How Trump Could Lose or How IIDB Got John Sarfati Banned at TWeb

[Jimmy Higgins]

Something odd happened last night. Rubio is making fun of Trump. But not in the normal way... he appears to be trolling him. link

Rubio in recent days revived a decades-old old insult, mocking Trump for having relatively slight hands.

"He's always calling me Little Marco. And I'll admit he's taller than me. He's like 6'2, which is why I don't understand why his hands are the size of someone who is 5'2," Rubio said in Virginia on Sunday. "And you know what they say about men with small hands? You can't trust them."

That is trolling Trump.

It reminds me of good ole John Sarfati at Tweb (better known as his secret alias of "Socretes"). The golden son of TWeb was banned at TWeb. What the people running that board never understood was that there was a concerted effort behind the scenes to get him to behave in a way that would get him banned. Being a hot head, he was getting poked and prodded. And his attitude was getting worse and worse and then we just continually trolled him, targeting his weaknesses (well within their board posting rules) until he cracked and started insulting other true believers at the site.

We knew when he was posting late at night (locally), what would rile him up, and just how to push him over. And it worked.

Rubio seems to have started an exact same sort of thing. He is prodding Trump over stupid shit, but stuff he knows will rile Trump up. He is trying to get Trump to finally say something that costs him the Presidential Race.

Now before you say, there is nothing that he could say to do that, we got TWeb to ban one of the golden child members. Anything is possible.

 

[Rhea]

I agree - good points. It has been hilarious watching Rubio dial it up, Rubio's quotes always stay within bounds, but Trump can't let a jab go unanswered and he tries to ratchet it up. Hilariously. I haven't seen any clips, just read comments, but it sounds like last night was a pretty sour disaster for the GOP!

 

[barbos]

One of these people will be the leader of the free world.

 

[Thomas II]

One of these people will be the leader of the free world.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

One of these people will be the leader of the free world.

No they won't. There's really not a risk of the GOP candidate winning this election.

 

[repoman]

when Rubio said the thing about being flexible and yoga I was hoping he was going to say something about Trump or Cruz doing it to suck their own dick, but their dicks being too short.

Come on, someone here structure that quip!

But you know, that if Trump was told his dick was too short for self-suck, he would challenge that assertion. He wouldn't be able to stop himself.

Make America SelfSuck Again! Vote for Trump!

 

[repoman]

Someone needs to interview Mike Judge and ask him if Idiocracy was too slow in its timeline.

 

[Terrell]

One of these people will be the leader of the free world.

No they won't. There's really not a risk of the GOP candidate winning this election.

Hope you're right, but Bush II. Granted that W wasn't over the top like these guys, I don't think he was a good president.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Come on, someone here structure that quip!

I suffered an accident between 5th and 6th grade and lost the last knuckle on the middle finger of my right hand.

Sometimes I show people the bird. On my left, I fold all the fingers down except, of course, the bird. It really sticks out there. On my right, I fold the pinkie down all the way, and fold the ring and forefingers down to the last knuckle so the middle finger only barely extends beyond it.

"What's the difference between these two?" I ask. "Well, this one's not deep enough to satisfy."

So, maybe something along the lines of "What's the difference between President Trump and President Cruz? Both'll screw the country, but Trump can't go deep enough to satisfy...."

 

[laughing dog]

One of these people will be the leader of the free world.

No they won't. There's really not a risk of the GOP candidate winning this election.

You will never go broke underestimating the American public.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

No they won't. There's really not a risk of the GOP candidate winning this election.

You will never go broke underestimating the American public.

Well yes, there is the issue that Trump has defied expectations regarding his longevity and support levels every step of the way. However, the serious Republican attacks against him have only truly ramped up recently because the other candidates wanted his voters and they weren't really sure what would be effective against him.

