Donald Trump

[william.scherk]

Michael, I am sorry. I could have been clearer and simpler: what do you think about this Trump tactic to urge supporters to 'remember' Cruz's iffy evangelical credentials -- do you think it wise?

As to the wisdom of Trump's election rhetoric, he's a bare-knuckles kind of guy and he wants to win. He likes Ted Cruz and I, personally, think Cruz is well placed to be Trump's VP, but Trump wants to win. So he slugs. Probably not as hard as he wants to because he likes Cruz.

Tomorrow, everybody but the gotcha crowd will forget all this. Just like they no longer remember what Obama & Co. said about Bill and Hillary during the primaries.

I still remember the 2008 primaries, at least a bit, though the 2012 GOP primaries are fresher to my mind. The remarks of Trump are fresh in the mind of David and I, and at least some of the thousands who heard Trump speak them. A month out, the remarks will subside -- as long as he does not repeat them. As he said, "Remember that.. Remember that." If he drops that hint again in his stumping, yeah.

It is a naggy little moral question for some, if not a bother for you. The audience for Trump's remarks were Iowans, a month out from caucus. He is attempting to take a big chunk of the GOP evangelical slice of likely-and-presumed GOP caucus-goers. If insinuating that Cruz is not 'one of us,' he could conceivably make that shift some butts. How many evangelicals were among the thousands in the crowd to be swayed?

So, yeah. A month out from the first real poll, fussing about details of which Christian social-conservative/wacko bloc goes which way -- that can seem dull.

But, my remaining question is, then -- what details of the ongoing races are we going to talk about in the next month? And if Iowa itself will be a snooze for Michael and others (until the tallies and even then), what are we going to talk about until New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina?

Well, here is what Jeb! I mean Jeb!!!! is going to be talking about. Oy vey. Is this the best that money can buy? I can't wait for The Donald's team to start delivering some of their ad buys on tap.

Jeb! Juuuub. Juuubbfizzle Jzzzzzzz. Zzzzz; Z.

-- by Trump's forthcoming ad buys, see the December 28 Fox story for details, "Trump plots big TV ad blitz that could change campaign landscape." I don't live in broadcast/cable area for regional ads like the ones being mounted for Iowa and New Hampshire by Trump (joining a group of spenders). I don't know that any active OLers in this thread are going to see much of this action (although ads will presumably appear on other platforms, like the pathetic PAC offering I give you next comment).

The top five kind of puts the ho in hum. It almost lands a slap -- but will have nil effect on Trump Lovers. I think MSK could make a better case against Trump than that sorry thing above. But, I guess there is money to be spent, the larger nozzles fitted for blitz. Maybe there will be some remarkable propaganda in the gouts about to sluice through the early states. I will be looking for The Worst Of The Worst. Since there won't be too much else to talk about ... he said smilingly.

Will they get this bad?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

It is a naggy little moral question for some, if not a bother for you.

William,

I want to unpack an insinuation here. Nobody is comfortable with being called a hypocrite. Neither side.

The problem comes when everybody is saying things they can be called on. In other words, depending on how one spins things, everybody can be called a hypocrite.

So what standard does one use when there is so much gotcha floating around that the very thought of saying something in public becomes stifling?

This is where the "say versus do" thing comes in. People start looking at deeds over words. If they find good, consistent, productive deeds, they forgive a lot of what the person says.

Just on your side, what is Bernie Sanders's appeal?

It's that he has consistently acted a certain way all his life. Agree or disagree, or get him on this gotcha or other with his words, nobody can look at his life and say he doesn't put his core beliefs into action.

Ditto for Trump. This is what Trump supporters see.

What Trump may say in a momentary context is so small compared to what he has done (and still does), Trump supporters don't even let it register in their brains. I believe this applies to Sanders supporters, too.

So it's not a question of being comfortable with being a hypocrite because of being gobsmacked by a personality. (I.e., being a true believer.) It's a question of using a different standard than just words for hypocrisy.

Michael

[Marc]

Trump is getting very desperate , cannot wait till things start to unravel .

Did not need to spend , now is starting to buy ads in Iowa .

The wheels are starting to fall off

[Marc]

Starting to think that Rubio will pick Cruz for the VP . Cruz has to get some bonus for knocking Trump out of the race . Well the first major knockdown anyway as Iowa is basically locked up . As Trump realizes that NH will fall next ( regardless of his pathetic attempt to stop his ship from sinking ) , Nevada is starting to become a non issue .

Trey is about set to deliver the knock out punch for South Carolina ,

This could well be over by Super Tuesday as Rubio looks to gather steam them - an unstoppable force .

[Wolf DeVoon]

Trump is getting very desperate , cannot wait till things start to unravel .

Did not need to spend , now is starting to buy ads in Iowa .

