2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump also criticised Saudi Arabia, an enemy of Russia. Trump linked Saudi Arabia with 9/11, and the speculation is Trump is right on this.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/finding-discussion-and-narrative-regarding-certain-sensitive-narrative-matters-saudi-arabia-911-11-a6999091.html



I would rather have a country being friendly with Russia, rather than calling Saudi Arabia 'an ally'. With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?

Hillary Clinton and the Clintons are too cosy with the Saudis and their foundation has benefited significantly from the Saudis.

It would make world politics interesting if Trump became president and managed to get a good relationship with Russia.
It would be a union that would be very bad for Sunni Islamic extremism that countries like Saudi Arabia are responsible for.

And bad for eastern Europe. Yay Trump may be right on one of his random speculations. A stopped clock and all that.

I am also curious as to what you think Trump and Putin will do differently to combat extremism. I have yet to hear a plan. Remember both countries are already fighting ISIS.

Black Swan

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump also criticised Saudi Arabia, an enemy of Russia.

Trump was claiming that Saudi Arabia is "an enemy of Russia?" The diplomatic relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia were by far more complex than an over-simplified nominal level friend/enemy dichotomy categorisation, showing how superficial Trump's knowledge was of international diplomacy. For example, just one aspect (and there were many to consider) that defines their relationship was based on the supply of oil to PRC's teapot refineries. Historically, Saudi Arabia was the number one supplier to PRC, but Russia has been competing in the world oil markets with Saudia Arabia, and specifically targeting the supply of oil to PRC's teapot refineries. To say that they were "enemies" when competing to supply oil to PRC, was analogous to saying that pharmaceutical market giants Pfizer was "enemies" with Merck, and that they were at "war" in the marketplace; or that McDonald's and Carl's Jr were "enemies" across the pond, and were in the midst of a "burger war."

Earlier this year these 2 "enemies" made an historic preliminary trade agreement: "it’s the first significant cooperation between OPEC and non-OPEC producers in 15 years." This preliminary trade agreement obviously addresses the mutual self-interests of both Russia and Saudi Arabia, whereupon their oil partnership will be of significant advantage to them when competing with other major oil suppliers like Iran. How far this agreement goes, was not the point, rather these 2 "enemies" were working closely together earlier this year. And this is just one aspect of the complex diplomatic relationship between Russia and Saudi Arabia that flies in the face of the extraordinarily superficial and over-simplistic proclamations from Donald Trump's polemic pulpit to his loyal and uninformed believers (that reeks of Donald Trump's anti-Muslim and racist feelings calling Saudi Arabia an "enemy," while many of his believers cheer in agreement).

marienbad

RobertKK wrote: »

I am anti-Hillary, a 100% proven warmonger, and even CNN on their state of the race program said: that while Trump lies, Hillary sticks to her carefully scripted lies and it is why she doesn't do press conferences as she is programmed as what to say.

There are a lot of people who dislike Hillary more than Trump.

What is your definition of warmonger ? And can you name any significant politician in the USA that doesn't fall into it ?

And what is the difference between 'carefully scripted lies ' and Trump lies ?

To be honest I would prefer a competent liar to an incompetent one

K-9

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump also criticised Saudi Arabia, an enemy of Russia. Trump linked Saudi Arabia with 9/11, and the speculation is Trump is right on this.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/finding-discussion-and-narrative-regarding-certain-sensitive-narrative-matters-saudi-arabia-911-11-a6999091.html



I would rather have a country being friendly with Russia, rather than calling Saudi Arabia 'an ally'. With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?

Hillary Clinton and the Clintons are too cosy with the Saudis and their foundation has benefited significantly from the Saudis.

It would make world politics interesting if Trump became president and managed to get a good relationship with Russia.
It would be a union that would be very bad for Sunni Islamic extremism that countries like Saudi Arabia are responsible for.

Well the Saudis means Muslims so I'm not surprised, I'm not being facetious here, I'm wondering what the political and electioneering angle is for his admiration of Putin and Russia. Being anti Russia would usually be a more popular strategy historically obviously

Seems I got my answer on my newsreader this morning:
http://time.com/4433880/donald-trump-ties-to-russia/

Trump seems a bit dependent on funding from Russian finance companies. It maybe that somebody who prides himself on no ties with Wall Street may have a slight bias for Russia instead. It's a bit worrying, especially if I was a Trump supporter.

I don't know, maybe there's some foreign policy angle you can explain to me and it has nothing to do with business dealings.

Skylinehead

RobertKK wrote: »

I am anti-Hillary, a 100% proven warmonger

Why do you like Condoleeza Rice, a 100% proven warmonger?

Black Swan

K-9 wrote: »

Seems I got my answer on my newsreader this morning:
http://time.com/4433880/donald-trump-ties-to-russia/

Trump seems a bit dependent on funding from Russian finance companies. It maybe that somebody who prides himself on no ties with Wall Street may have a slight bias for Russia instead. It's a bit worrying, especially if I was a Trump supporter.

