Trump Talk™

so many shallow people in this country....

It doesn't have anything to do with country. That's a core human response. That happens everywhere, always has, likely always will.

Where is it that you think this isn't happening?

Sorry, but he was still white. Race did not play a part of people's decision. Nor his sex.

Chanti, I know you are trolling, but do you have to make it so obvious?

color of one's skin

How is that trolling? It's the truth.

Again, it has nothing to do with skin color specifically. That's just one data point. You're either being willfully thick or trolling, and I don't care which.

Candidates have always been about more than a pile of policy points, and no one who follows politics as closely as you do can be blind to that unless you are choosing to be.

just because he was an Irish Catholic doesn't mean he wasn't white

I guess we are having two different arguments

Electability was clearly a factor in the 1960 election just going by the response to the first televised debates.

Many people think the whole likability thing in the 1960 debate was due to Kennedy's physical appearance vs. Nixon's, but not everyone agrees. This is obviously not the best of sources, but here's what Cracked.com has to say about it.

5 Famous Pieces of Presidential Trivia (That Are Total BS)

Article text in spoiler:

Far from destroying our democracy, he’s exposing all its phoniness and corruption in ways as serious as he is not. And changing it in the process.

In the late nineteenth century, political cartoonist Thomas Nast regularly lambasted Irish Catholic immigrants as drunkards and barbarians unfit for citizenship; signs that read, “No Irish Need Apply,” lined shop windows in Boston and New York and dotted the classified pages in many of the country’s leading papers; statesmen warned about the dangers of admitting Catholics from Southern and Eastern Europe onto American shores, for fear that they were something less than civilized (and less than white). It wasn’t unusual for respectable politicians to wonder aloud whether Catholics could be loyal to their adoptive country and to the Pope....

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump’s tax plan would cost an eye-popping $12 trillion over 10 years, according a new estimate that runs directly counter to the billionaire’s pledge not to increase the deficit with the proposal.

The conservative Tax Foundation, which has been scoring candidates’ tax proposals throughout the race, found that Trump’s changes to the individual tax code would add $10.2 trillion to the deficit using traditional scoring methods, his corporate tax cuts would add $1.54 trillion and his proposal to eliminate the estate tax would add another $238 billion.

In addition, the gains from the cuts would disproportionately benefit ultra-wealthy Americans like Trump, whose personal income, business earnings and inheritors all stand to gain from a number of its provisions. According to the analysis, the wealthiest 1% of Americans would see their after-tax incomes increase by 21.6% versus just 1.4% for the poorest 10%.

The findings strongly contradict Trump’s campaign rhetoric, where he’s repeatedly boasted about his willingness to raise taxes on well-off Americans like himself in order to help others. On Tuesday, Trump said his plan would “cost me a fortune” at his press conference unveiling it.

For perspective, the same group pegged the cost of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s tax plan at $3.66 trillion, Sen. Marco Rubio’s at over $4 trillion and Sen. Rand Paul’s flat tax proposal at roughly $3 trillion.

The analysis acknowledged that details of Trump’s plan were still vague, requiring them to make some approximate guesses, but added that the overall size was largely driven by the deep cuts in rates. Trump’s plan would lower the top tax bracket for wealthier Americans to 25% from 39.5% today and the top corporate tax rate to 15% from 35% today, which it would partially offset with some changes to deductions. Trump has also claimed his plan would add some 31 million households to the substantial number of Americans who pay no money — or gain money through credits — in income tax, bringing the total to 75 million filers.

A white paper by Trump outlining his tax plan on Monday claimed that it “doesn’t add to our debt and deficit, which are already too large,” a claim that conservative and progressive economists alike cast doubt on.

Trump, like other Republican candidates, claimed that his plan would offset its cost by encouraging further growth. The Tax Foundation also scored it using a model that assumes supply side conservative theories of economic growth are correct and found it still would add $10.14 trillion to the deficit.

The Trump campaign pushed back against the findings on Tuesday, claiming the organization underestimated the amount of revenue Trump would raise to offset its cuts.

“They seem to largely ignore most of the plan’s pay-fors, but even accounting for that, their figures seem wildly off the mark,” Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks told MSNBC in an e-mail. “Especially compared to how they scored similar provisions for Jeb Bush’s plan.”

Shortly after the estimate dropped, Bush jabbed Trump on Twitter for the proposal’s cost, but also for employing a similar structure to his own reform plan.

“Finally saw Donald’s ‘tax plan,’” Bush wrote. “Looks familiar! I’m flattered. But he should’ve stuck with growth & fiscal responsibility.”

Despite Trump’s gigantic net tax cut, influential conservative leader Grover Norquist said on Tuesday that he took issue with Trump’s plan because it requires hedge fund managers to pay slightly more in taxes by closing the carried interest loophole, a change he derided as “a shiny bauble conceived in left-wing academia.”

This is a relatively minor feature of the plan, however. The Congressional Budget Office estimates ending the carried interest provision would raise just $17 billion over 10 years. As the Tax Foundation analysis indicates, this small change would be dwarfed by the trillions of dollars in cuts proposed by Trump, some of which — like a reduction in the top capital gains tax rate — would directly benefit wealthy investors.

MSNBC but other articles on this are everywhere.

Where people elect those based on issues and not on the color of one's skin? For anything? The nationalist politics gaining steam in Japan haven't gone unnoticed either.

South Korea
Japan
Russia
India
China

Just to name a few off the top of my head.

Why not use the primary source then? I know it's conservative, but I promise you that you won't catch on fire by posting it....

Because none of the articles I saw bothered to link to or mention the original source nor did I wish to hunt it down.

The MSNBC piece seemed complete enough.

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump says if he takes the White House, he will send back Syrian refugees coming to the U.S.

“I’m putting the people on notice that are coming here from Syria as part of this mass migration,” he told an audience in Keene, N.H.

“If I win, they’re going back. They’re going back. I’m telling you. They’re going back.”

Trump last week accused his GOP rivals of seeking to “start World War III over Syria.”

He suggested at the time that the U.S. should let Russia take up the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

Hate to break it to you, but that's not a newscast. You shouldn't believe anything that comes from a channel called Comedy Central...

Hate to break it to you, but that's not a newscast. You shouldn't believe anything that comes from a channel called Comedy Central...

Hate to break it to you, but that's not a newscast. You shouldn't believe anything that comes from a channel called Comedy Central...

I presume you mean if it's not a newscast, it doesn't belong in the thread?
You can report it and have it removed if mods agree with you.

It's not that, it's that you shouldn't mistake The Daily Show as "news."

It is about as accurate as Brian Williams.

nobody mistakes it for news, and don't pretend they do.

What in that 8min clip was a lie?