The wheels are starting to fall off

Who taught you punctuation? -- or is it a canuck software issue?

[Marc]

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Well, we know where some Rubio people stand.

Rubio Donor: Democrat Hillary Clinton Better than Republican Donald Trump
by Breitbart News
1 Jan 2016
Breitbart

From the article:

In an interview with Breitbart News reporter Charlie Spiering, Stan Pate–the millionaire and political activist who founded a Super PAC responsible for an anti-Donald Trump skywriting campaign–admitted he would rather support Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic frontrunner, for president over Trump.

. . .

“Quite frankly, if it was Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton, I would vote for Secretary Clinton,” he said. “I will accept anybody but Trump."

I can honestly say that if Trump does not get the nomination and Rubio does, and the contest is with Hillary, I will vote for Rubio. That won't happen, of course, but I'm making an unrealistic hypothetical to make a point. (Exaggeration to the point of unreality is classic rhetoric. )

But I also see this dude, Stan Pate, hanging around Rubio, so that would make me think twice before voting or staying home. Granted, a crony capitalist is a crony capitalist is a crony capitalist, but, frankly, Hillary's crony capitalists make Pate look like a piker. And I'm sick and tired of amateurs in the executive branch of the federal government.

Which do you prefer? Raw professional Soros-soaked power-mongering or amateur power-mongering with all kinds of nasty sharks circling around? Heh. That's a hell of a choice.

I tried to look up Pate to see where his hatred of Trump came from, old spat, different political ideology, whatever. All I got was a lot of news articles with "Who is Stan Pate?" in the headline, but not really saying who he is in the article.

Oh, they say he's a real estate developer from Alabama and has supported John McCain and John Edwards in the past, and that he hates Trump. The articles talk a lot about how he hates Trump. You know, he hates Trump. The articles say so. He really hates Trump. (And he hates former Republican Alabama Governor Bob Riley.) Very little else about him.

So I guess that's who he is. A Trump hater with a little money and of very little other consequence. Except he supports Rubio.

Michael

[Marc]

Well, we know where some Rubio people stand.

Rubio Donor: Democrat Hillary Clinton Better than Republican Donald Trump

by Breitbart News

1 Jan 2016

Breitbart

From the article:

In an interview with Breitbart News reporter Charlie Spiering, Stan Pate–the millionaire and political activist who founded a Super PAC responsible for an anti-Donald Trump skywriting campaign–admitted he would rather support Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic frontrunner, for president over Trump.

. . .

“Quite frankly, if it was Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton, I would vote for Secretary Clinton,” he said. “I will accept anybody but Trump."

I can honestly say that if Trump does not get the nomination and Rubio does, and the contest is with Hillary, I will vote for Rubio. That won't happen, of course, but I'm making an unrealistic hypothetical to make a point. (Exaggeration to the point of unreality is classic rhetoric. )

But I also see this dude, Stan Pate, hanging around Rubio, so that would make me think twice before voting or staying home. Granted, a crony capitalist is a crony capitalist is a crony capitalist, but, frankly, Hillary's crony capitalists make Pate look like a piker. And I'm sick and tired of amateurs in the executive branch of the federal government.

Which do you prefer? Raw professional Soros-soaked power-mongering or amateur power-mongering with all kinds of nasty sharks circling around? Heh. That's a hell of a choice.

I tried to look up Pate to see where his hatred of Trump came from, old spat, different political ideology, whatever. All I got was a lot of news articles with "Who is Stan Pate?" in the headline, but not really saying who he is in the article.

Oh, they say he's a real estate developer from Alabama and has supported John McCain and John Edwards in the past, and that he hates Trump. The articles talk a lot about how he hates Trump. You know, he hates Trump. The articles say so. He really hates Trump. (And he hates former Republican Alabama Governor Bob Riley.) Very little else about him.

So I guess that's who he is. A Trump hater with a little money and of very little other consequence. Except he supports Rubio.

Michael

Thank you for your vote !

Illinois is a swing state so it is appreciated .

I do remind you MSK that the issue in your country and on this thread is who will be POTUS . As I believe , DT will not get there . Based on my belief , I am attempting to understand who I believe will get the nomination and who can beat Hillary - which is all of our goal I would assume on this OL of ours .

My politics are very simple . I would vote for Cruz , 100 percent ( if I had a vote ) . My issue though is that he cannot and will not be POTUS because he is too , to the right . Therefore why waste our time . DT will not win the nomination , yet using your words ( if he did ) would probably suffer a nervous breakdown during a campaign against the Clintons , and Obamas remnants .

Therefore how do we continue from January 2017 going forward ???

Objective reality .

Only Rubio can win the nomination , Only Rubio can beat Hillary .

Its Hillary or Marco . Real simple folks . The rest is just wasted banter about bullshit .

