Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I see no reason to believe that Trump couldn't win the presidency. Sure he has the highest negatives of anyone running for president ever but Clinton's are also sky high. And sliding.
You describe him as " He is like the dumb kid in class who was looked down on by the smart kids. But he is going to show them all." But in the end we don't know. This is the character he plays on TV and I think part of his appeal is that he is so transparently fictional, right from reality TV. Sure one day he wants to nuke the middle east, the other he wants the US to mind its own business. Everything he says is changeable and none of it matters. What does that leave people with? Judging a man by his enemies is not the most reasonable approach but it certainly has quite some emotional appeal. So who are his enemies? The Republican establishment hates him. The media hate him, even though they can't stop talking about him. Even the sleazy billionaires funding his party hate him. And of course there are feminists, BLM activists....
Now taking together the enemies of those enemies are a winning coalition. So the last thing you want is to remind people of the most loathsome people on this list. So what does the Clinton campaign do?
Clinton Releases a Brutal Anti-Trump Ad | Mother Jones -
the ad is a compilation of unkind things Trump's fellow Republicans have said about him during the party's nomination campaign.

It's harsh. Mitt Romney calls Trump a misogynist, Marco Rubio claims he's the most "vulgar person to ever aspire to the presidency," and Jeb Bush says Trump needs therapy.


I also see no chance of her following your suggestions. Instead she goes after Republican donors.

Really there is no better way to depress turnout among Sanders supporters in the general election than to convince them that Republicans hate him and love Hillary. If there are enough "Moderate Republicans" to make up for this loss is anyone's guess.

And since we were talking October surprises, here is the list of event risks from Naked Cpitalism

Continued weakening of the economy. Despite all the cheerleading, first quarter GDP numbers were vastly weaker than expected in January, and the latest job figures were far enough below expectations as to put the Fed's rate increase plan in question. The latest reading from Saudi Arabia is even more of a hawk on keeping oil prices low to (among other things) discipline US frackers. That means another leg down of oil prices is likely, and with that comes more losses of high-paying jobs, more bankruptcies, and more energy loan/junk bond distress. Clinton has firmly tethered her record to Obama's, so she will be tarred if it decays going into the election.

Market turmoil. Most observers seem to forget that Sanders' big rise in the polls occurred in the first two months of the year, when global markets and Wall Street nosedived. Clinton is strongly identified with Wall Street, and it going wobbly reminds voters that financiers wrecked the economy for fun and profit and no one was punished. Worse, the lack of real reform means they can do it all over again.

E-mail hairball. Hillary has the FBI investigation as well as private suits in play. The State Department having a "dog ate the files" moment with its former employee, Brian Pagaliano, who also set up her home server, may have a second shoe drop. Even though Clinton cheerily says that she is looking forward to putting this behind, her, the stonewalling with the Judicial Watch suits means the e-mail scandal will still be in the news well into the summer, and potentially into the fall.

Health. Hillary has had at least a mini-stoke and has been having fainting spells since at least 2009, when she broke an elbow. She also appears to have gained a lot of weight and one wonders if that is the result of stress or difficulty managing her medication.

Finally I disagree with this:
It remains to be seen whether Hillary has the balls to be anything other than the archetypal weak women that Trump so despises.

I don't think anyone doubts she is tough. You can roast her in front of inquiries for hours on end and she won't break a sweat. What that wins her I don't know.

by generic on Wed May 11th, 2016 at 11:09:05 AM EST
For Trump to win he has to first split the Obama coalition: women, Liberals, blacks, Latinos, under 35s,  and second to attract that faction.  

Not.  Gonna.  Happen.  

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Wed May 11th, 2016 at 11:17:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
He doesn't need to split it.  He just needs it to stay home.  Clintstone, whose opinions are all derived by triangulation of the latest polls, may succeed in accomplishing that.
by rifek on Wed May 11th, 2016 at 08:41:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
She's hugely popular with black and Latino voters.  She could conceivably have issues with women and under-35s, but I think people have grossly overstated the dislike those folks have for her while not acknowledging just how much they despise Trump.

Every poll so far suggests that, even before Hillary and Bernie make an effort at unifying the party, Trump is underperforming relative to Romney and even McCain with those folks.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu May 12th, 2016 at 08:04:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I could have done a post almost as long on Hillary's weaknesses, but in the end, I'm not sure how much they will matter, provided her health stays ok and she holds her own in the debates.  And we must remember that Trump is just as old as she is, and perhaps less used to the hard slog of a Presidential campaign.  That takes age out of the equation unless she has a turn.

The good thing about the Trump is that he takes the spotlight away from her weaknesses. There is almost o comparison you can make that casts him in a favourable light.  No doubt Paul Manafort is even now ginning up some "Blacks for Trump", "Latinos for Trump", "Women for Trump" and "Iraq Veterans for Trump" front organisations, and the media will give them airtime. But will anyone take them seriously?

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed May 11th, 2016 at 11:59:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have a bad feeling about the debates.  I see a Kennedy-Nixon-type result, with her as Nixon.  I see her as a deer in the headlights.
by rifek on Wed May 11th, 2016 at 08:44:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Many people will look at the debates as some kind of grand finale to The Apprentice with Trump in the Chair and Hillary as the meek supplicant looking for money for her dodgy endeavour. He will be in his element and she has to avoid looking like a second fiddle player.  She has to turn the tables on him - rhetorically, visually, factually.

His only claim to that chair is his wealth.  She has to turn that into a liability by arguing that he has never done anything that others haven't done better, and that his claim to wealth - and that chair - is a sham. She has to claim that it is his track record, not hers, that is the issue.

"You want to talk about my private e-mail server?  Your organisation has dozens of private email servers!"

Etc.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu May 12th, 2016 at 05:35:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series