Okay. We must be talking about different people.

I agree that getting the Nobel peace prize was a political move which he himself seemed embarrassed about, however he got it at the beginning of his presidency so your logic is screwed.

And the failure of the Republican presidency was such that they’d driven away just about every voter persuadable to their side, then drove away the rest by choosing an idiot like Palin to be the running mate.

I’ve said before I thought Clinton was the better candidate in 2008. I wish Obama had carried on as a senator, or got some gubernatorial experience, then was the candidate this year. However, he’s an extremely intelligent and talented man who is a wholly capable president.

Future historians will have their hands full figuring out how the only U.S. President to have waged war continuously for 2,922 consecutive days (including heretofore unimaginable numbers of targeted killings, among them U.S. citizens whom that President had solemnly sworn to defend) nevertheless managed to cop the so-called Nobel “Peace” Prize for literally no good reason.

And that’s only after these historians figure out how a ludicrously unaccomplished “neighborhood organizer” and serial memoirist came to power in the first place.

If there’s any justice, he’ll end up in an appendix on historical oddities and absurdities, which is more than he deserves.

Definitely! I’m sure many books and papers are currently being written ready to be released as soon as the election is over.

Less distantly, it could inspire many a History/Poli Sci/Abnormal Psych/Sociolgy, etc., thesis! 😀

I completely agree!

As someone with pretensions to he an historian, I often look at events and wonder how people will look at them from a couple of hundred years in the future. The Trump Phenomenon is one that will have people reacting in disbelief for centuries.

A lot of Trumpishness would be hilarious if it wasn’t also so appalling and scary. 😉

Yeah, I had heard that about his taxes, and also the additional speculation that there’s something about who he’s donated to and how much he’s donated that he wants to hide. But I think you’re right – nothing will sway his acolytes. When he made that comment about gunning people down in Fifth Avenue and they’d still love him he was right. Sam Harris made a similar one on that really long video that Grania posted the other day. I mostly listened to it as background noise, but I remember Sam Harris saying Trump could send out a tweet saying he wanted to f**k Danni Minogue, and he’d just get tweets back saying, “Yeah, go for it,” and similar. No-one else could get away with that.

I’m sure you know the speculation that the reason that Trump won’t release is tax returns is because they’d show he paid next to nothing if not actually nothing in taxes. I’d love to have that exposed, but I don’t think it would even sway his acolytes now.

I’m not so sure his tactics so far are going to be quite so successful in the general election. Yes, there’s definitely mud to throw at Clinton, but she’s also clearly more knowledgeable than Trump in every area and thinks quickly on her feet. Trump has plenty of dodgy things he can be tackled on too, and his own flip-flops just in this campaign are legend. Sanders I think could have wiped the floor with Trump on many domestic issues, but he struggles with foreign policy and USians seem to like Trump’s bluster on that. If there’s a terrorist attack Trump could capitalize on that easier with Sanders than with Clinton. Sanders responses would be perfectly reasonable but would be framed as weak.

I’m not impressed with the way Debbie Wasserman Shultz handled things, especially in relation to debates. I agree there should have been more, and at better times.