Why was Trump unstoppable

[Da2017]

He did many things that would of ended any other campaign.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Media Attention


If he got as much airtime as everyone else did , he would no be nowhere near close to getting the nomination

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well he was stoppable, but the problem is no one else wanted to break out of the mold that all the other candidates fit neatly into but was way out of pace with the desires of the electorate.

[darklordoftech]

The media thought there was more outrage towards him among the general public than there actually was.

[Mr. Morden]

He did many things that would of ended any other campaign.

I'm not convinced that's true.  One possible conclusion from the campaign is that voters don't actually care as much about things that will supposedly end a campaign as we might have thought.

[RINO Tom]

He wasn't.

[Mr. Smith]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

[RINO Tom]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

[Rookie Yinzer]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

[RINO Tom]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

I said nothing like that...  not judging the chip on your shoulder, pal, but you shouldn't stereotype what others believe like that.

[Xing]

He wasn't, but

1) No one figured out how to stop him, since his supporters didn't care one bit about his character, and

2) The Republicans and Hillary Clinton thought it would be impossible to actually lose to him

[Rookie Yinzer]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

I said nothing like that...  not judging the chip on your shoulder, pal, but you shouldn't stereotype what others believe like that.

No chip at all.

How did Hillary act smug and morally superior? All she did on the trail was talk about his racism and demagogic dog whistles. You're alleging that this "morally superior attitude" is why she lost and I'm wondering where's the problem there? Wouldn't any Democratic candidate have done the same (not to the extent of ignoring policy like Hillary of course)?

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Cause he got big ol' cojones and a sexy smile. 

[Calthrina950]

He did many things that would of ended any other campaign.

For me, it seems as if many Republican voters in 2016 were looking for something different, and Trump fit that mold. Many people were "riled up" by his constant attacks upon Hillary Clinton and other politicians, and viewed him as "politically incorrect". So that is one factor. Another is that his unpopularity was canceled out by Hillary Clinton's, and so, voters were left with two choices: either elect the lesser evil, or go third-party. And since most voters are loyally Republican or loyally Democratic, most of them chose the first option. One other factor is that the Republicans were willing to put aside much of what Trump said, for the sake of winning the White House and defeating Clinton, who they absolutely despise.

[Calthrina950]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

I said nothing like that...  not judging the chip on your shoulder, pal, but you shouldn't stereotype what others believe like that.

No chip at all.

How did Hillary act smug and morally superior? All she did on the trail was talk about his racism and demagogic dog whistles. You're alleging that this "morally superior attitude" is why she lost and I'm wondering where's the problem there? Wouldn't any Democratic candidate have done the same (not to the extent of ignoring policy like Hillary of course)?

I would disagree with this. Although Trump was (and is), a despicable person, there is much more to why Hillary Clinton lost than what you say. Her many character faults, the e-mail scandal, and the history of her actions during her husband's presidency all played a role in undermining her approval ratings. There is also the fact that she ran a horrible campaign, and that I attribute directly to her arrogance. That she didn't visit Wisconsin at all, took Michigan for granted, and only focused on Pennsylvania until it was too late, while wasting resources going after Arizona and Georgia, testifies to that. Moreover, she said some comments (i.e. the deplorables comment), that need not have been said, or should have been phrased differently.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

1. Immigration. This is the biggest reason by far. No other issue has such a huge disparity between the people and the politicians.

2. Trump's gaffes at least showed that he wasn't another scripted politician pushing focus group approved talking points 24/7. It was seen as crude, but genuine.

3. The media discredited itself. The inability to maintain even a semblance of impartiality reduced caused many people to tune it out completely even when there were fair criticisms to be made.

4. The establishment regarded the people and the issues faced in Middle America with condescension, if not outright contempt, and deliberately tried to subvert them. From the Colorado GOP refusing to have a primary so Trump wouldn't win delegates, to the DNC and media colluding against Sanders while super-delegates made it impossible for him to win, to National Review saying white working class communities should die, to Hillary calling 1/4 of America deplorable and bragging about how she would put coal miners out of work, it was a recipe for backlash.

