John Oliver: Make Donald "Drumf" Again.

[Metro Jacksonville]

John Oliver: Make Donald "Drumpf" Again



"Our main story was about Donald Trump. We can't believe we're saying that either."


Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2016-feb-john-oliver-make-donald-drumpf-again

[CCMjax]

Wow, hilarious!

[Downtown Osprey]

Hilarious and spot on. If you still vote for this guy after watching this I don't know what else to tell you.

[JaxJersey-licious]

That has to be one of the more insightful episodes of John Oliver's show. Almost as head-turning as the one about the Miss America pageants and their college scholarship funding claims.

[Gunnar]

Actually, there were a couple of inconsistencies in the video:

For one, Oliver says that Trump always threatens to sue but never does, then a while later he does mention how Trump sued and lost.

Then on the question of campaign financing: He disputes Trump's claim of being self funded. While that part may very well be true, I believe the main point Trump is making is that he does not have any large donors and Oliver does not specifically address this, just stating that Trump did receive over 7 Million in campaign donations. What I would have liked to know is where those predominantly small  donation or did the Koch brother hit the donate button repeatedly on Trump's campaign web site.

That would indeed be interesting.

[Bridges]

Actually, there were a couple of inconsistencies in the video:

For one, Oliver says that Trump always threatens to sue but never does, then a while later he does mention how Trump sued and lost.

Then on the question of campaign financing: He disputes Trump's claim of being self funded. While that part may very well be true, I believe the main point Trump is making is that he does not have any large donors and Oliver does not specifically address this, just stating that Trump did receive over 7 Million in campaign donations. What I would have liked to know is where those predominantly small  donation or did the Koch brother hit the donate button repeatedly on Trump's campaign web site.

That would indeed be interesting.

NY Times ran an article stating the Kochs are furious at Trump.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/donald-trump-republican-party.html?_r=0

The party’s biggest benefactors remain totally opposed to him. At a recent presentation hosted by the billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch, the country’s most prolific conservative donors, their political advisers characterized Mr. Trump’s record as utterly unacceptable, and highlighted his support for government-funded business subsidies and government-backed health care, according to people who attended.

[spuwho]

I find it all hilarious.

The Repubs think he is not presidential and too liberal.

The Dems think he is a fascist.

You know, when 2 establishments fear the same person, who owes nothing to either one, you begin to see why they fear him.

No political chips to cover, say what you think, but not what you mean.

But the US Government is designed to handle these kind of personalities if & when they become president.

James Madison was a brilliant man, and when he theorized how the new country should create a balance of power, he had these guys in mind.

Ultimately, Trump is a deal maker who like an elephant (pun intended) wants to threaten their enemies will shake the dust off their ears, but ultimately will trade up with the peanuts offered by Congress.

[spuwho]

I find it all hilarious.

The Repubs think he is not presidential and too liberal.

The Dems think he is a fascist.

You know, when 2 establishments fear the same person, who owes nothing to either one, you begin to see why they fear him.

No political chips to cover, say what you think, but not what you mean.

But the US Government is designed to handle these kind of personalities if & when they become president.

James Madison was a brilliant man, and when he theorized how the new country should create a balance of power, he had these guys in mind.

Ultimately, Trump is a deal maker who like an elephant (pun intended) wants to threaten their enemies will shake the dust off their ears, but ultimately will trade up with the peanuts offered by Congress.

James Madison didn't turn a blind eye when journalists like the Time Photographer today were beaten and choked by a candidates thugs, spuwho.  This isn't partisan politics as usual.

Bullying takes on different forms, some are physical, some are linguistic; (stick and stones?)

Hillary's campaign has banned the following words to be used in covering her presidential effort as they are considered "coded sexism"

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/03/281081-clinton-fans-banning-words-call-coded-sexism/

NY Times Political Reporter, Amy Chozick was warned by one of the Dem mouthpieces. Here are the words the group says can’t be used to describe Clinton:

Ambitious
Calculating
Disingenuous
Entitled
Insincere
Out of Touch
Over Confident
Polarizing
Represent the Past
Secretive
Will Do Anything to Win

[spuwho]

how did we go from beating and choking to a more generic term like 'bullying'?