Clinton, however, doesn't want his voters (since there are maybe three people across the country who would find a way to have Hillary Clinton as a second choice behind Donald Trump, so it's not like they're a viable potential voter base for her) and the other GOP candidates are doing all the groundwork for her in figuring out which attacks have legs. They need to damage Trump and she will end up either being able to profit from that damage or the GOP will have a brokered convention and she'll be able to campaign on the message that not even their own party wanted whoever the candidate was.

This Presidential election has been over for a while and the only remaining question is how large Clinton's victory will be and how much of that she'll be able to translate into increased down-ticket votes for the Senate and House.

 

[Derec]

This Presidential election has been over for a while and the only remaining question is how large Clinton's victory will be and how much of that she'll be able to translate into increased down-ticket votes for the Senate and House.

I think your are overly optimistic (or pessimistic) about the inevitability of she who has been inevitable since 2007.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

This Presidential election has been over for a while and the only remaining question is how large Clinton's victory will be and how much of that she'll be able to translate into increased down-ticket votes for the Senate and House.

I think your are overly optimistic (or pessimistic) about the inevitability of she who has been inevitable since 2007.

It's not overly anything except overly able to pay attention to basic reality. Sanders can't catch her with what's left of the primary and neither Trump nor any of the rest can take enough of the potentially contested states to match her in the general election. Her becoming the next President is a done deal. Whether one is happy, sad or indifferent to that fact doesn't change that fact.

 

[Axulus]

I think your are overly optimistic (or pessimistic) about the inevitability of she who has been inevitable since 2007.

It's not overly anything except overly able to pay attention to basic reality. Sanders can't catch her with what's left of the primary and neither Trump nor any of the rest can take enough of the potentially contested states to match her in the general election. Her becoming the next President is a done deal. Whether one is happy, sad or indifferent to that fact doesn't change that fact.

Are you putting your money where your mouth is? You can get ~1.5:1 return on your money by placing a bet on prediction sites like paddypower.com that Hillary will win the election. You can also bet against Trump winning and get ~1.33:1 return on your money.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

It's not overly anything except overly able to pay attention to basic reality. Sanders can't catch her with what's left of the primary and neither Trump nor any of the rest can take enough of the potentially contested states to match her in the general election. Her becoming the next President is a done deal. Whether one is happy, sad or indifferent to that fact doesn't change that fact.

Are you putting your money where your mouth is? You can get ~1.5:1 return on your money by placing a bet on prediction sites like paddypower.com that Hillary will win the election. You can also bet against Trump winning and get ~1.33:1 return on your money.

That's the weirdest response to a question I've seen since the last Trump debate.

 

[Axulus]

Are you putting your money where your mouth is? You can get ~1.5:1 return on your money by placing a bet on prediction sites like paddypower.com that Hillary will win the election. You can also bet against Trump winning and get ~1.33:1 return on your money.

That's the weirdest response to a question I've seen since the last Trump debate.

If it is fact then that means you making lots of money would be a fact if you participate, no? Why would you pass on that opportunity unless it wasn't really a fact?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

That's the weirdest response to a question I've seen since the last Trump debate.

If it is fact then that means you making lots of money would be a fact if you participate, no? Why would you pass on that opportunity unless it wasn't really a fact?

That's just kind of creepy. Your gambling problems are your issue, not mine.

 

[Axulus]

If it is fact then that means you making lots of money would be a fact if you participate, no? Why would you pass on that opportunity unless it wasn't really a fact?

That's just kind of creepy. Your gambling problems are your issue, not mine.

If it is a fact, then it isn't a gamble. A gamble implies a chance of losing.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Hope you're right.

Hey, that's what I say to (and this election cycle the gravity of the situation is on par with) climate deniers.

This Presidential election has been over for a while and the only remaining question is how large Clinton's victory will be and how much of that she'll be able to translate into increased down-ticket votes for the Senate and House.

Hope you're right.
I'd rather see Clinton have to go up against Kasich. The potential outcomes are less disturbing.

I shudder to think how Cruz or Trump might respond to the antics of Kim Jong-un.