Trump shakes up staff, intent on finishing race on own terms

Good luck fixing this insane campaign in meltdown. Or getting Trump's foot out of his mouth for that matter.

Donald Trump is hinging his presidential hopes on a risky bet: that the fiery populism and freewheeling style that won him the Republican nomination give him a better shot at the White House than uniting his party and rallying moderate voters.

I couldn't be happier. Really. This is the best case scenario, not only for Team Dem and for America. Trump is burning down the Republican party.

Captain Trump really is hell-bent on steering the Titanic, its Republican campaign crew and the Republican passengers into the iceberg while having ditched all lifeboats along the way. Loving it.

"He believes he should stay true to what got him this far"

Trash talk and stupid shit all the way. No flip-flopping on that score. You've got to admire a man who stays true to his art.

Good news go Trump

"He believes he should stay true to what got him this far,” said David Bossie, the leader of a pro-Trump super PAC."

Comedians can have another hour in bed every day. The next few months will see more material than you could wave a KKK hat at.

Good news

Now with the Breitbart magnate and no doubt other alt right media moguls backing Trump, it's good news for his cultists who no longer want to hear mere dog whistle bigotry. Instead they'll now be able to hear it said straight out, unfiltered, which is good news for those who want to see a further deepening of the divides that separate the WASP's who want a return to the 1950's style segregation from those who want to try to keep the nation from further falling apart.

It will be good news if there's a stronger stop-the-hate, stop-the Trump-cult movement which ends up uniting those who want to fight against a return to a separate but equal past.

Will the new team get Trump to show his tax returns and open up about his relationship with Russian oligarchs??

Breitbart?

Well, they've found the bottom of what a human being can do.

I thank the Trump campaign for this - it might well motivate the lazier among the Democratic voters to be sure to cast a ballot, however "in the bag" this election will seem by November: I'd have to violate Godwin's Law to describe anyone with Breitbart.

Please continue, Mr. Trump. Do not change course for ANY reason. You fans deserve it.

US guys at the office say that the problem is not Trump's staff. The problem is Trump. But Trump pathologically cannot blame himself for any problems.

This is the final denouement of the Trump campaign: he has cast aside all reason and temperance, dead set on running a berserk campaign that will careen crazier and crazier down the highway. He has completely misread the reasons for his drop in the polls, and this will ensure his defeat by a landslide. The democrats could not have been blessed more. Now watch McCain, Ryan, McConnell and the rest of the cowardly GOP leaders squirm their way out of this one. The irony is beyond comprehension. This is desperation on a completely new plane.

Today's fodder article to create the usual back and forth between the usual people. Yawn.

You know where this headed. The Donald is a bad loser, and when he loses the election in a landslide, it will be the fault of his advisers, or the media, or the Republican status quo... It'll be everyone else's fault, but of course not himself.

It is pretty interesting. I've never seen the media so obsessed with somebody that is supposedly losing so badly.

No one is motivated to vote for Clinton, there is no energy amongst even her supporters. So seeing as she is supposedly so far ahead lots of people who "support" her wont bother to go vote. She has a nearly 70% untrustworthy rating, so will someone take a day off from work or skip their lunch or pick up their kids late from school just to go vote for her? Its going to be a "well someone else will go do it" Brexit type reaction.

It's easy to say "Clinton" when someone calls you on the phone and asks for a poll, but will those people actually follow through and go vote? The Trump people are motivated and energetic and will show up early and will bring friends. Plus there will be an extra 10% of people who have never bothered to vote before turning out for Trump as well.

Do you really think someone who has never cared enough to vote will do it now just to vote for Clinton? She will get votes from the minority groups who she constantly panders to, plus some women, and the deceased due to lack of voter ID requirements. I dont see that as being enough for her to win.

@Lizz and Blacklabel

I agree with the media obsession - it is a bit much - and I do not support Trump. On the other hand I believe he is going to lose very badly, but who knows...strange things happen.

As far as the 2 candidates - this is an interesting election. I am up there in years and it is, in my opinion, the strangest one I have seen. This is as polarized as I have seen the country since the 1960s - but then there was a feeling that people could pull back together. This time - with all going on - I do not have the same feeling.

Regardless this is quite interesting.

There is no new Clinton- just the same corrupt self-serving politician/lawyer that you have always had.

