaries so as to nominate weak little campaign messes or total putzes on the Republican ticket.

So if I understand the morality issues at play here: As a punishment for a few bad words by Trump, the nation has to accept 4 years of a Clinton presidency. It seems to me like an extreme punishment for a minor crime that the nation didn’t commit. Or perhaps some people are overreacting.

Is Trump even going to last long enough for Sunday debate? Wheels are coming off fast.

This just in. Hackers have broken into Trumps computer! They have discovered that he has a porn stach and have made it public.

Shall we extend the same level of belief in your statement as you have in Trumps apology?

WHo cares what he said a decade ago. The election is about two choices: Hillary or Not-Hillary. Vote for Not-Hillary!

Henry Hawkins | October 9, 2016 at 9:20 am

In defense of Trump I’d like to point out that Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and Carlos Danger all did far worse. This fact makes Trump a great candidate for the US presidency, that others have done worse. /sarc

Trump’s base will defend him no matter what, but that’s irrelevant in that there isn’t nearly enough of them to win the election. People who weren’t going to vote for Trump before won’t be changed by this video dump, obviously.

The key is how independents will react to this and likely ensuing video dumps (Oct surprises), because neither Trump nor Clinton can win without a large percentage of them – in 2012 Romney won the independent vote, but it still wasn’t nearly enough.

That the media would be full-tilt against the GOP nominee no matter who it was, let alone it being Trump, was a given. It always is. That the Clinton campaign would play dirty was a given. That independents, owning a plurality among all US voters, would decide the election was a given.

Despite fair early warning on these Politics 101 issues, the Trump campaign has failed to counter any of them. The master of media is being defeated by the media. The great deal maker has failed to secure ‘deals’ with anyone but it’s numerically insufficient base supporters. It doesn’t matter what ‘should’ be happening, only what is.

Let the race to find scapegoats begin.

    DieJustAsHappy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 9, 2016 at 10:50 am

    One can run against the political establishment. One must never forget that the game is still played by their rules. One of these is that when political capital is spent it is gone, never to return.

    Remember the early days of this administration. Obama had, at least in some circles, considerable amount. Others adopted a wait and see. Then, there was the bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia. The CD’s of his speeches to Queen Elizabeth and the return of a bust of Winston Churchill. Michelle’s “all this fuss over a flag.” He began to loose goodwill and continued to draw upon it until any number of people were adamant that he was the worst ever.

    Trump spent his like the billionaire he is. Consequently, the slightest expenditure now is most likely sending him into another bankruptcy, a political one.

I asked several top Republican strategists who have worked on presidential campaigns but are not involved in this one. None believes Trump will win, but most thought a congressional stampede would not be decisive, or even terribly important.

“It is not going to become unsurvivable for Trump,” wrote one. “It already IS unsurvivable for Trump.” Nevertheless: “I don’t think congressional defections matter in terms of Trump’s fate one bit. The die is now cast for him. Congressional defections are all about the defectors trying to save themselves from the flying shrapnel.”

“This is not about whether it is survivable for Trump,” wrote another. “Much of this is already built into his stock price. He may not win, but he’s driving the wagon and will continue to do so. Others riding in his wagon may not be so lucky. They are bailing because they can’t afford to go down this road with him.”
—Byron York

PowerLine reminded me of Ronald Reagan’s reaction to the news of Gary Hart’s sexual peccadillos in 1987: “Boys will be boys—but boys will not be president.”

Neither will the sick Collectivist puke so many here apologize for so lamely. It really is a disgusting display of cult worship and mindless partisanship.

ST. LOUIS – No candidate has entered a presidential debate so cloaked in disgrace or deeper in a hole than Donald Trump – and no candidate has ever been less prepared to face the most searing trial of his public life than the shaken Republican nominee.

The walls were already closing around Trump before the Friday release of a video showing him blithely describing, in lurid and demeaning language, his efforts to seduce a married woman and how he would kiss and grope women even if they didn’t want him to. [Which constitutes a sexual assault; Rags] Those walls have now fallen in on him – and what aides were describing last week as an opportunity to rebound is now being cast as one final shot at survival.