I remember Meir Kahane ( maybe only a few folks here know who he was RIP , God Bless Kahane ) and he said " you will vote for me , or Arafat " , those are your choices . The Israelis actually voted for Arafat .

Same here , Clinton or Rubio .

Thats it .

Trump , Sanders , Cruz , who cares ?????????? They ain't gonna be on any ticket so why waste our time debating hypothetical garbage .

[Marc]

oh yeah , polls , blah blah blah blah blah

Rubio or Clinton .

Reality don't give a flying F--- about what we want

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's a little more on Luther Stancil Pate, IV.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

DT will not win the nomination , yet using your words ( if he did ) would probably suffer a nervous breakdown during a campaign against the Clintons , and Obamas remnants .

Marc,

Where on earth did you get that idea? Nervous breakdown about Hillary? Trump will suffer a nervous breakdown about Hillary? You got that from my words? Really?

Well, dayaamm! I need to learn to write better. A hell of a lot better.

Let me try to be clearer. See if this is vague.

Contrary to any neurosis, Donald Trump is going to have the time of his life as president taking apart those folks and the messes they have made. It's going to be fun for him. And fun for us Trump supporters to watch.

(Not fun for some poor crows, though...)

Michael

[Marc]

DT will not win the nomination , yet using your words ( if he did ) would probably suffer a nervous breakdown during a campaign against the Clintons , and Obamas remnants .

Marc,

Where on earth did you get that idea? Nervous breakdown about Hillary? Trump will suffer a nervous breakdown about Hillary? You got that from my words? Really?

Well, dayaamm! I need to learn to write better. A hell of a lot better.

Let me try to be clearer. See if this is vague.

Contrary to any neurosis, Donald Trump is going to have the time of his life as president taking apart those folks and the messes they have made. It's going to be fun for him. And fun for us Trump supporters to watch.

(Not fun for some poor crows, though...)

Michael

No , no , no my little buddy ( Gilligans Island reference )

DT is starting to crack is my point . I can explain if you would like but I feel I am wasting my time attempting to preach to the " impossible to convert " on this thread .

DT IF he actually pulled off the nomination is some multi Universe parallel Universe somewhere , sometime , then he still needs to campaign against political professionals and he would actually have a nervous breakdown in my opinion .

This man gets irked fast and baiting him to say even more ridiculous lying bullshit than the Cruz/Cuba statement would be easy , and daily . He would blow up , or he would simply implode and internally combust

[Brant Gaede]

Marc and Michael and wishful thinking as bantering entertainment.

One is desperate, and doesn't know it.

One is deluded, but happy.

--Reality

[Marc]

Marc and Michael and wishful thinking as bantering entertainment.

One is desperate, and doesn't now it.

One is deluded, but happy.

--Reality

And one sits on the fence , delusional and desperate ( One of the 3 of us )

-Reality stings sometimes

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

--Reality

Brant,

How did you know that was me?

btw - Don't be so hard on yourself. You're neither desperate nor deluded.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

Why are you guys ganging up on helpless little me?

I only want that you should know the truth.

--Me

[Marc]

We are not ganging up my man , we are lobbying you to come join the winning team !

Thats me ( shhhhhhhhh , MSK thinks its him ! )

I am just trying to pull you over to me Trump style , which is insulting , rude , and attack attack attack !

Michael is using persuasion techniques and his brilliance .

We both think we are right , One of us is . The other is not .

Choose your poison fine sir , and drink away

[william.scherk]

Torn from today's headlines!

The 12 Best Donald Trump Stories From 2015

POLITICO Magazine-4 hours ago

Whether it's been about his rise, his fall, his past or whether to cover him at all, Donald Trump coverage has dominated the media since he ...

Al-Qaeda Group Uses Donald Trump in Recruitment Video

TIME-2 hours ago

The video, apparently the first to include footage of Trump, juxtaposed clips of the presidential candidate and al-Awlaki saying the West will ...

Donald Trump campaign website goes offline

CBS News-35 minutes ago

Donald Trump's campaign website went offline Saturday morning, and a New York-based hacker collective claimed responsibility.

Donald Trump ripped as 'disgusting' by skywriters at Rose Parade

AOL News-3 hours ago

A group of skywriters took to the not-so-friendly skies to writes messages that included "America is great. Trump is disgusting." Another read ...

Is Donald Trump A Role Model For Authenticity?

Forbes-29 minutes ago

So when columnist Michael Gerson, speaking on PBS Newshour, said that Donald Trump is demonstrating a presidential model of authenticity ...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I think MSK could make a better case against Trump than that sorry thing above.

William,

You know, I think I could, too.