Will the new team get Trump to show his tax returns and open up about his relationship with Russian oligarchs??

Manafort does need to be thoroughly investigated for his undisclosed ties to undisclosed foreign lobbying. But the company that the Ukrainian money was routed through....John Podesta, huh? He just happens to be the Chairman of the Clinton 2016 Presidential Campaign. He’s in the same position as Manafort. He actually took the money and did the work. Besides being one of the biggest paid lobbyists for the Saudis who has even not resigned from his own firm, with close ties to the Russians and the Saudis and it is Manafort who is the alleged evil doer.

Just one more example of the enormous double standard being applied to Trump vice Clinton.

I've never seen the media so obsessed with somebody

I agree with the media obsession - it is a bit much

I can only see these kinds of comments as naive - at best.

Think about Trump and his history. He’s the biggest self-promoter I’ve ever read about. He’s been the biggest manipulator of the media I’ve ever read about. He’s a master at marketing, someone who’s used the media to sell his brands for decades. (That so many of his brands have failed and several of his businesses have bankrupted can’t be blamed on lack of media exposure, however.)

He’s a member of the global ruling class, an elitist who flaunts his wealth in Dubai, Istanbul, Mumbai, Manila, among many other places worldwide where his towers and businesses blare his name in giant, bold letters. Anywhere he appears he arranges for the media to showcase him. He’s a reality TV character who loves the spotlight. He makes the most outlandish statements I’ve ever heard from any candidate, which does attract a lot of attention. He says things even George Wallace, another politician who loved being in the spotlight and who was also known for his blatant racism, would hesitate to say.

He’s now got the alt right media firmly in his grasp. He’s a moneymaker for them. Expect even more media attention. And please don’t pretend the media’s 'out to get him'. That’s not even naive.

LizzAUG. 18, 2016 - 08:58AM JST It is pretty interesting. I've never seen the media so obsessed with somebody that is supposedly losing so badly.

Then you've never watched the news. Every celebrity meltdown gets followed with this kind of attention - more if the people involved are attractive. That's what we're watching, a celebrity melt-down. The media follows what gets them views because views get them money, and if there's one thing the public loves, it's watching someone with more money and more fame and more tools to get everything the public wants in life self-destructing publicly. You might say it's unfair that Trump gets covered like a celebrity rather than as a politician, but I say if he wanted to be covered as a politician he shouldn't have campaigned as a celebrity.

As for the news story in the article itself: best news I've heard all week. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b97zJxKEqAk

As head of Breitbart, Bannon was unfazed by falsehoods put out by his organization. “We’re honey badgers,” he said. “We don’t give a s---.” This, in fact, has been the motto of Breitbart, and it's a perfect one for Trump as well. Truth no longer matters. It's all relative to who screams the loudest.

Politics has always been dirty business, and there has never been perfect impartiality in the news media. However, the unholy alliance between Republican operatives and unapologetically right wing media has changed political discourse in America forever. From Limbaugh to Fox to Breitbart, the Machiavellian cynicism of these people is sick beyond belief.

LizzAUG. 18, 2016 - 08:58AM JST

I've never seen the media so obsessed with somebody that is supposedly losing so badly.

"Supposedly?" Every poll is putting Clinton clearly ahead, even though she should be easily beatable. There are continual campaign staff shake-ups. Republican leaders frequently criticise Trump. Do you really think these are signs of a campaign that's going well?

Not satisfied with the hole he is in --- Trump hires two more power shovels.

It's just strange to think that Trump supporters think there's some kind of conspiracy that he's in second place. It's like his disastrous campaign just doesn't factor in anywhere. How many top advisors has he hired and fired? And he's doing this because he's winning but the media is lying?

I said before that I was worried about what the GOP would do when faced with the reality of losing another presidential election. I said they would become desperate. I've watched people here go from critics of Trump to betting their entire political future (and credibility) on him. I'm worried about what those people will do when faced with utter reality that they bet everything on a false savior.

It's going to be brutal.

...the decision to promote the pollster and hire Bannon suggests Trump “wants to win and is willing to make the changes necessary to do so.”

I don't see it that way. More likely is that Trump had grown frustrated with Manafort's attempts to have Trump read from Teleprompters and eschew craziness. From Trump's point of view, if you have to do that, why run at all?