Thanks for pointing this out K-9.

"For the record, I have ZERO investments in Russia," states Donald Trump, yet it appears that after several bankruptcies Trump could not get the funding he needed from American banks, so he turned to Russian investors for capital, some of whom have highly questionable backgrounds.

In private sector they often have background checks that may include personal financial history, depending upon the position vacancy job description. No wonder Trump does not want to release his tax returns. Holy Cow, didn't the RNC properly vet their presidential candidate before nominating him in July? A party nomination is not like the 8 November 2016 general election, rather its primaries, states with non-primary election caucuses, and Democrat super-delegates and GOP unassigned delegates, were used to sort out candidates for the July nomination, hence the Republicans and Democrats had to have a National Convention to nominate, rather than simply counting primary votes; i.e., it's a party nomination, not a general election by party. The GOP obviously did not exhibit due diligence before nominating Donald Trump.

InTheTrees

Black Swan wrote: »

"For the record, I have ZERO investments in Russia," states Donald Trump, yet it appears that after several bankruptcies Trump could not get the funding he needed from American banks, so he turned to Russian investors for capital, some of whom have highly questionable backgrounds.

It also explains why he's suddenly become so anti-NATO and anti-Ukraine.

Akrasia

Trump is bringing out the only tool he has in his box again, and is accusing his opponent of the same thing they accuse him of, except ten times worse.

Clinton and Obama are challenging Trump's temperment, so his response is to say that he has a great temperment, but Clinton is mentally ill.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/06/trump-in-series-of-scathing-personal-attacks-questions-clintons-mental-health/

"I know you are but what am I" works in 4th grade, but given that he communicates at a 4th grade level, it's unsurprising that he's arguing like a 9 year old.

She is a totally unhinged person. She's unbalanced. And all you have to do is watch her, see her, read about her,” Trump said during a campaign rally in Windham, N.H., Saturday evening. “She will cause — if she wins, which hopefully she won't — the destruction of our country from within

K-9

Yeah, saw those quotes, he crossed a line, again! It is as if he still thinks he is still fighting the primaries. That stuff goes down well with his base but they are won over anyway. It'll turn Independent voters against him. Maybe he is going after the hardline Bernie supporters?

Just on Russia, he has to get finance somewhere, it's just it seems to be influencing his foreign policy and this from somebody who prides himself on being his own man.

Quin_Dub

Newt Gingrich repudiates Trumps economic plan.

Not a good end for a pretty bad week for Trump

Black Swan

Ronald Reagan's White House political director from 1987 to 1989 Frank Lavin states that:

The depressing truth of the Republican nominee is that Donald Trump talks a great game but he is the emperor who wears no clothes.

Trump falls short in terms of the character and behavior needed to perform as president. This defect is crippling and ensures he would fail in office. Trump is a bigot, a bully, and devoid of grace or magnanimity. His thin-skinned belligerence toward every challenge, rebuke, or criticism would promise the nation a series of a high-voltage quarrels. His casual dishonesty, his policy laziness, and his lack of self-awareness would mean four years of a careening pin-ball journey that would ricochet from missteps to crisis to misunderstandings to clarifications to retractions.

This quote by Frank Lavin agrees with the earlier quote in this thread that Donald Trump was a "textbook narcissist."

AbusesToilets

You'd have to think that if Johnson was the Republican candidate, he'd have a very strong chance versus Clinton.

54and56

I'm surprised the Harvard Republican Club statement that they will not be supporting their own party's nominee hasn't been discussed here.

"Dear Members and Alumni,

In every presidential election since 1888, the members and Executive Board of the Harvard Republican Club have gathered to discuss, debate, and eventually endorse the standard-bearer of our party. But for the first time in 128 years, we, the oldest College Republicans chapter in the nation, will not be endorsing the Republican nominee.

Donald Trump holds views that are antithetical to our values not only as Republicans, but as Americans. The rhetoric he espouses –from racist slander to misogynistic taunts– is not consistent with our conservative principles, and his repeated mocking of the disabled and belittling of the sacrifices made by prisoners of war, Gold Star families, and Purple Heart recipients is not only bad politics, but absurdly cruel.

If enacted, Donald Trump’s platform would endanger our security both at home and abroad. Domestically, his protectionist trade policies and draconian immigration restrictions would enlarge our federal deficit, raise prices for consumers, and throw our economy back into recession. Trump’s global outlook, steeped in isolationism, is considerably out-of-step with the traditional Republican stance as well. The flippancy with which he is willing to abdicate the United States’ responsibility to lead is alarming. Calling for the US’ withdrawal from NATO and actively endorsing nuclear proliferation, Donald Trump’s foreign policy would wreak havoc on the established world order which has held aggressive foreign powers in check since World War II.

