DescentBB

So everyone seemed to think Trump might go third party and ruin the chance of the GOP winning the top job. You might want to turn around 180 degrees and look towards a former Dem contender Jim Webb. Seems he is going third party. I wonder what this means for Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party. So I wonder what Webb will call his new party and how much will this fracture the Dems? Curious times in the offing.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... ce-direct/

woodchip wrote:So everyone seemed to think Trump might go third party and ruin the chance of the GOP winning the top job.

right off the rails from the get-go. Virtually every expert will tell you that there is very little chance that the GOP wins this election, after months of making collective asses of themselves. Trump has helped point up the matter of dimwittedness, but he has taken the whole crew down with him.

You might want to turn around 180 degrees and look towards a former Dem contender Jim Webb. Seems he is going third party.

not judging from the conference call I was invited to be involved with the other day(remember, I helped fund his primary effort). The push for third-party run is apparently not coming from him at all, and I and many other donors lambasted the fools who are running this effort. Webb put out ZERO effort to run as a Dem with our money, and not too many interested in putting up a dime more, ever.

woodchip wrote:I wonder what this means for the [Mrs. Clinton] and the Democratic party.

Let me tell you: Nothing.

If you look at Webb's stance on popular issues you can see he's a strange fit for the Democratic Party. He's got Independent written all over him. He's way too far to the right for the base, which is why I like him.

right you are, vision. I liked and supported him, not because I am in lock-step agreement, but in the hope that he would add another lens to see certain issues through. However, he got essentially the same fear-mongering point over foreign affairs that the GOP is trying to sell and started to lose me. Coupling that with one of the worst campaign efforts I've ever seen, I can't imagine him getting traction as an independant, nor doing the work to get on every ballot, a daunting task. Likewise, I doubt Trump could or would do likewise, should the GOP base not nominate him(which I can definitely see as a possibility....he is the sort of personality who loses luster once he loses a primary or two. Very much like Howard Dean was for the Dems).

it's sort of hilarious watching the devolution of Woodchip: "lookee there!! Hillary has to lose, somehow!" Woody, the desperation is starting to get thick FAR too early in the process. I will understand when you are in full meltdown in late October, but try and pace yourself.

Now I'm almost rooting for Hillary to win just to watch woody's reaction. He might go thermonuclear first, but then he'll most certainly subject all of us to same bastardization of Hillary's image that he did with Obama's in his avatar, although with Hillary being female, that might just look WRONG even for him.

Plus there's the small fact that, unlike Trump, I don't think most people know who the hell Jim Webb is in the first place.

callmeslick wrote:it's sort of hilarious watching the devolution of Woodchip: "lookee there!! Hillary has to lose, somehow!" Woody, the desperation is starting to get thick FAR too early in the process. I will understand when you are in full meltdown in late October, but try and pace yourself.

The only desperation I see is you fearfully clinging to the failing hope that Hillary will win. Whats the matter? You have no in with Trump?

Trump's a bloviating egotistical blowhard who's eventually going to disappoint even his base, because in order to win the presidential election, he's going to have to track to the center, wherever that point on the political spectrum is located now.

woodchip wrote: The only desperation I see is you fearfully clinging to the failing hope that Hillary will win. Whats the matter? You have no in with Trump?

whoever the Dems pick wins. It is that simple. No fears. As for Trump, you have a point. I'll have to touch bases with him next time he's here in town at Chancery Court with another bankruptcy filing.

If he succeeds in building his promised wall all along the Mexican border, then can't get Mexico to pay for it, which I can guarantee you they won't, our country will be the next Trump bankruptcy.

tunnelcat wrote:Trump's a bloviating egotistical blowhard who's eventually going to disappoint even his base, because in order to win the presidential election, he's going to have to track to the center, wherever that point on the political spectrum is located now.

Kinda sounds like you're describing Billy Bob Clinton.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote: The only desperation I see is you fearfully clinging to the failing hope that Hillary will win. Whats the matter? You have no in with Trump?

whoever the Dems pick wins. It is that simple. No fears. As for Trump, you have a point. I'll have to touch bases with him next time he's here in town at Chancery Court with another bankruptcy filing.