Trump does not want to change. Many who have been close to him say that he cannot change. This is a clear sign that he is taking charge of his campaign. Two possibilities ensue.

One is that he doubles down on his craziness - the foreigner-bashing, wall-building, conspiracy-hugging, Kremlin-loving statements that brought him to this point thanks to his gullible base. The other is that he ups ans quits. I suspect it will be both: a burning dumpsterfull of hateful vitriol spewed between now and mid-October, by which time he'll have found some reason to exit the race.

It is pretty interesting. I've never seen the media so obsessed with somebody that is supposedly losing so badly.

When the official candidate for one of the two major parties in a presidential election is losing ground in national polls as rapidly as Trump is, it's of interest to the public. Nothing interesting or surprising in the least that news outlets would focus on it.

What is interesting is so many still seem to believe in the ultra-nationalist fairy tale that Trump keeps spinning, utterly tone deaf to the reality that the majority of the electorate doesn't like or want his cynical, hate-fueled vision of America.

“There is no new Donald Trump,” Clinton said. “This is it.”

The problem is, there is no new honest Hillary Clinton. This is it.

This is interesting: " Trump: Obama, Clinton Iraq strategy was 'absolutely insane' " ( Fox News )

This should be funny.

Serrano- "The problem is, there is no new honest Hillary Clinton. This is it.

This is interesting: " Trump: Obama, Clinton Iraq strategy was 'absolutely insane' "

LOOK AT THAT! A BROWN DOG! - But he makes no mention of how Trump's policy ideas would be better, or have been better. Or even if Trump has put out any ideas (I only recall him urging something like a "massive influx of troops" and "carpet bombing" and "torture and killings of the families of suspected terrorists" - Serrano likely knows not even that much).

Trump and his supporters would win the lottery every single time, if only they could choose the numbers the day after the winners are announced.

lets hope when Trump loses the election, he`ll fire himself on the next episode of The Apprentice

"LOOK AT THAT! A BROWN DOG! - But he makes no mention of how Trump's policy ideas would be better, or ( would ) have been better"

Try watching the FoxNews video I listed, you might learn something. Also this one: "Gorka: The war is real and the war is here"

"when Trump loses the election"

Dream on. Hillary is toast.

Serrano who supported the iraq war and everything W Bush "achieved" . Now pivoting to Trump's insane campaign crtisising everything he previously supported. Heh, and to think conservatives used to talk about "personal responsibility".

The Meltdown and the Denial continues.

"The Meltdown"

According to who? You and the mainstream media? hehe

He got rid of trouble makers. Now, there will be better campaign?

What is interesting is so many still seem to believe in the ultra-nationalist fairy tale that Trump keeps spinning, utterly tone deaf to the reality that the majority of the electorate doesn't like or want his cynical, hate-fueled vision of America.

Funny, liberals are never satisfied, when Trump is off message, they have to complain, when he is on message....they have to complain. It's NOT that they DON'T want Trump, you are sadly mistaken if you think that the electorate wants Clinton, none of the polls show it, especially when it comes to social issues, Hillary loses by a big margin.

It is quite hypnotic to watch the same rhetorically charged attacks on Trump by the same people EVERYDAY! Yet, not one of you has yet to cite what would a positive aspect about another Clinton presidency.

Please inform your reasons for supportering Clinton without mentioning Trump.

I wonder what intelligence agency wanted him tomanswer yesterday's quizzes?

He probably got rid of his globalist insiders, now the CIA wants to have a few words. I can't believe he said he doesn't trust the CIA and doesn't want to work with over many failures PUBLICALLY!

@madverts

What to liberals in the "liberal mind" is an acceptable and passing news source?

It is quite hypnotic to watch the same rhetorically charged attacks on Trump by the same people EVERYDAY! Yet, not one of you has yet to cite what would a positive aspect about another Clinton presidency.

Please inform your reasons for supportering Clinton without mentioning Trump.

Did you not read the response by Black Sabbath you got to this question last time you asked it? I guess not. Here it is:

I will. But first, I think its is important to point out that because she is not Donald Trump is reason enough to vote for her. Ignoring all the intricate domestic political squabbling, Trump would be a foreign policy disaster. No one who cares about US prestige and avoiding wars the restructure the international system, wars like the Napoleonic Wars, or WWII can allow that man near the US presidency. He is too ignorant and too erratic. Too much human life and misery is on the line.

