The Future President, Donald Trump

That's about where I'm at. I'm really against Trump and Clinton. The idea of having either with both houses of congress is horrifying.

It sadly not supporting anyone but my strong desire not to allowed the Republican party to have complete control of the government given their last decade or so of proving they can not govern any branch of the government.

All they seems to do is play to their nuts even if it mean threatening for example the full faith and credit of our country more then once over nonsense.

Apparently a large number of Americans support Trump and the policies he has stated.

there is no way the rise of Trump is a figment of our imagination

Quote:

there is no way the rise of Trump is a figment of our imagination

More like our nightmares.

Why am I thinking about the 1930s and another country and we do not have the excuse of losing a major war and having other nations carrying away our wealth.

A little while ago I went rug shopping. Four rugs were laid out on the floor and among them was one with a pink motif that was dazzlingly beautiful. It was complex and sophisticated. If you had asked me at that moment which rug I wanted, I would have said the pink one.

This conviction lasted about five minutes. But then my mentality flipped and I started asking some questions. Would the furniture go with this rug? Would this rug clash with the wall hangings? Would I get tired of its electric vibrancy?

Suddenly a subtler and more prosaic blue rug grabbed center stage. The rugs had not changed, but suddenly I wanted the blue rug. The pink rug had done an excellent job of being eye-popping on its own. The blue rug was doing an excellent job of being a rug I could enjoy living with.»

For many Republicans, Donald Trump is their pink rug. He does the job that they want done at this moment. He reflects their disgust with the political establishment. He gives them the pleasurable sensation that somebody can come to Washington, kick some tail and shake things up.

But decision-making is a journey, not an early December snapshot. It goes in stages.

The campaign may seem old, but we are still in the casual attention stage. Every four years pollsters ask Iowa and New Hampshire voters when they made up their minds. Roughly 70 or 80 percent make up their minds in the final month of the race. Up until then they are busy with life and work and just glancing at the campaign. If you ask them which candidate they support, that question may generate an answer, but that doesn’t mean they are actually committed to electing the name they happen to utter.

Over at the FiveThirtyEight blog, Nate Silver looked at campaign-related Google searches in past years in the weeks before the Iowa caucuses. Until a week or two before the caucuses very few people are doing any serious investigations of the candidates. Then just before and after the caucuses voters get engaged and Google searches surge.

Silver produced a chart showing what this year’s polling would look like if we actually took the current levels of casual attention and uncertainty seriously. In that chart “Undecided” had 80 percent support. Trump had 5 percent support; Carson, 4; Cruz, 3; and Rubio, 2.

That’s about the best description of where the Republican race is right now.

Just because voters aren’t making final decisions doesn’t mean they are passive. They’re in the dressing room. They’re trying on different outfits. Most of them are finding they like a lot of different conflicting choices.

Human beings have multiple selves. The mind dances from this module to that module. When Montaigne tried to describe his mind, he wrote, “I cannot keep my subject still. It goes along befuddled and staggering, with a natural drunkenness.” In one mood Trump seems pretty attractive to some people. In another it’s Carson, or Cruz or Rubio.

But in the final month the mentality shifts. The question is no longer, What shiny object makes me feel good? The question is, Who do I need at this moment to do the job? Different sorts of decision-making styles kick in.

For example, there are two contrasting types of decision-making mentalities, maximizing and satisficing. If you’re choosing a marriage partner, you probably want to maximize. You want to find the very best person you are totally in love with. You’ll need that passion to fuse you two together so you can survive the tough times. You want somebody who can inspire and be a messenger to your best future.

But politics is not like that. Politics is a prosaic activity most of the time. You probably want to satisfice, pick the person who’s good enough, who seems reasonably responsible.

When campaigns enter that final month, voters tend to gravitate toward the person who seems most orderly. As the primary season advances, voters’ tolerance for risk declines. They focus on the potential downsides of each contender and wonder, Could this person make things even worse?

When this mental shift happens, I suspect Trump will slide. All the traits that seem charming will suddenly seem risky. The voters’ hopes for transformation will give way to a fear of chaos. When the polls shift from registered voters to likely voters, cautious party loyalists will make up a greater share of those counted.

The voting booth focuses the mind. The experience is no longer about self-expression and feeling good in the moment. It’s about the finger on the nuclear trigger for the next four years. In an era of high anxiety, I doubt Republican voters will take a flyer on their party’s future — or their country’s future

Many Americans are mad as hell at our political leaders — both Republican and Democrat — and are giving voice to their anger through the likes of Donald Trump and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). The anger is understandable. The federal government is paralyzed, unable to tackle any of the major problems facing our country or even accomplish basic functions such as enacting annual budgets for federal departments and agencies. The anger derives equally from governmental ineptitude, arrogance and corruption, and self-serving politicians more concerned with getting reelected than with the nation’s future.

Many Americans are mad as hell at our political leaders — both Republican and Democrat. The anger derives equally from governmental ineptitude, arrogance and corruption, and self-serving politicians more concerned with getting reelected than with the nation’s future.

Mad Magazine is "fair and balanced."

CNN host Jake Tapper grilled Republican presidential candidate and Ohio Gov. John Kasich and asked him if he thought his attack web video against GOP rival Donald Trump seemed "desperate."

Tapper asked Kasich about his recent video against Trump and that the video could be compared to a poem about the Nazis.

"The Nazis killed 12 million people," Tapper said. "It seems a little extreme and perhaps even a lot desperate to compare Donald Trump to the Nazis."

Kasich responded and said that wasn't "what is being done here."

"When you attack Hispanics, when you characterize all Muslims in a very negative way, when you insult women, we don't think that that's good. We think, at this point in time, more than any other time, we need to have -- we need to have America united," Kasich said. "And we need to have an American president who is going to unite us and not divide us."

"And it's no more than that," Kasich said. "And any read into it more than that is certainly not what was intended or what was meant."

Trump is the best bet if one wants a unifier rather than a divider.

Quote:

Trump is the best bet if one wants a unifier rather than a divider.

Send me a bag of whatever it is you're bonging.

Quote:

Trump is the best bet if one wants a unifier rather than a divider.

Send me a bag of whatever it is you're bonging.

Considering that the Clintons have always practiced extremely divisive politics, in fact the Clintons took it to a whole new level never seen in the Presidency before they got into office with their identity politics

France’s political prospects appear as ominous as at any time in the republic’s recent history. After the first round of the regional elections, the far-right Front National of Marine Le Pen, with a 30% share of the vote nationwide and more than 40% in some areas, is ahead of the mainstream parties, and poised for breakthrough. This is not only a consequence of the terrorist attacks just over three weeks ago that killed 130 people. Security was indeed high in voters’ minds, and that was easily exploited by Ms Le Pen’s anti-immigration and anti-Muslim rhetoric. But the FN surge is as much to do with the dismal state of France’s economic and social affairs. Unemployment is at 10.4% and still rising. Turnout, though better than last time, was low, handing advantage to the more motivated protest movement. Supporters of mainstream parties, whether from the rightwing Les Républicains or the ruling Socialist party, seemed to have felt less reason to get out and vote.