Yeah, Bernies a shoo in. Amazing how many people in his home state of Vermont packed a Trump speech and how many more were still outside. Yeah...keep deluding yourself.

What, 1400 hand picked supporters, out of those 20,000 free tickets passed out to everyone, with the not-so-upfront caveat that you had to declare you were a Trump supporter just to be allowed in? Nice way to sway voters leaning on the fence. Also, many of the people gathered outside in the cold were protesters as well.

http://www.wcax.com/story/30913572/prot ... rump-event

And yet prior to people being allowed in, a CNN reporter was amazed at how long the line was. And don't forget how cold it was and how Bernie would be wetting himself if he had a tenth the crowd Trump has.

yup, and it turns out a lot of them were there to mock Trump and/or support Bernie. The night did not go well for Trump, by all reporting.

Wow, how delusional are you? Define "A Lot". The night did not go well for the disruptors as they all got booted out.

woodchip wrote:Wow, how delusional are you? Define "A Lot". The night did not go well for the disruptors as they all got booted out.

not before getting the Donald to lose his cool and act like an ass. By local reports, about half the crowd in line were not Trump supporters.

woodchip wrote:And yet prior to people being allowed in, a CNN reporter was amazed at how long the line was. And don't forget how cold it was and how Bernie would be wetting himself if he had a tenth the crowd Trump has.

Yeah man, no one wants to see Bernie.

Seriously, how hard do you have to try to be this delusional? Or does it just come naturally to you? It's a fascinating talent either way.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Wow, how delusional are you? Define "A Lot". The night did not go well for the disruptors as they all got booted out.

not before getting the Donald to lose his cool and act like an ass. By local reports, about half the crowd in line were not Trump supporters.

Show us a link that reports what you are posting.

callmeslick wrote:By local reports, about half the crowd in line were not Trump supporters.

This is actually a Hipster-type thing going on right now. Because Trump is so ridiculous, there are a lot of people supporting him "ironically," for attention. These people have no intention of voting for Trump, but play-act as fans, wearing Trump hats and t-shirts. They even go to rallies and cheer him on so they can take pictures then go home and laugh about it with their friends, like, "haha check out these photos of us at the Trump rally with those idiots." It's become a form of people-watching, a type of entertainment, completely divorced from the political process. Trump is literally a clown to a weirdly large group of people.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Wow, how delusional are you? Define "A Lot". The night did not go well for the disruptors as they all got booted out.

not before getting the Donald to lose his cool and act like an ass. By local reports, about half the crowd in line were not Trump supporters.

Show us a link that reports what you are posting.

this was planned sabotage. And, it worked. Looks real good, and real Presidential when the dick on stage suggests sending people out into the cold and confiscating their coats.
here's the planned, laid out in advance:
http://www.ibtimes.com/donald-trump-fee ... nt-2254981

of course, sometimes Trump and his little minions sabotage themselves. This looks Presidential to most of us, not:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YBt_6HfbM

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:Wow, how delusional are you? Define "A Lot". The night did not go well for the disruptors as they all got booted out.

not before getting the Donald to lose his cool and act like an ass. By local reports, about half the crowd in line were not Trump supporters.

Show us a link that reports what you are posting.

this was planned sabotage. And, it worked. Looks real good, and real Presidential when the dick on stage suggests sending people out into the cold and confiscating their coats.
here's the planned, laid out in advance:
http://www.ibtimes.com/donald-trump-fee ... nt-2254981

You actually posted what turns out to be a loser link and expect us to believe that somehow it succeeded? Man, you are losing your posting-fu.

vision wrote:

callmeslick wrote:By local reports, about half the crowd in line were not Trump supporters.

This is actually a Hipster-type thing going on right now. Because Trump is so ridiculous, there are a lot of people supporting him "ironically," for attention. These people have no intention of voting for Trump, but play-act as fans, wearing Trump hats and t-shirts. They even go to rallies and cheer him on so they can take pictures then go home and laugh about it with their friends, like, "haha check out these photos of us at the Trump rally with those idiots." It's become a form of people-watching, a type of entertainment, completely divorced from the political process. Trump is literally a clown to a weirdly large group of people.