I repeat: She is not Donald Trump. And we Americans have a choice between those two. One and only one of those two will be president. Nothing will change that. A protest vote for a third party candidate only matters in how it affect whether CLinton or Trump wins.

And Trump cannot win. Too much is at stake. They always say that, and this time its true.

So, really, one doesn't need a better reason to vote for HRC. And for those people who hate HRC so much that they are willing to allow that man to seize control of the US presidency, well, I have nothing to say to them other than they are terrible people.

IOW, ignoring the insane rhetoric against her, the worst thing that can be said of HRC is she is well within the status quo on economic issues and America's military role in the world. Depending on your perspective, she is too liberal on social issues, but from where I stand, she is a moderate, left of center centrist. When you look at the issues, the Democrats are mainstream, and the Republicans are extreme.

Most Americans support gay rights, access to abortion, increased health care for all, increased taxes on the rich, expanding social security and medicare, equal pay for women, increasing gun control, and keeping garbage being taught to our kids in science classes.

Those are mainstream Democratic positions. HRC supports all those. She's even championed more than a few.

That is the reason to vote for her.

The worse thing I can say about HRC is she is not a good campaigner, she's too much the technocrat, and IMO she is not enough of a Liberal Democrat. A good example of this caution is how she dragged her feat on equality for gays at a critical moment back in the mid oughts. I understand why she did that, but that is really the thing: I'd like my leaders to lead.

On the bright side, she and BIll know how to deal with the all the Washington b.s. and will get things done.

NEWS FLASH ! Trumpster - the campaign is over ! We're just going through the motions. 1/20/17 - "Madame President"

Well, it's a day later, and what can we say, other than,

IT JUST GETS BETTER AND BETTER.

Stephen Bannon is a complete and total cluster f*$%. He's a complete liar, with no crack pot conspiracy-theory too low to pass. He's actually turned Breitbart into a den of white supremacists. Please note: I am not saying everyone at Brietbart is a naked white supremacist. I am saying that Bannon openly courts those crack pots, and the site is filled with them.

Bannon hates Paul Ryan, loathes Mitch McConnel, and pretty much despises the 'Republican Establishment."

We are looking at the RNC and other organs of the party abandoning Trump by the end of the week. If that happens, AND if the Republicans cannot drive a wedge between Trump and the Republican Brand, down ticket is gonna take a heavy beating and turnout for Team Repub could be, in the low 30%s.

This is unprecedented folks.

"And for those people who hate HRC so much that they are willing to allow that man to seize control of the US presidency, well, I have nothing to say to them other than they are terrible people."

Ivanka Trump is a terrible person? Even Chelsea Clinton doesn't think that. On the other side of the coin: And for those people who hate Donald Trump so much that they are willing to allow that witch to seize control of the US presidency, well, I have nothing to say to them other than they are terribly misinformed/deceived people.

Every poll is putting Clinton clearly ahead, even though she should be easily beatable.

The polls I have seen with LIKELY voters with REASONABLE D/R splits (D+1, 2 or 3 but not +15) she is not clearly ahead, if at all.

Every poll, put Carter ahead as well and then what happened. When Trump declared his run for presidency, everyone laughed Dems and the GOP and he ended up being the last man standing, destroying 17 of the most powerful Republican candidates, he survived all of the scandals, insults, conspiracy theories from both sides, attacks on his character and he's still standing. The point is, Dems should NEVER be overconfident, that's ther biggest Achilles heel. I'm not ruling anything out, that would be foolish. But it all does remind me of 1980.

he ended up being the last man standing, destroying 17 of the most powerful Republican candidates, he survived all of the scandals, insults, conspiracy theories from both sides, attacks on his character and he's still standing.

Yeah, but the only people who have voted for him so far are the Republicans.

Don't forget, the actual election is not held in that same vacuum.

he survived all of the scandals, insults, conspiracy theories from both sides, attacks on his character and he's still standing.

Because that's what Trump's candidacy is all about: being a loudmouthed, ignorant jerk. He entertains people who like reality TV. His fans love him because he makes these people feel like they're not as obnoxious and moronic as he is.

Every poll, put Carter ahead as well and then what happened.

