Hillary Unleashes Hounds of War on Donald Trump

[RaphaelDLG]

I should add that I liked this commercial mentioned in the article because it really is edited to make Trump look like an idiot but that imo she's got to be careful about using Republicans criticizing him as an argument because it could reinforce his image as a "moderate" "anti-establishment" type.

[Virginiá]

What do you guys think is the best strategy?  She definitely needs to attack and can't ignore a lot of his BS, but how should she attack and what should she respond to?

I like what someone said earlier about portraying him as a con man and running Romney-Bain esque commercials about Trump University.  I think that's by far the strongest lane of attack.

I think you have to touch on the racist and sexist stuff he's said but in a very particular way that doesn't reinforce his image as an entertaining straight talker.  I also think if you get too personal or accuse him of corruption in certain ways it could very easily backfire based on Hillary's history.

I think focusing on him being manifestly unqualified is good but you have to be able to counter his positive image as an "anti-establishment" outsider.

Any thoughts?

Focus on these three:

1. Offensive comments towards women (there are so many audio clips/videos)

2. His shady business practices - Paint him as a failed businessman who lies about his record

3. Play up how dangerous he would be if in control of the military / intelligence apparatus. He is a moron who has the BEST words, but the WORST bona fides for the presidency.

Also worth the effort may be to paint him as a bigot / someone who encourages bigots. White supremacists are really becoming a common thing with his campaign.

Just my thoughts. Obviously not a political strategist, but

[NHI]

The Republicans spent 100 million on negative ads and still got crushed. 

Good luck.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I think a combination of "con man," "bull in a china shop," and "big baby" are the way to go, personally.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The Republicans spent 100 million on negative ads and still got crushed. 

Good luck.

Because our so called neutral media gave him 2 billion dollars in free ads with all the tv interviews he did to defeat all the formidable GOP Candiates . Now it's in general mode they will not do the same thing

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The Republicans spent 100 million on negative ads and still got crushed. 

Good luck.

Because our so called neutral media gave him 2 billion dollars in free ads with all the tv interviews he did to defeat all the formidable GOP Candiates . Now it's in general mode they will not do the same thing

I wouldn't be so sure. They want a close race. And when the prevailing winds favour Clinton, which they generally do, it will mean Trump gets favourable treatment.

[RaphaelDLG]

I think a combination of "con man," "bull in a china shop," and "big baby" are the way to go, personally.

Explain big baby?  That could be dangerous because it's the left that's traditionally stereotyped as whiny.

I assume he means thin-skinned and petty and narcisistically/defensively temperamental.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I think a combination of "con man," "bull in a china shop," and "big baby" are the way to go, personally.

Explain big baby?  That could be dangerous because it's the left that's traditionally stereotyped as whiny.

I assume he means thin-skinned and petty and narcisistically/defensively temperamental.

Well, I'd say it's at least two-pronged. What you've mentioned is one of the prongs for sure, but the other is that his working knowledge of how government and policy actually work is so incredibly simplistic, and he so lacks maturity on the issues, that he's like a hothead little baby pretending to play president.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Ill say it again Trump isn't running a conventional campaign.  Hes bypassing the media and typical political campaign and going right to the folks.  He will say anything that normal political candidates wouldn't dare say even if they wanted to.   Hillary can go negative and attack with the usual stuff.   Trump is not a governor, senator, congressman etc..  he was a entertainment guy and businessman.  Everybody knows the Donald Trump tabloid  nonsense already. 

All Trump has to do is stand next to Hillary and convenience voters that he can actually be president( nobody expects him yo know more than Hillary ) even if its the minimum. Once that happens Hillary is finished .    Those exit polls that show high percentage of voters wanting an outsider and anti establishment should worry you guys.  Its been consistent in both parties this year.

Trump is not bypassing the media. His campaign would be nothing without the outrageous amount of free coverage it received from major media outlets.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The Republicans spent 100 million on negative ads and still got crushed. 

Good luck.

Because our so called neutral media gave him 2 billion dollars in free ads with all the tv interviews he did to defeat all the formidable GOP Candiates . Now it's in general mode they will not do the same thing

I wouldn't be so sure. They want a close race. And when the prevailing winds favour Clinton, which they generally do, it will mean Trump gets favourable treatment.

The media is pro establishment dems

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The Republicans spent 100 million on negative ads and still got crushed. 

Good luck.

Because our so called neutral media gave him 2 billion dollars in free ads with all the tv interviews he did to defeat all the formidable GOP Candiates . Now it's in general mode they will not do the same thing

I wouldn't be so sure. They want a close race. And when the prevailing winds favour Clinton, which they generally do, it will mean Trump gets favourable treatment.

The media is pro establishment dems

You shouldn't believe everything you hear in the echo chamber.

[Adam Griffin]

The Republicans spent 100 million on negative ads and still got crushed.  

Good luck.

Except that, you know, what you're referring to consisted of arguments for sanity in an attempt to convince voters in a party that is both ideologically and intellectually rotten to its core that their favorite guy is as bat-s[inks]t crazy as they are...of course that wasn't going to work.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I think a combination of "con man," "bull in a china shop," and "big baby" are the way to go, personally.

Cruz bombarded Indiana with "con man" and "this is how he talks about our mothers, our sisters, our daughters."  It helped a lot. /sarcasm.

