Donald Trump has become the presumptive Repub Nominee for POTUS. A metaphor for his tactical success could be guerilla warriors firing from the trees upon vulnerable soldiers marching in line (perhaps in bright red uniforms). The "guerilla warriors’ remain relatively invulnerable while picking off individuals in the opposing army that is complying to traditional tactics.
In my thinking, Trump has (and continues to) arranged (probably hundreds of) millions of dollars of free advertising. Who needs SuperPACS, with such an effective tactic? The media is compelled to be complicit with him, because the media cannot resist the outlandish.
I don’t think that Trump will abandon this most effective tactic in the general election contest. If the Democratic nominee cannot effectively adapt, he or she, could be picked off just as Trump’s Repub opponents have been.
I doubt Bernie is up to that.
Billary would probably literally find actual snipers to kill her enemies, but she’s also not the type to master Trumps way.
And besides that, Bernie is being absolutely clobbered by the Democratic Machine.
Most of the news outlets are smearing him, Democratic politicians are smearing him, He’s up against Super Pacs used by Hillary.
This however has no effect on Trump. This is just an Incredible Hulk factor with Trump.
The more bad press he receives, the more it validates his anti-establishment angle with voters.
This comes into play with Bernie supporters too, but it’s not enough.
The Dem Machine has convinced enough Baby Boomers that if Sanders is elected they’ll lose their pensions.
It’s that simple.
I doubt Bernie is up to that...It's pretty much adapt or die (as the potential Dem nominee) at this point, as I see it.
And besides that, Bernie is being absolutely clobbered by the Democratic Machine. Most of the news outlets are smearing him, Democratic politicians are smearing him, He's up against Super Pacs used by Hillary. This however has no effect on Trump. This is just an Incredible Hulk factor with Trump. The more bad press he receives, the more it validates his anti-establishment angle with voters. This comes into play with Bernie supporters too, but it's not enough. The Dem Machine has convinced enough Baby Boomers that if Sanders is elected they'll lose their pensions. It's that simple.Bernie will not lose because "The Dem Machine has convinced enough Baby Boomers that if Sanders is elected they'll lose their pensions. It's that simple." Put some thought into your assertions before you make them, for Bern's sake.
Bernie will not lose because "The Dem Machine has convinced enough Baby Boomers that if Sanders is elected they'll lose their pensions. It's that simple." Put some thought into your assertions before you make them, for Bern's sake.Why because you say so? And make some appeal to Bernie's sake? That's exactly what is going on. That's why many of Clinton's supporters are over the age of 50 or so.
...And make some appeal to Bernie's sake?I meant it as an epithet. Being an atheist, I shy away from saying "for Christ's sake" so "for Bern's sake" was an epithet that, also, relates to this thread.
Bernie will not lose because "The Dem Machine has convinced enough Baby Boomers that if Sanders is elected they'll lose their pensions. It's that simple." Put some thought into your assertions before you make them, for Bern's sake....That's exactly what is going on. That's why many of Clinton's supporters are over the age of 50 or so. People over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. And that is the simple reason that Bernie will lose. That is what you are saying. 1st of all, I doubt that you can demonstrate that people over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. 2nd, if Bernie loses, that won't be the simple reason for his loss.
People over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. And that is the simple reason that Bernie will lose. That is what you are saying. 1st of all, I doubt that you can demonstrate that people over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. 2nd, if Bernie loses, that won't be the simple reason for his loss.That's the messaging they are using in that demographic. They're spreading fear that Bernie messing around with Wall St could be dangerous for the economy. That equates to older people worrying about their retirements. It's pretty simple. I didn't say that would be the simple reason Bernie would lose. I said that was one of the techniques they are using against Bernie. If you can't argue in good faith, without twisting my words around quit wasting my time. I mean look at the thread were having this discussion in. That's what you bring? Bernie should develop Guerilla War tactics? You do know that you don't have to make a post on this thread every five seconds don't you Tim?
People over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. And that is the simple reason that Bernie will lose. That is what you are saying. 1st of all, I doubt that you can demonstrate that people over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. 2nd, if Bernie loses, that won't be the simple reason for his loss.That's the messaging they are using in that demographic. They're spreading fear that Bernie messing around with Wall St could be dangerous for the economy. That equates to older people worrying about their retirements. It's pretty simple. I didn't say that would be the simple reason Bernie would lose. I said that was one of the techniques they are using against Bernie. If you can't argue in good faith, without twisting my words around quit wasting my time. I am arguing in good faith. Your words were "It's that simple." Go back and read your own post if you don't believe me.
I mean look at the thread were having this discussion in. That's what you bring? Bernie should develop Guerilla War tactics? You do know that you don't have to make a post on this thread every five seconds don't you Tim?Really? Now your attack is that I post too frequently? Since I am responding, mostly to your posts, how does that work?
Really? Now your attack is that I post too frequently? Since I am responding, mostly to your posts, how does that work?You respond mostly to my posts? That's it? Definitely not the other way around. This thread by the way is real gem. Bernie should use Guerilla War tactics. Hmnnn. That's good. That makes for insightful conversation.
That’s the messaging they are using in that demographic.
They’re spreading fear that Bernie messing around with Wall St could be dangerous for the economy.
That equates to older people worrying about their retirements.
Really? Now your attack is that I post too frequently? Since I am responding, mostly to your posts, how does that work?You respond mostly to my posts? That's it? Definitely not the other way around. This thread by the way is real gem. Bernie should use Guerilla War tactics. Hmnnn. That's good. That makes for insightful conversation. Actually we are both responsible for the frequency of back and forth responses. The difference is that you brought it up as an issue. As far as whether my topic is insightful, I consider it to be quite insightful. That you cannot recognize the insight and respond meaningfully is problematic. Allow me to attempt to assist. Do you have an alternative insightful idea as to how Bernie could change his tactics in order to have a chance to win the nomination?
Rubio has, in the last few days, adopted this asymmetrical tactic that I suggested Bernie use. It is unlikely to win Rubio the nomination, because it is probably too late, but unlikely is better than impossible. Rubio had no chance to win the nomination on his existing trajectory, so adopting a tactic that has been working like a charm, the whole time for Trump, is belated but better than not.
Bernie will not lose because "The Dem Machine has convinced enough Baby Boomers that if Sanders is elected they'll lose their pensions. It's that simple." Put some thought into your assertions before you make them, for Bern's sake....That's exactly what is going on. That's why many of Clinton's supporters are over the age of 50 or so. People over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. And that is the simple reason that Bernie will lose. That is what you are saying. 1st of all, I doubt that you can demonstrate that people over the age of 50 are convinced that they will lose their pensions if Bernie is elected. 2nd, if Bernie loses, that won't be the simple reason for his loss. Most Democrats have more sense to believe anyone will lost their SOcial Security pensions. They also know that a president couldn't end anyone's pension--it would take Congress to do that and most members of Congress wouldn't Vote for it. They know that seniors and anyone over 50 represent a solid voting block. They'd be out on their ear in the next election if they tried that. I don't know one person over 50--and I know quite a few--who believes that Bernie Sanders could or would be able to or even want to end their pensions. Lois
That’s the messaging they are using in that demographic. They’re spreading fear that Bernie messing around with Wall St could be dangerous for the economy. That equates to older people worrying about their retirements.Intelligent people aren't that easily convinced of anything. Republicans, maybe. Lois