10/22/16 2:03 PM

B Plan, or actually the A Plan from the start.

I predict a media driven [show?] that will milk all those who have been supporting him of as much coin as possible. This will be Tea Party / Freedom Caucus on Steroids.

After all, the Beck/Limbaugh folk have made a nice living in syndication.

Now that OB won't be a viable target, the Clintons will do just fine being a target rich environment. Even way more so with her as POTUS. He will probably vote for her in both her first and second terms.

But then again, maybe the GOP's 2020 pigeon will cause him to change parties once again if the profit margin dictates it.

10/24/16 10:02 AM

The future is very cloudy. Republican/Fox/Rush rhetoric created Trump. He's simply saying out loud and directly all the things they have implied for decades. Now that he has activated that part of the Republican base, how do they deal with it? Possibilities range from business as usual (act as if it never happened) to the Tea Party on steroids that Sparky predicts.

Get the popcorn popper heated up.

10/24/16 10:45 AM

He can get into top dancing (and meet some bad senoritas):

http://www.pressherald.com/2016/10/22/port-city-post-talent-for-tap-dancing-can-lead-to-overconfidence-bigly/

10/24/16 3:05 PM

It sure would be nice to have a contingent of confident politicians (oxymoron?) tell misleading pundits they are out of line. You know, formulate something positive behind the looking glass and emerge with the contra goal of the one stated in 2008: "Our main objective for the next four years is to prevent his reelection."

It still astounds me that the global economy was going bust, and that was their main objective.

All this email disclosure proves Hillary is a play-YAH. (Twain did dialect so much better.) Maybe we need a player, an operative.

10/24/16 3:09 PM

Wall street play-YAHs, Hala-burp-ton play-YAHs, what next?

10/24/16 3:23 PM

Why Obama is focusing his post presidency on state politics

Slate.com

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/why_obama_is_focusing_his_post_presidency_on_state_politics.html

10/24/16 3:29 PM

"Obama himself, as Politico writes, has “identified the group … as the main focus of his political activity once he leaves office.” The group will focus on the “gubernatorial, state legislative and House races” in 2018 and 2020 that will determine the design of the next congressional redistricting maps."


They shoulda figured this out prior the 2010 mid terms as far as I am concerned.

10/25/16 6:41 PM

Trump marches up all of Hispanic employees in front of a mic in FL from a FL golf course of his so they can all say they are voting for him. Not just a few folk either mind you.

Nice. What is wrong with this picture??

10/26/16 5:34 AM

I would not count your chickens before they hatch.

Nate Silver 's FiveThrityEight has a really cool interactive election forcecast web page.

10/26/16 8:00 AM

It appears that Trump's first order of business will be trying to put his businesses back together. Occupancies at his hotels and condos are plummeting. Also his golf courses are losing major events. I also read that he is considering taking his name off of some of his properties. If true that would be a major hit to the Trump ego. As an example today he is off the campaign trail to do a "Grand Opening" event at his new DC hotel which is under performing.

I think he had no goal of actually becoming president but just wanted to stroke his ego and increase the value of the Trump brand. How is that working for him?

10/26/16 1:34 PM

I'm betting he comes out ahead in HIS race no matter the outcome of the election. Maybe a McGovern or Mondale level loss would hurt him but anything less severe will help his doubletalk with foreign investors. The tarnishing of the brand, enough to warrant new signage is an interesting development.

It would be fitting though if his became the first example of Reality TV / Internet overexposure.

How do you spell schadenfreude?

10/26/16 3:11 PM

Even if Trump loses, which seems likely, he's shown the way forward. Other more competent politicians will appear to take over the Trump mantle - there are plainly many millions of Americans who are seething with discontent at the present status quo and want it torn down. It was just such environments that allowed Hitler and Mussolini to flourish.

Welcome to fascism American-style.

10/26/16 3:16 PM

"It was just such environments that allowed Hitler and Mussolini to flourish. "

The dictator club was exactly was I was eluding to in my above post. Holding Glocks silk screened with pink slips against folks head and advertising the process is fascist as he!! from where I'm sitting.

10/26/16 4:11 PM

And gee whiz, relatively speaking the U.S. has its act together. Seen the EU lately?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/10/21/a_free_trade_deal_between_canada_and_europe_is_collapsing.html

10/26/16 4:23 PM

In the US a fascist would have to get a majority, and I doubt it. Hillary, who is a vey flawed candidate (I, a lefty, don't even like her much) will probably clobber Trump. A principled, moderate Republican could probably beat her. American politics tends toward the middle. And if the economy improves there will be less discontent. I think the large majority of American have no ideology, they just go the other way if times are bad. And in the future minorities will be an increasing percentage of voters.