“It is a complete sh-t-show,” said one GOP operative who still backs Trump on Saturday – a day of mass defections by Republican women and down-ballot Senate and House candidates. “There’s one chance, one opportunity left – and that’s to get on bended knee and project the image of contrition… That’s not going to happen.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-campaign-turmoil-229392#ixzz4Mb24VPDc

Yep. Like I said last night, Donald “Da Pig” doesn’t have it in him. He can’t pull it off.

https://twitter.com/mike_pence/status/784799653547999234/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

That’s the Pence statement on the matter.

Note that he not only is disgusted by the “words”, but he has the integrity to mention the “ACTIONS”.

Which Donald “Da Pig” and his sweet wife airbrushed out of their statements/damage control/”apologies”.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | October 9, 2016 at 10:34 am

Bill Clinton degraded the presidency with his conduct. The list of women he had illicit encounters with is a long one. We know for certain that he sodomized Monica Lewinksy with a cigar in the Oval Office. He got blowjobs from her in the Oval Office while he negotiating on the phone with Republicans about policy. He was impeached by the House. He settled sexual assault cases for huge sums of money. He was disbarred from practicing law for perjuring himself. And Hillary not only supported him every step of the way, but she attacked the women he victimized.

And yet, when Democrats invited him to give the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 2012, his national favorability ratings were around 66%, including 32% with Republicans.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/14/poll-bill-clinton-is-more-popular-than-ever/?_r=0

And you’re supposed to think it is disqualifying that Trump used vulgar language in what he thought was a private conversation with a guy over a decade ago?

This is all ginned up by the media and establishment Republicans. This is Todd Akin all over again. In both cases the primary voters chose their candidate, the media (aided by establishment Republicans) created a firestorm over some comments, then the establishment Republicans en masse try to nullify the will of he primary voters and install their preferred candidate.

I’ve said a gazillion times I don’t like Trump and I believe the primary voters made a horrific choice when they made him the nominee. They knew all about his sky high record unfavorables when they nominated him. They knew other Republicans consistently polled better than Trump against Hillary. He was an irrational, emotion driven choice. Not one based on reason.

Trump was the worst possible choice. But I will still (probably) vote for him. Not because I support him. It is 100% a vote against Hillary. I do not want her to be president to continue Obama’s transformation.

She will stack the judiciary with even more left wingers than Obama has. It is already stacked with far leftists after Reid re-wrote the rules of the Senate so Obama’s appointees could not be filibustered.

Democrats have turned Citizens United into one of their boogey man hate symbols in order to give government more power. In the name of overturning Citizens United, a couple of years ago Senate Democrats voted unanimously to effectively repeal the First Amendment so government can regulate political speech. Even in the wave elections of 2010 and 2014, 85% of incumbents won re-election. After Democrats give government the power to regulate political speech, they will make it virtually impossible to remove an incumbent. Between the judicial appointments, the extraordinarily lax voting and registration rules making it easy for non-citizens to vote and to commit fraud, and changes in speech laws, we are seeing a sort of slow motion, bloodless coup that will give Democrats permanent power which will be impossible to reverse.

Hillary is also going to come after your guns. She wants to get the camel’s nose under the tent and begin the process of reversing the nearly 30 years of gun liberalization that has been underway at the state level for the past 30 years. If we don’t re-balance the judiciary, then 30 years of progress can be wiped out very quickly.

Her open borders immigration policy combined with national healthcare I think will be an economic catastrophe. Obamacare is in a failing death spiral. The VA in certain parts of the country is a disaster. Medicare will be bankrupt in 8 years. Social Security not long after that. And the country is $19 trillion in debt. When every third world peasant has an open invitation to come here, but will be unable to compete in an increasingly complex economic system that requires highly specialized skills and education rather than a strong back, your standard of living will decline. I think sharply.

