NM11046

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/trumpiq.png

How does this sort of thing continue with today's environment? http://www.sbnation.com/2016/7/29/12329726/texas-aggies-suspension-coaches-chalk-talk-women-clinic

That's it - there are too many, and they will only start getting more neutral more often now - def needs a separate thread.

Interesting find. In looking at all the bullets, I think it could apply to our current POTUS as well as the 2 major party candidates running right now. That's a matter of opinion ... NM is at it again. Saving the world, one internet post at a time. The classic "you don't agree with me so it's just an opinion" You literally said that NPD is a "very real thing" and then someone says that the current president and 2 candidates have some of these characteristics and you're all of a sudden backtracking and calling it subjective. Aw, I didn't realize my posts had such an impact on you Coach! Hopefully I cleared things up with my responses, I should have said I disagree with bnl, and there are some additional details on the disorder vs. just being narcissistic.

Interesting find. In looking at all the bullets, I think it could apply to our current POTUS as well as the 2 major party candidates running right now. That's a matter of opinion ... Well I think everything on huserboard is a matter of opinion, whether its this politics forum or the main football room. I'm just saying as I read through the list of bullets, many apply to Obama, Hillary, and Trump. I would definitely say it applies to most people that run fro highter public office. They want the power, they want to be remembered, they want to be well liked. It all fits. Trump, HRC, Obama, Bill Clinton, W, Reagen all had a lot of narssistic traits. . Really? I think anybody who runs for office has the view that they can and want to do good for the greater population - that's not necessarily narcissism. If they have qualifications and the knowledge I think that's confidence. It's really a selfless job for the most part and it certainly doesn't pay well. I think the key in what you said is that past president may have narssistic traits. I'd have to do some research, typically in order to be diagnosed with a DSM disorder you have to meet a certain number of the traits .. so if you exhibit one of them or three of them you may be a narcissist, but not have the NPD. And shoot, if they want to be well-liked, nobody would run for office.

Interesting find. In looking at all the bullets, I think it could apply to our current POTUS as well as the 2 major party candidates running right now. That's a matter of opinion ... Well I think everything on huserboard is a matter of opinion, whether its this politics forum or the main football room. I'm just saying as I read through the list of bullets, many apply to Obama, Hillary, and Trump. You're absolutely right - what I meant to say is I disagree with you.

Interesting find. In looking at all the bullets, I think it could apply to our current POTUS as well as the 2 major party candidates running right now. That's a matter of opinion ...

I found this definition of a medical condition interesting - it's a very real thing, and one I think we're witnessing on a national level right now. DSM-5 criteria for narcissistic personality disorder include these features: Having an exaggerated sense of self-importance Expecting to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it Exaggerating your achievements and talents Being preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate Believing that you are superior and can only be understood by or associate with equally special people Requiring constant admiration Having a sense of entitlement Expecting special favors and unquestioning compliance with your expectations Taking advantage of others to get what you want Having an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others Being envious of others and believing others envy you Behaving in an arrogant or haughty manner

Why did you feel this was an issue that needed to be brought up? Honestly asking.

Oh! Please, please, please start a Trump tweet thread, I need that.