[Mr. Smith]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Really? So tell me, what was the greatest achievement of the Humphrey administration? How did Senator Gaghan Douglas turn out? I bet Presidents Smith and Bryan had some phenomenal administrations!

What was the shining achievement of President Ford's second term?

[Rookie Yinzer]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

I said nothing like that...  not judging the chip on your shoulder, pal, but you shouldn't stereotype what others believe like that.

No chip at all.

How did Hillary act smug and morally superior? All she did on the trail was talk about his racism and demagogic dog whistles. You're alleging that this "morally superior attitude" is why she lost and I'm wondering where's the problem there? Wouldn't any Democratic candidate have done the same (not to the extent of ignoring policy like Hillary of course)?

I would disagree with this. Although Trump was (and is), a despicable person, there is much more to why Hillary Clinton lost than what you say. Her many character faults, the e-mail scandal, and the history of her actions during her husband's presidency all played a role in undermining her approval ratings. There is also the fact that she ran a horrible campaign, and that I attribute directly to her arrogance. That she didn't visit Wisconsin at all, took Michigan for granted, and only focused on Pennsylvania until it was too late, while wasting resources going after Arizona and Georgia, testifies to that. Moreover, she said some comments (i.e. the deplorables comment), that need not have been said, or should have been phrased differently.

The deplorables thing really wasn't that bad. She was specifically talking about the neo-Nazi alt-right who are utter garbage and aren't worthy of any respect. However, the triggered snowflake conservatives ran with it so they could continue the narrative that Hillary was an anti-white latte liberal elitist in bed with Wall Street. If I'm not mistaken she made the remark at a fundraiser in Manhattan, so it looked even worse.

[Calthrina950]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

I said nothing like that...  not judging the chip on your shoulder, pal, but you shouldn't stereotype what others believe like that.

No chip at all.

How did Hillary act smug and morally superior? All she did on the trail was talk about his racism and demagogic dog whistles. You're alleging that this "morally superior attitude" is why she lost and I'm wondering where's the problem there? Wouldn't any Democratic candidate have done the same (not to the extent of ignoring policy like Hillary of course)?

I would disagree with this. Although Trump was (and is), a despicable person, there is much more to why Hillary Clinton lost than what you say. Her many character faults, the e-mail scandal, and the history of her actions during her husband's presidency all played a role in undermining her approval ratings. There is also the fact that she ran a horrible campaign, and that I attribute directly to her arrogance. That she didn't visit Wisconsin at all, took Michigan for granted, and only focused on Pennsylvania until it was too late, while wasting resources going after Arizona and Georgia, testifies to that. Moreover, she said some comments (i.e. the deplorables comment), that need not have been said, or should have been phrased differently.

The deplorables thing really wasn't that bad. She was specifically talking about the neo-Nazi alt-right who are utter garbage and aren't worthy of any respect. However, the triggered snowflake conservatives ran with it so they could continue the narrative that Hillary was an anti-white latte liberal elitist in bed with Wall Street. If I'm not mistaken she made the remark at a fundraiser in Manhattan, so it looked even worse.

Well we can agree to disagree. My points about her incompetent campaign and her lack of character still stand.

[Rookie Yinzer]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Demeaning racism and demagoguery is a problem? LOL.

I said nothing like that...  not judging the chip on your shoulder, pal, but you shouldn't stereotype what others believe like that.

No chip at all.

How did Hillary act smug and morally superior? All she did on the trail was talk about his racism and demagogic dog whistles. You're alleging that this "morally superior attitude" is why she lost and I'm wondering where's the problem there? Wouldn't any Democratic candidate have done the same (not to the extent of ignoring policy like Hillary of course)?

I would disagree with this. Although Trump was (and is), a despicable person, there is much more to why Hillary Clinton lost than what you say. Her many character faults, the e-mail scandal, and the history of her actions during her husband's presidency all played a role in undermining her approval ratings. There is also the fact that she ran a horrible campaign, and that I attribute directly to her arrogance. That she didn't visit Wisconsin at all, took Michigan for granted, and only focused on Pennsylvania until it was too late, while wasting resources going after Arizona and Georgia, testifies to that. Moreover, she said some comments (i.e. the deplorables comment), that need not have been said, or should have been phrased differently.