I thought I was fairly specific as to what happened.

Are you saying that word choice nannyism is somehow the same thing as beating and choking a professional journalist?

Darn it, that redirect method in blogging that you taught me isn't working tonight.

"word choice nannyism"

Since I don't think they set out to murder the journalist, bullying would have to take the next place in the realm of adequate descriptions.

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Ultimately, Trump is a deal maker who like an elephant (pun intended) wants to threaten their enemies will shake the dust off their ears, but ultimately will trade up with the peanuts offered by Congress.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw8c2Cq-vpg

I think SM covers your point in the first 4-5 minutes and goes on for over an hour pointing out Trump's manipulation of the media from his own playbook, "The Art of the Deal".

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/Gw8c2Cq-vpg?" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/Gw8c2Cq-vpg?</a>

[peestandingup]

I'll just leave this here: http://i.imgur.com/N5dYr9c.png In the video, you can clearly see the reporter grabbing him first & the agent quickly reacting. I'd expect nothing less from these guys with anyone to be honest. If I grabbed an agent like that, I'm gonna assume he's gonna slam me.

Also, I don't get the left's anti-Trump position. For years we've all been talking about how corrupt the establishment GOP is. Here comes a guy outta nowhere who's self funded who's kicking them all in the balls, calling the Bush family lying war mongers in a televised debate in the heart of Bush country (and still won SC), for Planned Parenthood, etc & basically burning them to the ground. That's not an endorsement, but if he's able to do that (which he seems to be going to), then god bless him. It needed to happen years ago. When the media has resorted to throwing everything but the kitchen sink at him & nothing sticks, that's probably a good indication that he's onto something the establishment doesn't like.

Here's a good article about it from the left's point of view & it basically blames the current state of the tired GOP: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-america-made-donald-trump-unstoppable-20160224

I think the left is mostly scared that he'll actually win the Presidency. After Trump runs the board on Super Tuesday & Bernie drops out (and he will, it'll become clear then that it'll be impossible for him to win), it'll just be Trump & Clinton. I see many (not all, but many) voting Trump in the general because they fucking hate Hillary (I mean they REALLY hate her). They'll do it purely for spite & a "burn it to the ground" viewpoint. Trump will also totally stick the knife in & twist it during those debates with her, saying things that no other candidate would dare to say. All leading Trump to win the nomination. Mark it down.

[peestandingup]

read the above psu. your claim has already been discredited

Where exactly? I'm not seeing it.

Its the Republicans freaking out about him at the moment because he is destroying their party.

The Republican establishment is, not Republicans in general. Most realize it needs a shakeup. Granted, they probably wanted a better choice than Trump to do that.

And if you think a mafia dealing, con man and pathological liar with no problem roughing up journalists who appeals to racism and xenophobia is going to clean up corruption you are sadly mistaken.

What racist/xenophobic comments specifically has he ever made? Not saying he hasn't, you may know more than me since I don't follow him/politics too closely. I don't think being against open borders counts as xenophobic.

[Tacachale]

Leftists with brains are afraid of Trump, because *everyone* with a brain is afraid of Trump. Him taking a few positions they agree with doesn't move him past the fact that he's a populist charlatan who appeals to the worst tendencies of the electorate and says whatever he thinks will get him the most attention.

What racist/xenophobic comments specifically has he ever made? Not saying he hasn't, you may know more than me since I don't follow him/politics too closely. I don't think being against open borders counts as xenophobic.

I imagine his statement that Mexican immigrants are "bringing drugs, bringing crime, they’re rapists" would qualify, along with his claims that he will keep Muslims out, and his recent refusal to disavow David Duke and white supremacists.

[ben says]

Does this guy have a single positive attribute? Seriously?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Watch the above video that I posted. 

If you open it up you'll see that most of the media's talking points are completely debunked v/s what was said v/s what was printed.

It's broken down in PP fashion with quick-links to some of the main talking points.

The only people who are afraid of the guy are the established politicians.  I've felt this way for a while - I don't care who wins POTUS as long as it's Sanders or Trump.