You should go work for the Dem party where you can make ridiculous suppositions one step above slicks.

kinda fun watching Woody flail away!

I mean, I answered his point in my first response at the top. I can GUARANTEE that Webb will not put an Independant run together. His money sources for the Dem run are rejecting the idea, soundly. From that point, Woody spent the rest of the thread going, "but, lookee there" and brought nothing to the table, once his original premise had been destroyed.

You made a counter point, then assume his position is “destroyed” man that’s what I call arrogance, but quite typical of how one side always wins all of the arguments by declaring themselves the winners.

Spidey wrote:You made a counter point, then assume his position is “destroyed” man that’s what I call arrogance, but quite typical of how one side always wins all of the arguments by declaring themselves the winners.

counter point? I was in a conference call discussing the possibility and it was essentially rejected. That utterly destroys Woody's assumption which was that Webb would run and compromise Clinton's chances. Do you grasp that I am in a position on this issue to completely prove Woody's assertion to be wishful thinking?

I grasp the idea that he won’t get money from Democrats, but I can’t rule out his appeal to independents.

Spidey wrote:I grasp the idea that he won’t get money from Democrats, but I can’t rule out his appeal to independents.

the effort is going nowhere. There are a couple guys out of DC, and one from PA who are really trying to revive the idea(interestingly, Webb himself seems to be very distant from any involvement in this, unlike the Dem primary effort), and they have been soundly rebuffed in all attempts to raise money. Hence, the conference call to old, reliable donors, most of us going back to his Senate run in VA. We, almost to a person, soundly rejected the idea of spending more money on someone who doesn't really seem to like running a campaign. Period. It is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. If you would care to place a bet, I'll name the charity to donate my winnings to, you choose yours and the amount you wish to wager.

No thanks, I’m not a gambler.

Spidey wrote:No thanks, I’m not a gambler.

not really much of one myself, at this age, but really all I'm asking is trust me on this one. There will be no Webb run as an independant.

callmeslick wrote:
counter point? I was in a conference call discussing the possibility and it was essentially rejected. That utterly destroys Woody's assumption which was that Webb would run and compromise Clinton's chances. Do you grasp that I am in a position on this issue to completely prove Woody's assertion to be wishful thinking?

First off, I for one grasp that in all likelihood slick, you have simply created a online persona that is not who you really are. The internet is filled with people like you claiming all sorts of things, none of them based in reality.
Secondly you really need to read better. "Seems" and "Would" have two totally different meanings. Hiring Sam Jones is a indication for the word "Seems" as Jones is a fundraiser and by hiring him, Webb "Seems" to be more serious in his attempt to make a third party run. Who knows, maybe Trump will donate some money to Webb to keep things interesting.

well, you just hold onto your delusions and we'll see who is correct, now won't we?

for what it's worth, I still keep my Webb 2016 bumper sticker on the fishing car(which is my usual vehicle). Easy to locate from a ways off, and I've never seen another vehicle with one.

No delusions when I'm posting facts. Nice try at squirming there Earthworm Jim.

I'll offer you the same wager I did spidey. Feel free to take it. Grassroots Webb 2016(the organization lobbying for him to run, and hiring the fellow you cited) isn't going anywhere. They can't even get a SINGLE volunteer in 41 states. How do you figure that will translate into getting the signatures to be on the ballot?

Why would I make a bet based on the word "Seems". You're not very good at this game are you.

woodchip wrote:Why would I make a bet based on the word "Seems". You're not very good at this game are you.

no need to. If you think Webb will run, bet on it. Otherwise, just keep scraping your knuckles attempting to find glimmers of hope that a Dem won't be your President for the next 9 years.

callmeslick wrote:They can't even get a SINGLE volunteer in 41 states. How do you figure that will translate into getting the signatures to be on the ballot?

I would like to point out how difficult it is to get on the ballot. Remember Ron Paul's R[evol]ution? Tons of enthusiastic supporters, including myself standing in single digit weather, and Paul still didn't get on a lot of state ballots. Webb has no chance. ★■◆●, I signed up on his site and never even got newsletters, let alone a bumper sticker.