As the polling above indicates, the Clintons proved that character does not matter. It is all about power. I am unsure how Trump will wield the power of the presidency. He was a Democrat until he switched his party affiliation to become a Republican in 2009. The Clintons attended his wedding. He has said glowingly positive things about both Bill and Hillary when he was not running for president. He donated more to Democrats than to Republicans pre-2009. I suspect there is VERY MUCH I will not like about his presidency.

But at least with Trump I have a smidgeon of hope that he will slow the transformation Obama began and Hillary is committed to continuing.

I don’t like Trump. But I will (probably) vote for Trump in order to try to keep Hillary out of office.

    “This is all ginned up by the media and establishment Republicans. This is Todd Akin all over again. In both cases the primary voters chose their candidate, the media (aided by establishment Republicans) created a firestorm over some comments, then the establishment Republicans en masse try to nullify the will of he primary voters and install their preferred candidate.”

    I agree with a lot of what you said, but this is just delusional bullshit.

    In BOTH cases you cite (“Da Pig” and Aiken) profoundly stupid, lame candidates did themselves in with the voters. It wasn’t some “vast whatever-wing conspiracy”, or the “establishment” (Aiken was NOT a TEA party guy, but WAS a very weak candidate who practiced nepotism as his prime election strategy).

    OF COURSE the media is going to be all over this! T-rump has no excuse for not anticipating this.

    But “the establishment”…??? Please…!!! ANY elected official with ANY conservative cred is going to HAVE to deplore this. And quite rightly.

    See Pence, Mike.

      MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 12:15 pm

      Pence’s statement was pitch perfect. He condemned the remarks; refused to defend them; and focused on the hurt to the Trump family. That’s all that had to be done.

      What Pence did NOT do is call for the will of the primary voters to be nullified. He did not resign from the vice presidential candidacy. He did not insist that Trump step aside.

      I have no problem with Mark Kirk and other elected Republicans condemning Trump’s decade old remarks. They have to, in order to avoid answering questions about them during their own campaigns. Condemn them once and move on. Fine.

      My problem is with attempts to nullify the will of the primary voters to replace Trump with someone else. As much as I thoroughly disagree with the primary voters choice, Trump won the nomination fair and square. Their will must be respected, even if it means certain defeat in November.

      Establishment Republicans can not be using this to bully Trump out of the race. As I said, Bill Clinton had a 66% approval rating four years ago. That was AFTER everybody in the world knew about his truly grotesque sexual conduct in the Oval Office and his numerous affairs.

      If you can’t see how the media is using this to manipulate public opinion, and how establishment Republicans are piling on to try to nullify the will of the Republican electorate, then I don’t know what to tell you.

        I could quibble with you about “the will of the Republican electorate” on several fronts, but I won’t bother.

        I will point out that sometimes a gross error should be addressed, regardless of its origins or putative virtues, especially, as here where so many people raise “the good of the country” as their excuse for supporting this living, breathing example of the worst in American politics.

        But I will say you at least raise a valid, if wrong, argument.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/09/sunday-morning-talking-heads-32/

“Da Pig” surrogates cancel Sunday morning appearances.

That’s called a bell. Tolling.

Gee, you don’t think the Clinton Crime Family had anything to do with this do you? After all, our honorable opponents, the friends across the aisle would never, ever, ever do any thing less than “honorable” would they?
Rules for Radicals.
* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

Democratic socialists are always talking about Republicans as the party with “family values”. That is because the socialists HAVE NO VALUES. Theirs is strictly a means to an end. THEIR POWER. Nothing else matters. And if people are STUPID enough to worry that Trump said “pussy” 12 years ago, they deserve what they get.

* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)
* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)
* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)
* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)
* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality.)

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Fiftycaltx. | October 9, 2016 at 11:45 am

    Saul Alinsky did not invent these political tactics, he merely codeified political tactics that had existed forever, even back to Roman elections, modernized them, and put them in a booklet.

    OF COURSE the Clinton campaign uses them against Trump – that was expected no matter who the GOP nominee would be. The question is how a given candidate functions against them, as it has always been.