[Stranger in a strange land]

I think a combination of "con man," "bull in a china shop," and "big baby" are the way to go, personally.

Cruz bombarded Indiana with "con man" and "this is how he talks about our mothers, our sisters, our daughters."  It helped a lot. /sarcasm.

The problem is that Republican primary voters, by and large, agree with Trump on these things. They've also been conditioned to accept and not think critically about what trusted sources (meaning Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and their Pastor in roughly that order) say. That's much less the case with the general election electorate, which is also less angry and fearful.

[ProudModerate2]

I think a combination of "con man," "bull in a china shop," and "big baby" are the way to go, personally.

Cruz bombarded Indiana with "con man" and "this is how he talks about our mothers, our sisters, our daughters."  It helped a lot. /sarcasm.

The problem is that Republican primary voters, by and large, agree with Trump on these things. They've also been conditioned to accept and not think critically about what trusted sources (meaning Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and their Pastor in roughly that order) say. That's much less the case with the general election electorate, which is also less angry and fearful.

Exactly.
trump supporters just do not want to see and understand that "the methods" that worked for Little-Hands-Drumpf-Fuhrer in the primaries, is NOT the same for the general election.
And remember, on average, trump only had the backing of approximately 37-40% of the Republicans (just before the New York primary). That is not a convincing number of support from within your own party.

That is

[°Leprechaun]

She's nervous. I would be too if I was her.

 Due to a stubborn old man who refuses to recognize the fact that his presidential campaign is finished.

In 2008 she was a stubborn old woman who refused to recognize the fact that her presidential campaign was finished.
She also said that she wouldn't run again in 2009. So much for being trustworthy.

[Virginiá]

She's nervous. I would be too if I was her.

 Due to a stubborn old man who refuses to recognize the fact that his presidential campaign is finished.

In 2008 she was a stubborn old woman who refused to recognize the fact that her presidential campaign was finished.
She also said that she wouldn't run again in 2009. So much for being trustworthy.

And I would have said the same thing in 2008, except I wasn't paying attention to anything back then. I'm not saying this about Bernie just because he's Bernie, I'm saying it because his continued campaign is just wasting both his supporters money and forcing Hillary to waste her campaign money and time, as well. And for what? What does he think all this time and money is going to get him? The Democratic party would probably be more receptive to him if he didn't insist on staying in the race bashing Clinton and Democrats for no f*@(ing good reason at all. He's being stupid as hell.

So what is the point of your post? Are you assuming I'm just some blind Clinton supporter?

[°Leprechaun]

She's nervous. I would be too if I was her.

 Due to a stubborn old man who refuses to recognize the fact that his presidential campaign is finished.

In 2008 she was a stubborn old woman who refused to recognize the fact that her presidential campaign was finished.
She also said that she wouldn't run again in 2009. So much for being trustworthy.

And I would have said the same thing in 2008, except I wasn't paying attention to anything back then.

What is the point of your post?

I think that the point is that you shouldn't be blaming Sanders. He has said that he will support her. Either you believe him or you don't.

[Virginiá]

She's nervous. I would be too if I was her.

 Due to a stubborn old man who refuses to recognize the fact that his presidential campaign is finished.

In 2008 she was a stubborn old woman who refused to recognize the fact that her presidential campaign was finished.
She also said that she wouldn't run again in 2009. So much for being trustworthy.

And I would have said the same thing in 2008, except I wasn't paying attention to anything back then.

What is the point of your post?

I think that the point is that you shouldn't be blaming Sanders. He has said that he will support her. Either you believe him or you don't.

Uh, yes? He's the one who is deciding to stay in the race while going after Clinton as if he still has any chance to win. He's dragging out the primary for no good reason and probably even hurting his chances at getting concessions at the convention. Either he is being stubborn and stupid, or his advisors are all pushing him to stay in by feeding him sunshine and puppies.

I expanded my post before you had posted but apparently after you had already begun responding.

Edit: I feel obligated to point out I'm only annoyed because your post suggests I'm a hypocrite when that is not the case at all.

[°Leprechaun]

No, you're not a hypocrite. The election process is too long. I think it is fair that the largest state in the country should have a say in this, so there is a point for him to stay in, although you are right that the odds are against him. It doesn't seem right that California should be at the end of the primaries, however.

[Virginiá]

No, you're not a hypocrite. The election process is too long. I think it is fair that the largest state in the country should have a say in this, so there is a point for him to stay in, although you are right that the odds are against him. It doesn't seem right that California should be at the end of the primaries, however.

Well I do agree with that. The primaries should be better structured... but my beef with Sanders is not that he's staying in the race so much as he is staying in the race and attacking Clinton as if the primary is still a real, winnable race. As soon as his path was cut off, he should have either 1) suspended campaign, or 2) continued to run but ignored Clinton / Democratic party and run on the issues. Firing up people over Democratic causes could have helped, and instead he is also inflaming his supporters.

I want a Democrat to win in November, and win as big as possible, and he's making it more difficult by forcing Hillary into a two-front campaign for no sensible reason. It's like he can't accept that barring a miracle, he will not win the nomination. No possible miracles require him to attack Clinton in the meantime, though.

Anyway, I suppose that's all I have to say about this.