Trump cheats at golf - the ONE and ONLY politics thread

I've raised the same concern before. He's proven himself capable of defying the conventional wisdom so many times ... Why is it that, with the general looming, it's so easy to assume the rules will kick back into effect?

 

The projections of his likability weren't wrong. What was wrong was assuming a guy who received only 35 or 40 percent of the vote would lose. It turns out there was a fluke set of circumstances where that low support was enough to win.

That doesn't mean he has some innate qualities of winnerness that the experts didn't understand. Tim Tebow is out of the league and Donald Trump is losing this election, even if by flukes it takes a little longer than the experts thought.

 

Conventional wisdom was that the majority of Republican primary voters would reject him. Conventional wisdom was right.

 

Re Obamacare, there's a major difference between "wanted" it to be a disaster and "knew" it would be a disaster.

 

Well, the conventional wisdom also was that there was no way he'd wind up with a majority of delegates, but let's overlook that ...

I am talking more about the conventional wisdom re: e.g., decorum, etc. The whole "Now he's really blown it" bit. I don't think he can win, either, but I recognize there's a healthy helping of conventional wisdom in that assessment.

 

I'm about 25 pages behind on this thread. Between the regular work week and having umpired a JV doubleheader on Saturday, I don't have the time to be here I used to have.

 

But you guys are right; it is always possible that there is a black swan, a path that people just aren't seeing.

Saying Trump has no chance is hyperbole. All of the indicators point to him losing, but that doesn't guarantee it.

If you really think people are misevaluating those chances, the betting markets are open. Get rich.

 

Uh, no. Obamacare is circling the drain as we speak, and it's only going to get worse and fuck everyone over worse as times goes by.

 

You haven't missed much. YF posted a bunch of anti-Clinton tweets; Starman believes Trump fucks his daughter and we discussed our favorite type of Dick.

 

But I think we can acknowledge that apparent defiance without falling back on fundamental attribution fallacy. Just because it happened, and it was good for him, doesn't mean he caused it.

The GOP field caused a pile-up trying to get through the opening Trump's weakness (again, actively disliked by more than half of primary voters), thus allowing none of them to get through.

It is possible that he brilliantly orchestrated such a circumstance with his innate winnerness. It is also possible it was a fluke he benefitted from without having any positive traits that caused it to happen. I know which side I'm comfortable putting my money on.

 

Yeah, me too. You're getting no action from me this time 'round.

 

Between this guy and that Gruber character, it's obvious that Team Obama counts on the number of idiots supporting them. Probably not a good idea to come out and call them idiots afterward. Of course, the idiots will think Team Obama is talking about "someone else" when they try to review Obama's legacy.