Current Events > Peter Thiel: If Trump runs again, he'll be re-elected.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I do enjoy my intelligent, gay conservatives----

"Billionaire venture capitalist and entrepreneur Peter Thiel predicts that Donald Trump will get a second term in 2020.

I think that if he runs again, he will get re-elected, Thiel said at an event hosted by the Economic Club of New York on Thursday.

Thiel also expects that its probably the case that the Democrats will do quite well in the midterm elections this fall. The question about 2020 is a much trickier one, Thiel said. Its really one of is there anything that was learned from Hillary Clintons defeat?

He added that he thinks theres a vague parallel to the way the Democrats have treated Trump to the way Republicans treated President Barack Obama. Thiel added that the fundamental mistake Mitt Romney made in 2012 is thinking that he could just show up and win.

Theres a reason Obama got elected.There were some very real problems in this country. You had to talk about those problems, he said. It was a failure by the Republicans not to do that in 2012. And I think the Democrats are setting themselves up for an even bigger version of that failure.

"He noted that a hate factory of hating Trump all the time is going to prevent Democrats from seriously engaging with the issues.

I dont pretend to agree with every plank in our partys platform, but fake culture wars only distract us from our economic decline, and nobody in this race is being honest about it except Donald Trump, he said at the time."

He added that Silicon Valley has always been a very liberal place, but that it has almost become a one-party state.

If you have something thats 85-15 as split, thats pretty lopsided but understandable. If you have something where the apparent split is 99 to 1, thats sort of near unanimity. Thats not because the 99% have figured out the truth, he said. Thats where youre dealing with something thats almost totalitarian, thats almost a one-party state. So when you have complete unanimity that tells you the political correctness has gone too far.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/peter-thiel-trump-runs-will-re-elected-181751957.html
---

I didn't read all that, but why would it be hard to believe?

GoldenFlea posted...

I didn't read all that, but why would it be hard to believe?

This

I believe he will get re-elected pretty easily
---

Capn Circus posted...

nobody in this race is being honest about it except Donald Trump

lawl
---

hockeybub89 posted...

Capn Circus posted...

nobody in this race is being honest about it except Donald Trump

lawl

Is there any major overhaul Hillary offered and would have implemented besides being to typical talking head? Is there any potential 2020 Dem that will address the issues?
---

Capn Circus posted...

He added that Silicon Valley has always been a very liberal place, but that it has almost become a one-party state.

If you have something thats 85-15 as split, thats pretty lopsided but understandable. If you have something where the apparent split is 99 to 1, thats sort of near unanimity. Thats not because the 99% have figured out the truth, he said. Thats where youre dealing with something thats almost totalitarian, thats almost a one-party state. So when you have complete unanimity that tells you the political correctness has gone too far.

That apply to the deep south as well?
---

i cant see the dems bringing a candidate able to take advantage of his weaknesses.
---

hyperpowder posted...

GoldenFlea posted...

I didn't read all that, but why would it be hard to believe?

This

I believe he will get re-elected pretty easily

Well you're all wrong.
---

This dude is not intelligent
---

Pretty obvious the dems have learned nothing, and will fuck up all over again then proceed to blame it on everyone else, again.

And so on, and so forth until the end of time, switching between dems and repubs. that's life, baby.
---

Hillary's loss is meaningless. People won't vote for who has the better political ideals, they will be voting against the person they like the least.
---

Capn Circus posted...

He added that Silicon Valley has always been a very liberal place, but that it has almost become a one-party state.

cool sounds like the entirety of the rural midwest, south, southwest, and northeast with conservatism but let's focus on silicon valley

Trump's victory depends solely on who his opponent will be. If they roll out the pandering pantsuit again, he still stands a reasonable chance. Her whining/blaming about losing certainly hasn't done her popularity any favours. It should have been Bernie up there...

In all seriousness, who could the Dems put up against him?
---

Capn Circus posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

Capn Circus posted...

nobody in this race is being honest about it except Donald Trump

lawl

Is there any major overhaul Hillary offered and would have implemented besides being to typical talking head? Is there any potential 2020 Dem that will address the issues?

I was laughing at Trump being honest. He's just another lying scumbag. He just happens to new at applying it to politics.

E32005 posted...

i cant see the dems bringing a candidate able to take advantage of his weaknesses.

They just need to not be Hillary tbh. Don't forget how incredibly unpopular she was. And she still somehow found a way to win the popular vote against Trump. It truly was Giant Douche vs Turd Sandwich. If midterms continue the way these special elections have, Trump will go the way of Bush Sr and be 1 term.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

Don't forget how incredibly unpopular she was

and how it was 90% completely unjustified and tied back to alex jones-tier bullshit

clinton was extremely popular as sec of state during obama's first term

hockeybub89 posted...