    Savvy politicians and their campaign staff are hypervigilant for hot mics, hound dogs(opposition operatives who shadow candidates hoping to surrepticiously film/record gaffes). Politicians try always to never allow a hot mic tape like this, or the 47% video from Romney as another example. It’s Politics 101.

    Outsiders, being outsiders, do not guard against these things until the moment they decide they’ll run for office, by which time it may be too late, depending on the mouth and character of said outsider candidate. There can be no doubt that a mouth and ego like Trump’s has hundreds of such material hanging out there in the wind. It goes with the territory, and whatever an outsider’s positive attributes may be, the potential detrimental soundbites, recordings, and video are an integral deficit to go along with the positives.

    So, how’s Trump fairing against these eminently predictable and common political tactics, dirty as they are? He’s getting his ass kicked and it’s his own fault for not preparing for and countering it.

      Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 9, 2016 at 12:12 pm

      Every good trial lawyer, crisis manager, image consultant, and political adviser knows to have a “come to Jesus” talk with their clients.

      We explain to our clients that we need to know EVERY-FLUCKING-THING about their possibly damaging conduct. Armed with that, we can help inoculate them against the effects on their case. Often the best course is to make a clean breast of the problem early and candidly.

      As you say, this is 101 level stuff. This is done every day.

      From alllllllll indications, T-rump did not bother to do this elementary disclosure to his own people. They were caught flat-footed in a cage match.

      Since you can count on a scorpion to be a scorpion, all this is squarely on Da Pig, Donald T-rump.

      As Jonah Goldberg points out, this is simply character expressing itself. There is no “Presidential” T-rump. There’s just this grotesquerie.

With all due respect, Henry, how would you suggest that he could have prepared for the remark made in 2005, or any remark he made prior to entering politics? He was not an elected official representing anyone. My understanding of his remarks is that he failed in his attempt, objectionable and low down, to have his way with a married woman. Juanita Broderick? She claims to have been raped and then raked over the coals by Hillary. So having Hillary in the White House is an improvement how exactly? It is one or the other. I am giving a thumbs up to your comment because I believe discussion is good.

    Hi willow, Trump certainly knew that women had filed suit against him for sexual harassment and assault, something even a non-politician should know will come up at some point. Heck, if I know it and you know it, why wouldn’t the wise and wonderful Trump? And why wouldn’t the world’s most savvy businessman and leader plan for the absolute certainty that this would come up during a presidential campaign? Did he miss all the scores of times this has happened to others? It wasn’t that long ago that Herman Cain, for example, got lambasted for “inappropriate behavior” toward women, an allegation that effectively ended his presidential bid? Or did Trump naively imagine it wouldn’t happen to him? Either, I would imagine, might prompt some thought.

      Nice, doing the work of the Clinton crime syndicate.

      Wife in a divorce case, recanted.

      Allegation made in a bad business deal, dropped.

      Rape charge in what is clearly a case of the clinton crime syndicate trying to inoculate their selves from Bill Clintons actual rapes of children.

      You should be proud of yourself.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to willow. | October 9, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    “So having Hillary in the White House is an improvement how exactly?”

    Nowhere did I say or even imply that. Of course Hillary is the worst sort of crooked politician, and I would never vote for her. The discussion I seek would reveal the craziness of excusing a Trump because a Hillary is worse, particularly when there is zero way to know what Trump might do as president. He could be far worse than Hillary for all anyone knows. His supporters trust his word because he’s an outsider, not a politician. Well, Trump USED to be an outsider – that all changed the minute he declared and he’s been a politician and nothing else ever since.

    As for this idea that Hillary is worse than Trump, so Trump is therefore acceptable, no thanks. That Hitler was worse than Mussolini is no defense of Mussolini.

    If I had my way, the entire nation, every single voter, would stay home November 8th, refusing to legitimize a system that produces such wretched candidates.

      Ragspierre in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 9, 2016 at 1:41 pm

      Amain, amain, say it brutha…!!!