I wouldn't get overly excited. Most military generals in recent years are not happy with the Obama/Clinton foreign policy approach against ISIS and in general, as well as their strong opposition to the Iran deal that Hillary came out in support of. Additionally, Panetta, Gates, and Hagel who all worked for the Obama administration also have gone on record stating the Obama/Hillary approach to foreign policy is bad for America. Here are just a few of those who have expressed their dissatisfaction. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/3/obama-military-strategy-blasted-by-robert-gates-le/ http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/breaking-army-general-exposes-barack-obama-in-a-big-way-after-resigning/ http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/top-american-generals-stand-united-bold-public-stance-barack-obama/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jun/15/obama-ignored-generals-pleas-to-keep-american-forc/ http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2013/11/obama-vs-the-generals-099379 http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/08/28/former-generals-line-up-against-obamas-iran-deal-n2044995 Oh bnl, you are so predictable with the republican defense and multiple link posts. You're attempting to defend a position that I didn't question by the way. They may not have liked the past regimes choices and direction militarily, the point of this man's speech, if you listened to it was that no matter his belief in Hilary being or not being the ideal candidate choice, Trump is a danger to this country. Home and abroad and there is absolutely NO WAY Trump should represent the country. And he's not the only one: http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2016/07/25/marine-gen-john-allen-has-endorsed-hillary-clinton-president-heres-why-matters/87539996/ And the biggest impact, the open letter from the GOP Defense National Security Leaders - signed by 121 well respected thought leaders. We the undersigned, members of the Republican national security community, represent a broad spectrum of opinion on America’s role in the world and what is necessary to keep us safe and prosperous. We have disagreed with one another on many issues, including the Iraq war and intervention in Syria. But we are united in our opposition to a Donald Trump presidency. Recognizing as we do, the conditions in American politics that have contributed to his popularity, we nonetheless are obligated to state our core objections clearly: His vision of American influence and power in the world is wildly inconsistent and unmoored in principle. He swings from isolationism to military adventurism within the space of one sentence. His advocacy for aggressively waging trade wars is a recipe for economic disaster in a globally connected world. His embrace of the expansive use of torture is inexcusable. His hateful, anti-Muslim rhetoric undercuts the seriousness of combating Islamic radicalism by alienating partners in the Islamic world making significant contributions to the effort. Furthermore, it endangers the safety and Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of American Muslims. Controlling our border and preventing illegal immigration is a serious issue, but his insistence that Mexico will fund a wall on the southern border inflames unhelpful passions, and rests on an utter misreading of, and contempt for, our southern neighbor. Similarly, his insistence that close allies such as Japan must pay vast sums for protection is the sentiment of a racketeer, not the leader of the alliances that have served us so well since World War II. His admiration for foreign dictators such as Vladimir Putin is unacceptable for the leader of the world’s greatest democracy. He is fundamentally dishonest. Evidence of this includes his attempts to deny positions he has unquestionably taken in the past, including on the 2003 Iraq war and the 2011 Libyan conflict. We accept that views evolve over time, but this is simply misrepresentation. His equation of business acumen with foreign policy experience is false. Not all lethal conflicts can be resolved as a real estate deal might, and there is no recourse to bankruptcy court in international affairs. Mr. Trump’s own statements lead us to conclude that as president, he would use the authority of his office to act in ways that make America less safe, and which would diminish our standing in the world. Furthermore, his expansive view of how presidential power should be wielded against his detractors poses a distinct threat to civil liberty in the United States. Therefore, as committed and loyal Republicans, we are unable to support a Party ticket with Mr. Trump at its head. We commit ourselves to working energetically to prevent the election of someone so utterly unfitted to the office.

I can't believe I just saw this - one of many lifetime Republicans and a retired Army Col lays out the case against Trump (I actually saw it on CNN but wasn't able to get that clip): http://on.msnbc.com/1WxwWPm

Not sure if anybody is looking for something to listen to during a commute or while you're in the office, but I found this NPR This American Life broadcast interesting and timely. There's an in-depth interview with the lead pollster from 538 explaining why political polls are whacked, and why theirs is the most dependable (and the mistakes they still make). AND - looking at Wilt Chamberlins' free throw technique and the choice he made. http://tal.fm/590

That and the people who do have landlines certainly fit a certain stereotype.

This is garbage.