Don't forget how incredibly unpopular she was. And she still somehow found a way to win the popular vote against Trump.

Well, the only one less popular than her was Trump so yeah. Sadly he had better distribution.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Capn Circus posted...

He added that Silicon Valley has always been a very liberal place, but that it has almost become a one-party state.

If you have something thats 85-15 as split, thats pretty lopsided but understandable. If you have something where the apparent split is 99 to 1, thats sort of near unanimity. Thats not because the 99% have figured out the truth, he said. Thats where youre dealing with something thats almost totalitarian, thats almost a one-party state. So when you have complete unanimity that tells you the political correctness has gone too far.

That apply to the deep south as well?

Probably not, actually. The "deep south" has many, often very large Dem. cities. And in Texas, multiple blue counties lining the border. How deep can ya get?
---

Sir Will posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

Don't forget how incredibly unpopular she was. And she still somehow found a way to win the popular vote against Trump.

Well, the only one less popular than her was Trump so yeah. Sadly he had better distribution.

So the Dems should probably push forward a candidate willing to routinely do 4-5 rallies a day.

Trump's last rally ended at around 1AM EST in Michigan on election eve--- it was his fourth or fifth rally that day.
---

Hey are you cool with the President just making up bold face lies about stuff he doesn't understand when talking to our closest ally?
---

of course it's possible. he won once before and he does have incumbent advantage. plus democrats really manage to pull off losing at times when they shouldn't
but like, he's unpopular. many of his policies are disliked and there are a lot of democrats running this year, there's high energy from a crowd who are not taking too kindly to him. so long as there's a half decent democrat who doesn't have 20+ years of conservative propaganda against them, I don't see them losing
---

My belief is he will win because our democracy is open to outside influence.
---

billcom6 posted...

Hey are you cool with the President just making up bold face lies about stuff he doesn't understand when talking to our closest ally?

Are you referring to the Trudeau "incident"? Probably one of the biggest fake news examples in awhile, particularly if you're just listening to a talking head speak about it on TV.

... So, hes proud. I said, Wrong, Justin, you do. I didnt even know. ... I had no idea. I just said, Youre wrong. You know why? Because were so stupid. And I thought they were smart. I said, Youre wrong, Justin. He said, Nope, we have no trade deficit. I said, Well, in that case, I feel differently, I said, but I dont believe it. I sent one of our guys out, his guy, my guy, they went out, I said, Check, because I cant believe it.

It's classic Trump joshing around and reading this it's painfully obvious. At no point did Trudeau feel like he was actively being lied to or being accused of something.

The media just picked this retelling of a story up and decided to turn it into "Trump is LYING! Look what he DID!"

Really pathetic and if anyone actually buys this---I feel sorry
---

Sayoria posted...

My belief is he will win because our democracy is open to outside influence.

Oh come on, Say. You can't believe that. The amount "Russia" had to play in producing "fake news" or "propaganda" was pretty minuscule compared to Americans routinely posting fake news about both Trump and Clinton---and not to mention the obvious one-sided mainstream media that overwhelmingly supported Clinton to win.
---

KhlavicLanguage posted...

hockeybub89 posted...

Don't forget how incredibly unpopular she was

and how it was 90% completely unjustified and tied back to alex jones-tier bullshit

clinton was extremely popular as sec of state during obama's first term

She wasn't pulling Pokemon-go-to-the-polls while secretary of state. I'm sure there was irrational hate for her before she ran, but she really ran her presidential bid in a fashion where it was impossible to like her.

Capn Circus posted...

Sayoria posted...

My belief is he will win because our democracy is open to outside influence.

Oh come on, Say. You can't believe that. The amount "Russia" had to play in producing "fake news" or "propaganda" was pretty minuscule compared to Americans routinely posting fake news about both Trump and Clinton---and not to mention the obvious one-sided mainstream media that overwhelmingly supported Clinton to win.

Here's a fact. All of the investigation agencies led by this administration all stated that not do they believe, but they know Russia had infiltrated our voter security. The fact that after this information was released and that Trump took no action to prevent it from happening again, it terrifies me. This isn't just he-said-she-said. This is what happened and didn't happen. If our Commander in Chief refuses to act for the safety of our democracy, what would stop Russia from interfering again? Why shouldn't I be concerned about the future of our democracy if the person calling the shots isn't acting swiftly on a national threat?
---

---

He barely won on a technicality last time, and he's been hemorrhaging popularity and energizing the opposition ever since.

If hashtag russiagate doesn't get him first, he's gonna lose.
---

Its hard to make a decent prediction without knowing who hell be facing off against. Its certainly plausible or even likely depending on who the Democratic candidate is.
---

Do the Democrats even have anyone to run? Hilary isn't an option if they want to have a chance. Bernie will be too old by 2020
---