10/26/16 4:46 PM

"A principled, moderate Republican could probably beat her. "

Extinct species it seems, especially on the principled front. But think about it, Hillary IS a moderate Republican, barring a scant few things.

10/26/16 5:14 PM

quote:

---

A principled, moderate Republican

---

10/26/16 5:28 PM

"chose this unicorn of Republicans"

Freedom Caucus, no?

Our Extremists??

10/26/16 5:38 PM

I didn't say they would nominate one, I just said one might beat Hillary. Susan Collins. Pence, while not moderate, might run strong against Hillary. Even Jeb or Romney or McCain. Us Dems are lucky the Republicans won't nominate anyone reasonable.

10/26/16 6:26 PM

I can think of more then a few moderate Republicans I'd vote for, Colin Powell for one.

I like the idea of a former military top brass whose "been there". Maybe a clearer understanding of what it means to commit soldiers to a battlefield. Sec. of State as well.

Another is Susana Martinez, Governor of New Mexico. Another very down to earth and practical politician. She won reelection in a landslide in a state traditionally Democrat. Seemingly somewhat more in touch with reality then that other former ex-governor of NM - Gary Johnson, who seemingly suffered some permanent brain damage while on Everest. He does seriously ride a bike, though, so a positive.

And would think both of these would identify with what it means to be a minority yet also have a practical side to the realities of what it costs to run a country.

10/26/16 9:22 PM

I checked on Trip Advisor and Donald's showcase DC hotel is rated 3.5 / 5 stars. It is ranked at #118 out of 142 hotels in DC. The Trump family has some work to do!

10/26/16 10:53 PM

Let's cast aside the question of whether there is such a thing these days, please explain to me how a Republican primary system that whittled things down to Cruz and Trump, and then chose Trump could in any imaginable future chose this unicorn of Republicans.

I think that's much of the problem. Out here in the boondocks we see a few of them, but I don't think they stand a chance with the whole party. Remember Vermont's Jim Jeffords? He left the party, in part because the leadership penalized him for not toeing the party line. The party shifted under him and when he would not shift with it, they threatened to toss him off the committees. Right now we have a gubernatorial race that's too close to call, in part because when it comes right down to it either candidate would be pretty good. Phil Scott would make a president ten times better than Trump, but he believes in climate change and equal rights. Tough luck.

Ideally, one might hope the post-Trump party would look back to its roots and look for a modern Taft, but instead I suspect they'll just figure the problem was that their crazy wasn't smooth enough.

I have to say that I think one of the reasons Trump has done so well is that he actually is not so far from party policies. He's just singing aloud what they've been playing up to now on the dog whistle. I just hope that some of the dismay party leaders are now showing is that of realizing they're looking at themselves in the mirror. And yes, I know that's a bit of a lefty rant, but is Trump any worse, really, than, say, Dan Quayle? Newt Gingrich? Rick Santorum? Mike Pence? Is Trump's failing that he says the wrong things, or just that he never learned the code?

10/27/16 9:07 AM

Trump isn't playing to his audience, he's just being Trump. What you see and hear is what you get. Those of us in New York tired of this show many years ago. In business, people can choose whether or not to deal with him, and those who do deserve whatever they get. As President, what he says and does affects all of us.

As long as he stayed in business, we could care less. As POTUS?? No way.

10/27/16 9:42 PM

10/28/16 9:13 AM

A recent issue of the Economist did a long article on how candidates change parties. When Nixon executed his Southern Strategy I'm sure he did not consider that he was recruiting the religious right into his party. They had gone to ground after the Scopes Monkey Trial because they didn't like being made fun of in public.

But Jerry Fallwell and company decided that religion should return to politics so the "party base" was activated as the Moral Majority and it did a lot to elect Reagan. The traditional "big money" Republicans found themselves sitting at the table with a new kind of Republican but they didn't care as long as that helped them elect their kind of politician who dutifully enacted their kind of laws.

And now their economic principles are in grave danger because the people they have fooled for 35 years with trickle down economics have awakened to the screwing they have taken. The "screwees" don't really understand how it happened and they blame the wrong people and the wrong laws, but they know it happened and they're mad as heck.

So Trump puts down the dog whistle and picks up the bull horn and all of a sudden traditional Republicans have lost control of their party. There's all kinds of talk about how they'll get it back but I have my doubts. In any case it will be interesting to watch.

I find it hilarious to hear Republicans condemn Trump for his statements when all he is doing is repeating (with clarity) what they have been saying for decades. Trump says their is massive voter fraud and that is the exact thing Republicans have used to justify their unconstitutional voter suppression laws. Trump says "they're rapists" and that is the exact thing Republicans have used to justify their immigration stance. Trump says "ban all Muslims" and that is the exact thing Republicans have been implying since 9/11. The list goes on and on.