Trump blames everyone else for his self destruction

Donald Trump defied many predictions when he won the Republican nomination for the US presidency.

He is now living up to many predictions that he would self destruct. Defeat looks increasingly likely, unless something game changing occurs.

The way Trump is playing the game it will have to come from another team, like WikiLeaks, but so far Trump has failed to take advantage of the drip feed of hacked emails, instead choosing to keep attention on his flailing, especially on the accusations against him of sexual misconduct.

Trump is now blaming everyone else in what looks like excuses in advance of as loss.

He has blamed his own team, the Republican Part, and especially it’s Speaker Paul Ryan after Ryan said he would no longer campaign for Trump. The party appears to be fracturing.

Trump is blaming the Clintons and the media and owners of the media for conspiring against him.

He is blaming the growing number of women claiming to be victims of the sort brazen sexual assaults that he bragged about doing in the tape released just over a week ago.

And he says the election is rigged against him. He has even intimated that the Republican Party is a part of the conspiracy.

One thing that has been common in Trump’s campaign, a tactic that seems to be quite common, I’ve seen it used here, is a form of transference. He accuses others of doing what he is guilty of. The most frequent example of this is accusing others of lying.

He has just come up with another transference attack. In the first two debates he had a habit of sniffing loudly, and there were suggestions in social media it looked like someone with a cocaine habit.

Trump has now come out saying that he thinks Clinton is ‘pumping herself up’ for the third debate and they should take a drug test before the debate.

So it looks like the race to the bottom will continue. Fox News has just described Trump’s campaign as a scorched earth policy.

Fox has been one of Trump’s biggest promoters. This morning they have had a number of people on their election programme saying that Trump must turn his attention to policies and the differences between him and Clinton as president.

There is no sign of Trump changing tack like this. His success was through tapping into the ‘stuff the lot of them’ constituency, and now he seems to have one focus, ‘stuff the lot of them’. A lot of them are voters. He can’t keep lashing out at people and groups of people and expect to increase his support.

After the sexual assault bragging and allegations polls show women have turned away from Trump in big numbers, and they make up over half the voters.

The problem for Trump with the scorched earth strategy is that it is unlikely to turn the polls around. They have been trending against him since the campaign went off the rails, so driving the train further off the rails is unlikely to make a positive difference.

Talking of conspiracies, one that’s been floated is that Trump is deliberately trying to lose. I don’t think it’s that complicated.

It’s likely that Trump is simply stuffing things up.Self inflicted cock-up rather than conspiracy of others.

But going by past behaviour of blame transference it is unlikely Trump will blame himself.

 

57 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  16th October 2016

    I can’t see any validity in the claim Trump should talk policy when his opponents are attacking his character. It would get as little attention as Clinton’s emails.

    He has no realistic option but to fight back as hard as he can.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  16th October 2016

      He’s the one attacking his own character out of his dirty mouth. Nobody else could do it better.

  2. Conspiratoor

     /  16th October 2016

    For those who would prefer to discuss and debate trump’s policies here’s a link…

    https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

    • Gezza

       /  16th October 2016

      Stop making sense, c. In this campaign that ain’t gonna fly. 🕶

  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  16th October 2016

    If Trump has self-destructed I think it is his failure to use humour as a weapon. He had no control over his media enemies scouring his decades of video footage for ammunition. But he needed to retaliate with charm and humour and he had failed to do that. If you are going to be painted as a rogue it should be a likeable rogue. So now he is left with just the angry vote.

    • The angry vote won him the Republican nomination, but he has failed to adapt to a wider audience, all voters rather than Republican voters.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  16th October 2016

        Arguably he was neck and neck until the Bush video sandbagged him so I don’t think you can argue he failed to adapt to the wider audience. I just think he failed to find the right answer to that perfectly timed surprise attack which itself is hardly surprising since most expected he wouldn’t survive it at all. Yet he did better than expected in the second debate despite its perfect disruptive timing.

      • Klik Bate

         /  16th October 2016

        As a matter of interest, you certainly can’t say the Democrats haven’t been using ‘humor’ as a weapon XD

        Wikileaks released this (alleged) email from the DNC, showing fake Trump “grope under the meeting table” Craigslist job advertisement, which they prepared for publication in May 2016.

        https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12803

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  16th October 2016

          He can’t use charm, humour and likeability, he doesn’t have any of these.

          I can’t believe that I am the one who has to say that it’s a cock down, not a cock up.

          • Gezza

             /  16th October 2016

            I can. You get very vulgar when discussing El Trumpo. I’ve been quite surprised to be honest. At least we aren’t likely to be hearing about kippers, which is probably a good thing.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  16th October 2016

              That play on words was waiting-begging-to be made. I couldn’t believe that nobody had noticed it and putting the poor thing out of its misery by saying it..

              It’s all but impossible to quote DT without sounding vulgar, so much of what he says is vulgar and crude.

            • Gezza

               /  16th October 2016

              All very well, but look what people think of him now.
              There may be children visiting this forum, you know.

  4. Andrea ‏@nonsequiteuse

    Per WaPo, “Donald Trump now says ‘a global power structure’ is out to stop him.”

    We are, but most people just call us women.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  16th October 2016

      The US should send women to fight Clinton’s wars then.

    • David

       /  16th October 2016

      Of course, this then means everything Clinton screws up in her 4 year term will be women’s fault…..

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  16th October 2016

        Alan, I do wonder if the women squawking for gender equality here extend it to being forced by law to go to war if we’re at war.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  16th October 2016

          A global power structure ???

          And the band played ‘Believe it if you like.’.

  5. Corky

     /  16th October 2016

    Should Trump lose, I expect him to die on his feet like a true Righty. I don’t want him crawling away snivelling, like a PC liberal.

    But should he lose, its far from the end. In fact he could become America’s defacto president and sway public and political opinion.

    I’m talking about a new reality show called ” What’s Wrong America?” When the wheels come off Hillary’s presidency…and that will happen quickly, Trumpys show will rehash what Trump would have done in her situation. It would be discussed and alternatives given, and graphs would show where America could have been under Trumps presidency The show would end with Trump standing under the American flag saying:” What’s Wrong America? Its crooked Hillary.”

    I think that would guarantee Hillary as a one term wonder.

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  16th October 2016

      He won’t die on his feet, he’ll die snivelling and whining that it’s THEIR fault

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  16th October 2016

        The Crooked Hillary thing is old and tired by now.

        • Gezza

           /  16th October 2016

          No, it’s not. It’s still very effective. ‘Crooked Hillary’ is as locked in to people’s minds as ‘Lying Ted Cruz’ and ‘Low Energy Jeb’. He’ll be able to continue to use that meme/label for as long as he wants to. That label will stick because there are so many accusations it’s linked to & it’s so memorable.

          Advertising & Propaganda 101.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  16th October 2016

            I don’t think that it’s very good-to me it sounds childish, as does Lying Ted Cruz. These are names that schoolchildren give each other. They don’t sound original and CH doesn’t scan. A nickname should scan and roll easily off the tongue, and this doesn’t. It’s the sort of nyeh-nyeh remark that one would expect to hear in the playground. It’s not memorable, simply because it’s not GOOD, and I can’t see it staying of its own accord.

            Dirty Donald would be memorable, if unoriginal But Hillary as a name doesn’t easily lend itself to these things, which must be very annoying.

          • Gezza

             /  16th October 2016

            They don’t have to scan to be memorable. Slick Willy probably doesn’t scan. Just Do It (Nike) doesn’t scan, or even make sense. You only have to create a memorable association, keep it simple, and repeat, repeat, repeat it.

            Trump may well be disliked, but so is Hillary, & she’s widely distrusted & also on record for lying, and for providing no credible explanations for some of the now widely known genuinely dodgy-sounding massive donations by overseas donors to the Clinton Foundation & subsequent questionable trade-related approval decisions by the State Department & US government.

            The fact is, that label is memorable to people without degrees in English Literature, and maybe even some who do have them. The fact it doesn’t ‘scan’ is irrelevant.

            • Klik Bate

               /  16th October 2016

              @ Gezza

              It was rumored that when Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight were first pitched by their Ad Agency with the idea of the brand name ‘Nike’, they thought it may have been an acronym for ‘Necessitates Indonesian Kids Employment’ XD

          • Corky

             /  16th October 2016

            ‘Low Energy Jeb’. Geez, what a moniker to live down.

  6. I seriously doubt she is well enough to survive a full term, given the stresses of the Presidency, so a second term is debatable anyway.

    • Pete Kane

       /  16th October 2016

      ‘I seriously doubt she is well enough to survive a full term.” BJ, if there’s a Republican House, I doubt she would survive the House Oversight Committee. Actually, in all seriousness it will be a good ‘test’ of their institutions of democracy. If Clinton and Lynch are still there in four years, then I guess we have our answer.

      • David

         /  16th October 2016

        “Actually, in all seriousness it will be a good ‘test’ of their institutions of democracy”

        The problem being that many of these institutions are already corrupted, Clinton will be the final step to a banana republic.

    • Corky

       /  16th October 2016

      According to Gezza, she was coughing at her last speaking engagement.

      • Klik Bate

         /  16th October 2016

        Whilst I am unable to vouch for the authenticity of this video recently released on Youtube, it does purport to show some rather disturbing aspects in relation to the health of HRC.

        In keeping with site protocols, it is posted ‘as a matter of interest only’ 😎

        • Klik Bate

           /  16th October 2016

          2nd attempt….

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  16th October 2016

            BREAKING NEWS: we’re all dying.

            It’s not surprising that she coughs a bit-all that speaking does that to people. That’s why glasses of water are on the table. Aircon can dry your mouth and throat, too.

            • Klik Bate

               /  16th October 2016

              You’re so right there Kitty!

              When my elderly mum (84) sent this clip through to us the other day, even she was quick to point out, that as well as herself, over half the other women in her Bridge Club suffer from the same problem Hillary does, shown at about the 3m.30s mark.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  16th October 2016

              DT, of course, is so used to speaking non-stop that these things may not affect him as they do those who are less fond of the sound of their own voices.

            • Corky

               /  16th October 2016

              So can being chronically sick.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  16th October 2016

              I have a chronic condition-I have more than one-but I have had them for years. Being chronically ill is, in many cases, not life-threatening. A heart-attack, aneurysm or stroke can kill someone who wasn’t ill at all.Tetanus can kill. Many things can. People with diabetes can live to be very old if it’s managed, and so can people with other chronic conditions. Chronic and serious are not synonymous, chronic just means long term or permanent like chronic asthma or hayfever.

  7. Paul Ryan responds to Trump’s claims of a ‘rigged election’:

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  16th October 2016

      I would be astounded if it was possible to do this. The numbers are simply too huge to make it doable. It would be too daunting to even consider and would need far too many people to be in on it and not let anything out. This is paranoia.

      • Corky

         /  16th October 2016

        That’s what they said about the fake moon landing. Or Glen Miller dying in a plane crash. He died in the saddle ( no offence , Arty)

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  16th October 2016

          A fake version of a moon landing would be easy to do-we have all seen films that look just like the real thing, and if someone wanted to make a fake moon landing it wouldn’t be too challenging technically, I would think. Especially now, with modern technology. People might not believe a Mars landing, but a new moon one would certainly go unquestioned if it was on the news tonight. Even in 1969, it would have been possible, films then were quite sophisticated.

          I don’t know enough about Glenn Miller’s death to comment. That seems a bit extreme-a lot more questions would be asked about that than if they’d just said that he’d died of a heart attack in wherever the town was.

          But mass vote rigging-forget it, to do this on a scale large enough to make any difference would be more trouble than it was worth. It would almost certainly be detected, and anyone caught would wish that they hadn’t done it. The cost alone would be prohibitive. Nobody with any sense would consider doing it. It would be obvious. If the Greens, Act or NZ First had a landslide here and became the government in their own right, don’t you think that people would investigate this, especially in traditional Labour or National areas ?

      • Klik Bate

         /  16th October 2016

  8. Alan Wilkinson

     /  16th October 2016

    It’s interesting that Rasmussen polls over the last three days show Trump turning it around again and an LA Times poll has Trump ahead. Maybe things are not as they seemed:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  16th October 2016

      Sorry, LA Times has a tie, Rasmussen has Trump ahead.

      • Gezza

         /  16th October 2016

        Trumpy likes Rasmussen. He mentioned them in his Charlotte or Greensboro rallies. I watched both those speeches in full. He does actually cover his broad policies in those. His Charlotte one was amusing – when the teleprompter wasn’t working, he said, more or less, this was an example of how he works – the company wouldn’t be getting paid, because it didn’t work.

        Later on, during his address, he started interacting with some people up the back, on the left. Apparently their PA speaker cut out and they couldn’t hear him, but others could, so he explained that there would be a 30% deduction when he paid that company’s bill. Then a bit later, “what’s that? Oh it’s working again now? Ok, so now it’s a 20% deduction. That’s ok.” Or words broadly to that effect.

        But he used this, if I recall correctly, to illustrate how he would expect government to operate when, for example, contractors deliver faulty products or services, or charge more than quoted.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  16th October 2016

          Yes Rasmussen tends to favour Trump a bit whereas Reuters seems to be a big outlier favouring Clinton. But it was the movement in Rasmussen over just the last few days that caught my eye.

          • Gezza

             /  16th October 2016

            I’ve been casting my eye over Trump’s policies in that link his doorman, c, keeps posting lately. The taxation one makes my brain hurt, but it’s because it looks like US income, payroll & company taxes, maybe because they’re both federal and state, are mind bogglingly complex.

            The policies look like a bit of a grab bag in some respects, like someone has pulled together several of his utterances and knocked them into some semblance of coherent order & fleshed them out, but they’re probably no worse than what Hillary’s crew has pulled together after she’s ended up having to adopt some of Bernie’s sales pitches. I hope to find time to do a comparison before the next debate.

            Trump’s big weakness, as the Clinton crew has noted, is his ego. And I have to say there’s little doubt in my mind that the media have lined up against him. They’re focussing on the salacious allegations against him. But he feeds it by saying stupid things like “she wouldn’t be my first choice”.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  16th October 2016

              When it comes to ego I doubt there is much in it between these two candidates. It is only the expression of it that differs.

            • Gezza

               /  16th October 2016

              I’ve been thinking about that lately myself, Alan. It’s only my opinion of course but I don’t think she’s as narcissitic as him. I think Hillay’s driven primarily by political ambition – she wants to be the first woman president, and she doesn’t claim to have all the answers to everything herself.

              The Donald is a loudmouthed braggart. It’s always all about him. It’s that that’s got him into trouble. Boasting. And being unable to brush things off.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  16th October 2016

              His main problem has been his love/hate relationships with women. Hillary’s main problem has been that the truth is anything she needs it to be. That is Trump’s second biggest problem. Clinton’s second biggest problem is that her record is one long failure.

            • Trump’s untruthfulness isn’t a problem but Clinton’s is?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th October 2016

              That isn’t what I said, is it.