The deplorables thing really wasn't that bad. She was specifically talking about the neo-Nazi alt-right who are utter garbage and aren't worthy of any respect. However, the triggered snowflake conservatives ran with it so they could continue the narrative that Hillary was an anti-white latte liberal elitist in bed with Wall Street. If I'm not mistaken she made the remark at a fundraiser in Manhattan, so it looked even worse.

Well we can agree to disagree. My points about her incompetent campaign and her lack of character still stand.

I wasn’t disputing any of that just making an observation about the deplorables debacle.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The deplorables thing really wasn't that bad. She was specifically talking about the neo-Nazi alt-right who are utter garbage and aren't worthy of any respect. However, the triggered snowflake conservatives ran with it so they could continue the narrative that Hillary was an anti-white latte liberal elitist in bed with Wall Street. If I'm not mistaken she made the remark at a fundraiser in Manhattan, so it looked even worse.

Yes, it's about how it was spinned.

[Senator Incitatus]

He was the internet troll, and everyone running but Hillary Clinton decided to feed him. Too bad Hillary was compromised

Acting smugly morally superior to your opponent hasn't really ever worked.

Really? So tell me, what was the greatest achievement of the Humphrey administration? How did Senator Gaghan Douglas turn out? I bet Presidents Smith and Bryan had some phenomenal administrations!

What was the shining achievement of President Ford's second term?

In the cases of Hoover and McKinley/Taft, there's a big difference between being smugly superior and making it your campaign slogan. There is no dignity in reminding people how dignified you are.

In the Nixon examples, I'm baffled as to how anyone could think Nixon ran as the smug elite against any of his opponents, let alone in his Senate race. Am I missing something? Biographies of Nixon universally portray the Senate race as the turning point for both Nixon and the Republican Party towards populist anti-communism, where he painted Douglas as a pinko Hollywood elitist.

Or Carter? Carter clearly didn't win by being morally superior. I'm just completely lost on your train of thought here.

[Joe McCarthy Was Right]

The Republican base didn't trust establishment candidates because they've tried to pass horrible bills like the gang of 8 and the 2015 omnibus. Then on election day, only 28% of voters wanted to "continue Obama's policies."

[here2view]

I think, in a hypothetical scenario of course, he would have lost to Obama running for a third term.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

1. Immigration. This is the biggest reason by far. No other issue has such a huge disparity between the people and the politicians.

2. Trump's gaffes at least showed that he wasn't another scripted politician pushing focus group approved talking points 24/7. It was seen as crude, but genuine.

3. The media discredited itself. The inability to maintain even a semblance of impartiality reduced caused many people to tune it out completely even when there were fair criticisms to be made.

4. The establishment regarded the people and the issues faced in Middle America with condescension, if not outright contempt, and deliberately tried to subvert them. From the Colorado GOP refusing to have a primary so Trump wouldn't win delegates, to the DNC and media colluding against Sanders while super-delegates made it impossible for him to win, to National Review saying white working class communities should die, to Hillary calling 1/4 of America deplorable and bragging about how she would put coal miners out of work, it was a recipe for backlash.

This.  The only thiing I would add to this is the fact that most Americans agree with Trump on trade.

Trump positioned himself (A) right in the middle of the electorate as a whole (B) in a place where a significant number of Republicans were at, but who could not find another Republican who really represented their issues.  It kills folks to admit this, but Donald Trump has his finger on the pulse of America moreso than any other politician since Reagan.  The Trump Deniers that populate Atlas can't bring themselves to admit that not only is Trump not an idiot, he's a lot sharper than they are.

Trump keeps winning.  He wins ugly at times, but he wins.  He's winning now, remaking the GOP to conform to HIS platform (something Jimmy Carter failed to do, and it cost him a 2nd term).  Trump is all in as a Republican, and going about it the way the leader of his political party ought to be.  He "gets it" far, far more than his enemies will concede.  Frankly, I don't think you can stop a man who is as underestimated by his enemies as Trump continues to be.