      VaGentleman in reply to Henry Hawkins. | October 9, 2016 at 3:36 pm

      Henry,
      If you believe that there is zero way to know what he might do, then there is zero way for you to make an informed judgment in condemnation of him. Yet you make the judgment and claim it’s rational, when in fact it’s just feelings. You don’t like him so you choose worse, but better is also a possibility from the (un)known facts.

      If you were a Jew and had to choose between Hitler and Mussolini, the Italian was the better choice. Like Hitler, Hillary has a loathing for the deplorables among us and is driven to achieve their political destruction. Elections are not and never have been about choosing from candidates who score at least 90% on the morality scale (OK, maybe if you’re choosing a Pope). It’s nice if it happens, but it’s rare. Elections are about electing the best of the candidates offered. Choosing a candidate is not a defense of him/her. Just a recognition that, of the limited choices, he/she is the preferable one.

      The system is legitimate. The fact of Trump’s candidacy proves it. He overcame the establishment, the media and the extremists in the party to win the right to run. He is the candidate of the common man. Right or wrong, he’s what they chose, and that’s what a legitimate system is supposed to produce. The fact that you don’t like it says nothing about the system’s legitimacy but says a great deal about how you see those who disagree with you. It’s like free speech. The speech you hate the most is the speech that has to be protected. You either man up and respect the other guys right to be different or you take the totalitarian view that only you hold the keys to truth.

DieJustAsHappy | October 9, 2016 at 12:34 pm

Over at The Hill, there’s an article concerning Rep. Dent (PA) saying Priebus should remove Trump or step down. Now, I’ll admit I’m not the brightest light bulb in the room, but how could this be even possible?

    Ragspierre in reply to DieJustAsHappy. | October 9, 2016 at 12:42 pm

    According to what little I know about the weeds here (I don’t dwell in minutia…it’s part of my personality type), there is a Rule 9 RNC that plays a pivotal role. You can look it up.

    Essentially, as I understand the issue, T-rump would have to step aside. He cannot…according to the plain wording of the rule…be “deposed”.

    Next, you’d get into the rules and history of how the electoral college would have to deal with that event, which is NOT a slam-dunk issue on either side.

    Anyhow…the election is over at this point, without some kind of dramatic change. That won’t come from Der Donald. He is what he is.

      DieJustAsHappy in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 12:58 pm

      Thanks, Ragspierre. I’m quoting Rule 9 in its entirety since it’s not that long.

      RULE NO. 9
      Filling Vacancies in Nominations
      (a) The Republican National Committee is hereby authorized and empowered to fill any and all vacancies which may occur by reason of death, declination, or otherwise of the Republican candidate for President of the United States or the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States, as nominated by the national convention, or the Republican National Committee may reconvene the national convention for the purpose of filling any such vacancies.

      (b) In voting under this rule, the Republican National Committee members representing any state shall be entitled to cast the same number of votes as said state was entitled to cast at the national convention.

      (c) In the event that the members of the Republican National Committee from any state shall not be in agreement in the casting of votes hereunder, the votes of such state shall be divided equally, including fractional votes, among the members of the Republican National Committee present or voting by proxy.

      (d) No candidate shall be chosen to fill any such vacancy except upon receiving a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the election.

      Also, this is a link for all of the Rules of the RNC:
      https://s3.amazonaws.com/prod-static-ngop-pbl/docs/2016-Republican-Rules-FINAL.pdf

      There is no authority expressed for the Chairman of the RNC to remove anyone from the ticket. Moreover, it would be an entourage, no doubt, who would meet with Trump to urge him to vacate. Maybe, not now, but if there is anything as inflammatory forthcoming, his goose is burnt.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 1:25 pm

      Those are the existing GOP rules, but they could change them to allow the dump. However, that wouldn’t be a quick process, and it likely couldn’t be done in advance of November 8th. It wouldn’t be unanimous, as it would if Trump got caught molesting a child or some other horrible thing that would create unanimosity on dumping him. If over just this tape, it would be argued, slowing or killing the process.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/09/sunday-morning-talking-heads-32/

So, the Trump team sent out surrogates in full force in an effort to fight back against the incredibly crappy weekend the candidate has been having. Rudy Giuliani was dispatched to This Week with George Stephanopoulos, who said that what Trump was describing was sexual assault. Giuliani’s response?