And the crazy thing is, if Donald was a public figure and every one of his moves for his career was noted his mistakes and their impact would also be significant. Depending on your values and beliefs they could be considered worse. He's getting the benefit of not being in the public eye, and even more so, of you all not demanding that he answer any question with information, or that he disclose information like his tax returns etc. Two totally different standards. Why can't republicans sell us their candidate based on accomplishments and policy, plans of action and accountability? Because Trump has offered none. Instead they focus on trying to take down every competitor like Mean Girls. In life most often you must prove yourself and then you can earn the right to compare against your competitor. How he's snowed everyone into not requiring anything of substance to back him is just mindblowing. Andrea Mitchell said it quite well on Meet The Press: http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/03/27/nbcs-andrea-mitchell-donald-trump-is-completely/209566 Trump isn't a public figure? And hasn't been scrutinized over anything he is involved in? Interesting. Republicans are the only party that tear a candidate down Mean Girls style? I spent 22 years in WA state and raised Christian and conservative, no where else have had my beliefs openly ridiculed and mocked more than the liberals of a state where they are concerned about treating everyone's opinion and rights equally. I agree that Trump hasn't offered much for policies other than making brash comments about building a wall and kicking out Muslims. However, his healthcare ideas are better than what we're stuck with now, except for his idea about allow foreign pharmaceutical companies to import into the US. Reforming NAFTA is also a good idea too, that original deal has ended up benefitting only the elite and pinched the middle class. If Trump wasn't a jackmonster, and started clearly outlining policies and his agendas, he would win in a landslide. The policies Hillary and dems are standing for shouldn't even be allowed in an American political platform. Their socialistic ideas are what this nation has stood up to and fought against. There was once a president that spoke about people giving to the country and not asking what the country can do for them, that democrat barely exists and is drowned out by the rest. Well now perhaps. But before getting into the election a year or so ago he was a private citizen. One that was well known, one that thought of himself as a superstar and certainly craved the spotlight but he was a private citizen. And the result of that, and something he's tried to carry over into this role as political candidate is that he hasn't had to disclose the same amount of information, over the same number of years as someone like Hillary who has been a servant of the public for 30 years. Are you telling me that you feel the tone of this election has been similar with both parties? From my end the name calling, tweet attacks, accusations coming from the right are beyond a maturity and a professional issue. Sadly, the left has started swinging back to some extent. Yes, there's been dirty play in past elections, but this round it's childish and embarrassing (my Mean Girls comment refers to the name calling and bullying - kicking reporters out of conferences because one doesn't like what's been written about them, belittling people for their looks, for their handicaps etc). Seeing it happen from the top has given followers the sense that the behavior is ok, and the world is not a better place for it. Even some of the discussions on this site are more combative than I think we would have seen 4 years ago. I'm sorry that you felt persecuted while in Washington. I'm not sure I fully buy into your perspective that it was because of your religion & beliefs and the fact that it's a liberal state, but regardless I'm sorry. Sadly, there are individuals that align to any party or candidate that are not good, kind people. My issue is that until this election there was a level of respect between candidates, which then resulted in respect for the office. It used to be that you engaged during the election year, and the no matter the outcome you supported the President of the US. No matter the outcome of this election there will be a significant number of people who have zero respect for the candidate elected, they will act out and they will be patted on the back for it. I'm glad you have faith that IF Trump shared the details for his ideas he'd win in a landslide. We'll have to agree to disagree on that. What everyone on the right seems to forget is that the President alone can't do much. Without the support of Congress, he gets nowhere - as we've seen with the refusal of the right to support anything put forward the last 4 years; not because content was necessarily different than they'd support but because of spite and in order to make a point. Trumps not making any friends, in fact he's alienating people within his own party; respected, important people. Although he thinks he can fix things because he demands it - the real world is that he's got to be diplomatic and flexible and open to sacrifice to get something. I don't think he's capable.

And the crazy thing is, if Donald was a public figure and every one of his moves for his career was noted his mistakes and their impact would also be significant. Depending on your values and beliefs they could be considered worse. He's getting the benefit of not being in the public eye, and even more so, of you all not demanding that he answer any question with information, or that he disclose information like his tax returns etc. Two totally different standards. Why can't republicans sell us their candidate based on accomplishments and policy, plans of action and accountability? Because Trump has offered none. Instead they focus on trying to take down every competitor like Mean Girls. In life most often you must prove yourself and then you can earn the right to compare against your competitor. How he's snowed everyone into not requiring anything of substance to back him is just mindblowing. Andrea Mitchell said it quite well on Meet The Press: http://mediamatters.org/video/2016/03/27/nbcs-andrea-mitchell-donald-trump-is-completely/209566

i think it's more the delivery in the opinion and not the opinion itself. I can only speak for myself and my smartass remarks, but yes - totally delivery. It came across as pretty dour. For what it's worth, I don't think we get Lindsey either.

So BNL- I'm assuming seeing the pattern and volume of your posts that your are a lifelong Dem? Guessing you have a Hillary bumpersticker on the car?

Lewis will not be a Husker, Calvin will go to the Irish And the Wizard Of Oz, behind the curtain is just a little man.

Lewis will not be a Husker, Calvin will go to the Irish Santa, the Tooth Fairy & the Easter Bunny? All pretend.

Do we know the issue was for sure weed this time? I know in the past it was, but honestly I cant believe he kid couldn't put the bong down when he knew he was already high risk for testing.