Clinton's lead over Trump has been substantially and consistently higher than Carter's lead over Reagan. Yes, anything can happen, but remember that Trump is no Reagan. Reagan didn't build his campaign on insults, smears, falsehoods, inconsistent policy stands, pompous self-aggrandizement, or mocking people's appearance or physically disability. Reagan was a likable person who at least had a consistent and carefully thought out policy proposals (however terrible they may have been).

it all does remind me of 1980.

Time for me to dig out my Jordache jeans and pocket comb.

LizzAUG. 19, 2016 - 07:26AM JST

The polls I have seen with LIKELY voters with REASONABLE D/R splits (D+1, 2 or 3 but not +15) she is not clearly ahead, if at all.

Which polls? I've only seen one showing Clinton with a one point lead, Reuters, The Economist, NBC, Bloomberg and ABC all put her at least five points ahead. It looks to me like you're cherrypicking figures to fit what you would prefer to believe.

bass4funkAUG. 19, 2016 - 10:06AM JST

Every poll, put Carter ahead as well and then what happened.

He lost against Ronald Reagan. Donald Trump is NOT Ronald Reagan. I'm not a big Reagan fan by any means but Donald Trump doesn't deserve to have his name mentioned in the same sentence.

...destroying 17 of the most powerful Republican candidates...

Hrm. Anyone else remember any powerful Republican candidates from the Primaries? I can't.

...he's still standing.

Barely. And he doesn't really seem to be going anywhere.

Yeah, but the only people who have voted for him so far are the Republicans. Don't forget, the actual election is not held in that same vacuum.

Exactly, which is why that I'm saying, liberals or anyone for that matter should tread cautiously and why? Because you never know, that's being realistic and again, we don't know who in the end will ultimately vote or not vote. I have seen this soooooo many times and a lot of people hold their true feelings to their chest until the final moment. You might have some people that say they are for Hillary and when that curtain is pulled back, vote for Trump or visa versa. There is a lot of emotion in this election and for me, personally, it's all about the supreme court and less about Trump the man.

@Simon

That's NOT my point! My point is, all the polls in 1980 showed that Carter was going to crush Reagan, that's how the media called it, everyone we knew were talking about a 2nd term and then-BAM! Reagan won by a landslide, that's what happened, the same thing COULD happen and the ONLY thing I am saying and liberals for some reason don't want to accept is that, it's always, always best to be cautious instead of being overconfident, especially the way the entire election cycle has been this year, I'm not ruling ANYTHING out, I'm not a fool.

No one's predicting a Clinton landslide, Michael Moore said he thought Trump could win, and even "MSM" media outlets are pointing out Hillary Clinton's weaknesses as a candidate that a strong opponent could probably nail her on. So where this idea that liberals are all blind to reality is coming from I have no idea. Looks like an extremely lazy over-generalisation to me.

No one's predicting a Clinton landslide

I am. I've been wrong before though - I thought there was no way Bush Jr. would win a second term after lying about the Iraq war.

Michael Moore said he thought Trump could win

He thought Trump could win because of Democratic apathy, not because he actually thought Trump was qualified to do so. And recently he's come out saying he thinks Trump is trying to sabotage his own campaign because he doesn't actually want to be president: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/17/is-trump-purposely-sabotaging-his-campaign-michael-moore-commentary.html

No one's predicting a Clinton landslide, Michael Moore said he thought Trump could win,

Hearing that from Moore give me a grin like that cat from Alice in Wonderland and as Jessie Jackson's words "we live in hope." But you're right, NO ONE can predict a landslide in this, we will just have to wait and see.

But you're right, NO ONE can predict a landslide in this

I just did, in the post right before yours.

So then since we don't have a crystal ball, we just don't know, but a lot can happen between now and November for both of these people. We can have a new direction with a leader that will get us out of this financial mess or we can choose to continue chugging along at a laughable 1.3 GDP and more government dependency and more entitlements and more racism and more division.

bass4funkAUG. 19, 2016 - 03:06PM JST

We can have a new direction with a leader that will get us out of this financial mess...

Not sure what there is in Trump's record of business failures, bankruptcies and lawsuits to inspire such confidence in him.