“That’s what he was talking about.”

So, Barri, you can suck me.

    Sorry ragspiss, no sale, you’re the only one that sucks.

    As you always are, you’re wrong again. Must really hurt to always get your ass handed to you.

So you did not answer the questions. How does he prepare? Do you realize that no other candidate has had so many factions against him, and yet he is the Republican candidate? Wasn’t he already labeled a woman hater? The “shock” of the Mother Jones and Huff Post commenters is outrageous. The comments they made about Sara Palin were worse than any comment Trump made. I am bowled over that people cannot see what a Clinton presidency will do to the country. I pray for Donald Trump to have a conversion of some kind. I don’t rule out that he may still win. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal evidence, but here is my story. I had a dental cleaning, and the hygienist whom I have known for a number of years complained about the quality of the two candidates. I said, yeah, I gear you, but we (my husband and I) are voting Trump. Then the floodgates opened. She said she and her husband, a school principal, were voting Trump. Interestingly, I will get a chance to see her opinion now because my girls have a follow up appointment. I promise to report back.

    willow in reply to willow. | October 9, 2016 at 1:29 pm

    Oops, my comment was to Fuzzy Slippers.

    How does he prepare? There are a number of ways: he can get in front of the story and tell it his way first, right after he seals the GOP nomination, for example; he can be prepared with an appropriate apology in which he accepts responsibility and doesn’t try to shift the focus to Bill Clinton like a whiny schoolgirl; he does anything, anything at all, to not get caught flat-footed less than a month before the election and has to issue a midnight video “apology”.

    Yes, I’m aware that Trump is repulsive to a great many people across the political spectrum, and I don’t think it’s all unfounded. The attacks on Sarah Palin were unfounded. There’s a big difference between Donald Trump and Sarah Palin (or there was back in ’08). Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience. Most of the people I know are voting for Trump, too, and I don’t think the video will change any of their minds. 🙂

    Ragspierre in reply to willow. | October 9, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    The biggest key to handling this kind of story is to own up to it with you own professionals.

    T-rump is vaunted as a “super-manager”, and he certainly has the bucks to hire the best of whatever.

    You tell them EVERYTHING, and you hand them the ball for a while. You let them shape the best response you can, which might not ever even involve you having to say another word about it, though it might.

    But that’s not in T-rump’s world of hubris to do. And it looks very like he did NOT.

    Arminius in reply to willow. | October 9, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    He could have prepared for it by bringing it all out at the start of his primary bid. Trump knew then that there are hours of audio clips of him talking exactly this way. The producer of seasons 1 and 2 of The Apprentice is tweeting out that he has hours of Trump audio that’s far worse than the Access Hollywood audio. And I’ve also read that Access Hollywood also has hours more audio. Then there’s the hours of audio of Trump mouthing off about women and their physical features on the Howard Stern show, including his own daughter Ivanka. When Stern asks if it’s ok to call her a “piece of ass” Trump tells him to go ahead.

    He could have said that was all part of a TV persona he was cultivating. He could have said he always remianed in character while on the set. I’ve heard some really stupid things from the Trumptards, but among the stupidest is their attempted defense of these “grab a pussy” remarks by claiming they were part of a “private conversation.”

    Sheer idiocy. Trump is on a bus wired for sound with the Access Hollywood host and part of the Access Hollywood crew, not to mention a company bus driver. That’s not a private setting. And that bus was part of the set; that’s why there was another camera crew videoing it when it drove up to the mark where a soap opera actress was going to greet Trump and Bush as they stepped off the bus.