Before I say anything, though, I want to mention something Kat pointed out to me. Jeb is always shaking his head no. Once she mentioned it, I now can't stop seeing it. The next time you see Jeb talking, notice how he shakes his head no, even when he is saying something positive. (He has gotten a bit better about this over the last three weeks or so. That leads me to believe someone on his team has noticed this, also.)

This has a HUGE subliminal effect on audience response. Notice that Hillary's neck and face demeanor is the contrary. It is almost Japanese, smiling and nodding yes all the time. This is done on purpose. People teach these things. I know I learned the Japanese thing in a course on public presentation skills.

Anyway, here is how I would start a campaign against Trump. I don't think it can be done with humor like the Big Bird idea. Why? Bonding. You have to be taken seriously before you can get any message through to a Trump supporter to consider changing his or her vote.

So my first blast would be a highly charged emotional display of loving the USA. Remember when Glenn Beck broke down in tears on the air as he blubbered, "I just love this country so much..."

It would have to be something like that and it would have to be sincere. Totally from the heart and nothing staged.

That would establish a strong bond with a huge chunk of Trump supporters.

Then I would start experimenting with different approaches--all without directly criticizing Trump, at least for a good while. I would hammer my love of America. When I did talk about Trump, I would harp on about how busy he always is or something like that. It would have to be something quotidian, but real, that would degrade his performance as president.

After I got a good idea of what resonated best, I would take it from there.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

The cat's out of the bag.

Trump is now a chump.

--Brant

thx

[Selene]

I have suggested to folks that I am coaching to watch a speech with the sound off and no inset words on the screen so that all you have to "see" is the kinesics.

Evita's head bob works except that she rarely stops doing it so it becomes an irritant.

Jeb is hopeless and give Kat a Gold Star because he is horrible kinesically.

He will look at The Donald during the debate and say, "you will never win the nomination" and be shaking his head from 9 to 3 and back again which creates an uncomfortably dissonant image that makes the viewerperceive him as untruthful and "awkward."

He is almost as bad a candidate as Evita.

A...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Thought for the moment:

 

Hillary Clinton said that it is O.K. to ban Muslims from Israel by building a WALL, but not O.K. to do so in the U.S. We must be vigilant!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

January 2, 2016

 

If you didn't already, it makes you wonder...

 

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here is an extremely well-done analysis of Trump's speech patterns for stumping.

 

 

I don't agree with everything here, nor the condescending attitude, but this Nerd Writer dude is on to something. It takes a lot of discipline and intent for a person with Trump's IQ (135) and business savvy to speak in this manner and make it sound from the heart.

 

Don't forget, Trump is a guy who can take a 200 page contract apart and find the one hidden leverage point that lets him turn the deal around and makes the other parties cry uncle. People who have gone up against him say that is exactly what he does.

 

Michael

[Marc]

Thought for the moment:

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

If you didn't already, it makes you wonder...

Michael

This guy and his 135 IQ does not understand that he needs to win the Nomination before he lobs missiles at the Clintons .

Now you know me well enough that you already know my next question MSK !

Why is he taking on Hillary when he needs to be concerned about Iowa ? You telling me that I am to believe that he is starting his Presidential campaign now before winning Iowa which is really important for him to win ? He knows it aint in the bag , cause it aint . He knows that a loss in Iowa regardless of all the comments about whoever won/lost Iowa the last 20 years is very very important , and the most important for Trump .

So Trump is that smart yet he is still on the Clintons while he the Titanic basically has already sunk in Iowa .

Only rational answer is the obvious ( which I keep repeating ) . Trump ain't in this to win this .

A ) His political advisors are idiots

or

B) They are brilliant but he is way too narcissistic to even care what they say

or

C) He is not interested in Iowa , NH or the Presidency

Ding , ding , ding , ding

Its C

[Selene]

This is the beauty of content analysis which did exist in Aristotle's Rhetorical schema however there was no "term" for it then.

The tropes, word signaling, story lines and "style" were part of "content analysis" for rhetoricians.

Style concerns the artful expression of ideas. If invention addresses what is to be said; style addresses how this will be said. From a rhetorical perspective style is not incidental, superficial, or supplementary: style names how ideas are embodied in language and customized to communicative contexts (see Content / Form).

Because of the centrality of style, rhetoricians have given great attention to every aspect of linguistic form—so much so that rhetoric has at times been equated with (or reduced to) "mere style," as though rhetoric were concerned only with superficial ornamentation.

But ornamentation was not at all superficial in classical and renaissance rhetoric, for to ornament (ornare = "to equip, fit out, or supply") meant to equip one's thoughts with verbal expression appropriate for accomplishing one's intentions.

Upon this basic principle of style there has been agreement, but less so respecting how matters of style have been mapped within the rhetorical tradition, especially with respect to categorizing the figures of speech. These are the major groupings of stylistic concerns within the rhetorical tradition:

http://rhetoric.byu.edu/