But Hillary, lying to the public and dealing with dictators, using her public position to enriched herself, people dying on her watch, countries becoming disposed and killed, having a history of dealing with corruption and having a husband that used his power of the presidency to fondle women, that package inspires confidence into a voter? Really?

Nothing to say about Trump's strengths? I'll take that as a tacit admission there is in fact nothing in his career to support the assertion that he can get America out of its financial mess.

Nothing to say about Trump's strengths? I'll take that as a tacit admission there is in fact nothing in his career to support the assertion that he can get America out of its financial mess.

Whoa! Hold up! Just because I don't go rattling off about Trump's strengths doesn't mean I don't believe him or he doesn't have the capability. Of course he does. Over the last 4o years, his empire didn't grow by itself and not everyone can do what he did. Sure, he had some bankruptcies, but he bounced back and by the way, his empire is getting bigger and Hillary's pockets.....I mean, foundation is getting bigger as well.

Voters consistently rate the economy as the most important issue facing the nation. They also consistently trust Donald Trump on the economy more than they do Mrs. Clinton — this according to multiple polls in recent months. A few sample numbers: 53 percent trust Mr. Trump more on “top-ranking economic issues,” 45 percent do Mrs. Clinton (Gallup, June 2); 51 percent say Mr. Trump is a better candidate to “handle the economy,” 43 percent say Mrs. Clinton (CNN, June 21); 50 percent trust Mr. Trump more on the economy and federal deficit,” 45 percent trust Mrs. Clinton (Fox News, August 3). There are more.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/10/inside-the-beltway-voters-favor-trump-on-the-econo/

bass4funkAUG. 19, 2016 - 09:35PM JST

Of course he does. Over the last 4o years, his empire didn't grow by itself and not everyone can do what he did.

Right, it's amazing what you can do when you have a very rich dad to bail you out.

Sure, he had some bankruptcies, but he bounced back and by the way, his empire is getting bigger...

Yes, he always seems to be starting new things. Like Trump University, Trump Steaks, Trump Vodka... or how about the Trump International Golf Links in Scotland - a loss of £1.3 million in 2014, a loss of £1.8 million in 2013 and a further loss of £1.7 million in 2012, 6,000 jobs promised, only 150 people actually employed. Not much of an empire if you ask me.

Voters consistently rate the economy as the most important issue facing the nation. They also consistently trust Donald Trump on the economy more than they do Mrs. Clinton — this according to multiple polls in recent months. A few sample numbers...

Interesting that you cite all these figures and downplay the significance of polls that indicate things you don't find so palatable.

Latest news on Trump' He donated louisiana's floodvictim all sort of necessity.

And what about the Manafort possible scandal now? He's just cut and vanished.

Trump people here continue to pretend there is smoke over the Clinton Foundation, just because of the name attracting lies - despite all its dealing and finances being public knowledge.

C'mon! If Hillary had someone on her staff, stuffing envelopes even, that appeared this compromised and then was sidelined and then resigned, what would happen? What would Trump and the noise machine you get your POV from do?

And what do you (any of the Trump people here) say to it? I didn't give much credence to a single "black ledger" at first, but the Trump campaign's own actions suggest there something bad went on and they want to snuff out further investigation be the press.

Here's HRC's campaigns first serious salvo. Note that it asks Trump to clarify these matters (if with implied glee) w/o making accusations:

"Paul Manafort’s resignation is a clear admission that the disturbing connections between Donald Trump’s team and pro-Kremlin elements in Russia and Ukraine are untenable. But this is not the end of the story. It’s just the beginning. You can get rid of Manafort, but that doesn’t end the odd bromance Trump has with Putin. Trump still has to answer serious questions hovering over his campaign given his propensity to parrot Putin’s talking points, the roster of advisers like Carter Page and Mike Flynn with deep ties to Russia, the recent Russian government hacking and disclosure of Democratic Party records, and reports that Breitbart published articles advocating pro-Kremlin positions on Ukraine. It’s also time for Donald Trump to come clean on his own business dealings with Russian interests, given recent news reports about his web of deep financial connections to business groups with Kremlin ties."

Surprise me with candid responses that addresses the issue. I'll not only be surprised, but thank you if you do.

almosttransparentblueAUG. 20, 2016 - 08:33AM JST

Surprise me with candid responses that addresses the issue. I'll not only be surprised, but thank you if you do.

No responses. I wonder what's holding them back.