    Sheer idiocy is what I’ve come to expect from the Trumptads. Along with rabid insensible rage when someone intrudes on their delusional fantasy world by injecting a few facts in their lives. Hence their calls for Ragspierre to be banned.

    But that’s the only way Trump could have done it if he intended to be a serious candidate. The fact that he didn’t tells me he never intended to be a serious candidate.

    Let this sink into your heads. He knew if he brought it up he never would have won the GOP primary. And apparently that’s all he wanted to win. He knew all about those hours of audio because he’s spent decades making them and that they would make him unelectable. So he just shut up about it.

    And that’s the other way a “candidate” can prepare for it. Don’t run if you’re unelectable If you can’t beat the other party’s candidate if your skeletons escape the closet, and you care about the country and know the other party’s candidate is a disaster then don’t run and support a candidate who can win. But Trump didn’t do that. He ran knowing how much audio of him talking dirty about women including his own daughter was the worst kept secret in the entertainment industry.

    And by doing so he just teed it up like a ball on a stand in the pee wee baseball league, so Clinton could hit it out of the park at the time and place of her choosing. Which is naturally when it’s too late to do anything about it.

    It’s too late know to do anything about those comments. And it looks like there was a lot of coordination on this. Remember Clinton’s “baskets of deplorables” comment? It looks like the Clinton campaign and the MSM waited until they could do the maximum possible damage and not just in terms of waiting until it’s too late to replace Trump. They waited until every last Republican was on board.

    So now we’re going to have Hillary Clinton for President.

    Thanks, insane delusional Trumptards!

    And even if the GOP keeps the House and Senate, she in coordination with the MSM will accuse them, if they ever try to oppose her, of just opposing her because they hate women. Look at who they supported for President. And then they’ll just keep playing tapes of Trump’s comments.

    Frankly I wouldn’t be surprised if some of he coordination was between Trump and the Clintons. Billy Jeff is DJT’s golfing buddy. Why would anyone thing of running as a Republican make it public that he called Billy Jeff to get his advice first? In any case Trump won’t necessarily be damaged. Whether planned or not, all he he has to do is say this was his biggest reality show ever. He got as far as he did by playing a racist sexist pig, and you Trumptards ate it up.

Will someone please ban this idiot Robespierre?

    Ragspierre in reply to Lanceman. | October 9, 2016 at 4:16 pm

    There is no such poster.

    And no. Nobody is going to ban me, because I comply with the TOU.

    You should, too.

      DieJustAsHappy in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 4:58 pm

      TOU? I don’t recall having seen this before. So, after doing a look-up, I’d say it’s either Terms of Use or Tactical Operations Unit.

A cautionary quote from Colin Powell to those so eager to dump Trump: If you break it, you own it.

Hillary’s all yours boys and girls, if you get your wish. The next 4 years will be all your fault.

    Ragspierre in reply to VaGentleman. | October 9, 2016 at 4:14 pm

    Oh, hunny…!!!

    T-rump already GAVE us Hellary for four (maybe less) years.

    It’s over. He lost. On his very own.

      VaGentleman in reply to Ragspierre. | October 9, 2016 at 4:29 pm

      If Trump already lost it must be your mental illness that has you up here working for his defeat.

      “It’s over. He lost. On his very own.”

      You’re so full of sh*t. Own up to it. You’re “preference cascade” got dumped.

      Nice of you to make a fool out of yourself in public.

Henry Hawkins | October 9, 2016 at 4:18 pm

A cautionary quote from Ronald Reagan after Gary Hart’s sexual antics were revealed: “Boys will be boys, but boys will not be president.”

Face it kiddies, we’re looking at the “Fundamental Transformation” Obama promised. It’s here. NOW. and it will continue, because the asshole Trump couldn’t fight his way out of a f’g wet paper bag. He’s not nearly as slick as the snot out of Hitlery’s rectum and she’ll use that juice to clobber him tonight.

What saddens me most is that the down ballot is going to go to shite because T-rump (thank you, Rags) has sold them down the tubes as well. I just thank God I’ve lived well more than 3/4 of my life.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend