CLINTON EVISCERATES TRUMP

[Dutch Conservative]

I watched parts of the speech. Very scripted and unnatural, even the laughs are scripted. I found it to be very boring, cheap shots, not thrustworthy. I honestly do not think that people will buy these arguments. She is not the person to talk about good judgement. Something with a pot and a kettle.

And for the speech: she is definitely not Obama.

But maybe I have a different view of this as a European.

[Dutch Conservative]

Anyone who is not in a maximum security penitentiary can credibly talk about Trump's lack of judgement.  

It are exactly these kind of arrogant and offensive remarks that make people so angry. Im new to this forum, but I cant believe how polarised it is.

I think Clinton is a strong candidate that can win in November. I think its 70/30 on this moment in favor of Clinton. But I dont think this was a strong speech. She made a caricature of Trump, I really dont believe people will buy that anymore. This was for the most part not a foreign policy speech, it was an anti-trump speech.  The over hilarious laughing of the crowd doesnt make it any better.

[Dutch Conservative]

This scripted speech delivered by a career politician surrounded by teleprompter screens will no doubt be the silver bullet that kills Trump's campaign!

That's not the point.  The point is that she unleashed the "fear" card, which is the most powerful card in politics, with brutal effectiveness.  There aren't many election cycles in which contenders can use it, but when they can, landslides are born.  Massive ones.

Interesting, can you give an example?

[Dutch Conservative]

This scripted speech delivered by a career politician surrounded by teleprompter screens will no doubt be the silver bullet that kills Trump's campaign!

That's not the point.  The point is that she unleashed the "fear" card, which is the most powerful card in politics, with brutal effectiveness.  There aren't many election cycles in which contenders can use it, but when they can, landslides are born.  Massive ones.

Interesting, can you give an example?

Goldwater vs Johnson is the canonical answer with Barry Goldwater being portrayed as a deranged maniac who would literally destroy the world for no reason other than ideological mania. Some of Reagan's victories also exploited such a narrative.

Thanx, im learning. But isn't the opposite also true? That a positive message of hope can bring a landslide victory? Im thinking of 1932, 1980 and 2008. And in 2008 the fear-argument didn't really work (Obama as an inexperienced senator).

I think its not so much fear or hope, but change that brings landslide victories.

(sorry we're getting offtopic)