Perhaps most importantly, however, Donald Trump simply does not possess the temperament and character necessary to lead the United States through an increasingly perilous world. The last week should have made obvious to all what has been obvious to most for more than a year. In response to any slight –perceived or real– Donald Trump lashes out viciously and irresponsibly. In Trump’s eyes, disagreement with his actions or his policies warrants incessant name calling and derision: stupid, lying, fat, ugly, weak, failing, idiot –and that’s just his “fellow” Republicans.

He isn’t eschewing political correctness. He is eschewing basic human decency.
Donald Trump, despite spending more than a year on the campaign trail, has either refused or been unable to educate himself on issues that matter most to Americans like us. He speaks only in platitudes, about greatness, success, and winning. Time and time again, Trump has demonstrated his complete lack of knowledge on critical matters, meandering from position to position over the course of the election. When confronted about these frequent reversals, Trump lies in a manner more brazen and shameless than anything politics has ever seen.

Millions of people across the country are feeling despondent. Their hours have been cut, wages slashed, jobs even shipped overseas. But Donald Trump doesn’t have a plan to fix that. He has a plan to exploit that. Donald Trump is a threat to the survival of the Republic. His authoritarian tendencies and flirtations with fascism are unparalleled in the history of our democracy. He hopes to divide us by race, by class, and by religion, instilling enough fear and anxiety to propel himself to the White House. He is looking to to pit neighbor against neighbor, friend against friend, American against American. We will not stand for this vitriolic rhetoric that is poisoning our country and our children.
President Reagan called on us to maintain this, our shining city on a hill. He called on us to maintain freedom abroad by keeping a strong presence in the world. He called on us to maintain liberty at home by upholding the democratic process and respecting our opponents. He called on us to maintain decency in our hearts by loving our neighbor.

He would be ashamed of Donald Trump. We are too.

This fall, we will instead focus our efforts on reclaiming the Republican Party from those who have done it considerable harm, campaigning for candidates who will uphold the conservative principles that have defined the Republican Party for generations. We will work to ensure both chambers of Congress remain in Republican hands, continuing to protect against executive overreach regardless of who wins the election this November. We call on our party’s elected leaders to renounce their support of Donald Trump, and urge our fellow College Republicans to join us in condemning and withholding their endorsement from this dangerous man. The conservative movement in America should not and will not go quietly into the night.

A longtime student of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville once said, “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” De Tocqueville believed in the United States. Americans are a decent people. We work hard, protect our own, and look out for one another in times of need, regardless of the color of our skin, the God we worship, or our party registration. Donald Trump may not believe in that America, but we do. And that America will never cease to be great.

The Harvard Republican Club"

See https://www.facebook.com/HarvardGOP/posts/1190758900944693

For me their statement completely articulates why Trump has already lost the election, the only question is how much of a winning margin will Clinton have?

Quin_Dub

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

I'm surprised the Harvard Republican Club statement that they will not be supporting their own party's nominee hasn't been discussed here.

"Dear Members and Alumni,

.........

The Harvard Republican Club"

See https://www.facebook.com/HarvardGOP/posts/1190758900944693

For me their statement completely articulates why Trump has already lost the election, the only question is how much of a winning margin will Clinton have?

Wow - That's pretty damning stuff.. Not sure of the influence that the "Harvard Republican Club" has beyond College Alumni , but the statement certainly pulls no punches whatsover.

Brian?

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Wow - That's pretty damning stuff.. Not sure of the influence that the "Harvard Republican Club" has beyond College Alumni , but the statement certainly pulls no punches whatsover.

I think it's more a leading indicator of the election result rather than a driver of voting patterns. Large swathes of the GOP establishment are abandoning Trump, to me it indicates that there will be a poor turn out among traditional conservatives.

Trump's voter pool is shrinking rapidly. He needed to maintain the share of GOP voters Romney got and add some independents. He's doing neither.

InTheTrees

Brian? wrote: »

Trump's voter pool is shrinking rapidly. He needed to maintain the share of GOP voters Romney got and add some independents. He's doing neither.

At this point Trump can only dream of having the kind of support that Romney had.

Even though romney lost in a landslide.

Amerika

I’ve got to give MSNBC credit for admitting their complete bias. This morning I was watching MSBNC and they were talking about the outright lies Hillary was giving to answers at a press conference over the email scandal. One of the hosts of MSNBC said they will report on her statements, because they have to, but Brzezinski will never speak of it again because of how devastating was for Clinton.

Next up, was Clinton’s careless discussing sensitive intel sources on an unsecured and unauthorized e-mail system lead to nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri, a CIA source, being tortured and executed in Iran for providing America with vital information?

K-9

NPR made a good point in their podcast, Trump just went and proved Hillary's point, can you trust a candidate that gets baited by a Tweet?

When it comes to veterans she just has to remind people of Trump's comments about McCain and the Khan's, that's a spectacular own goal and exactly what the Democrats wanted.

The thing is, things had been going quite well up that, or as well as the conventions could be expected to go for him, but he just couldn't help himself. As shown with the Harvard Republican statement that's the last straw for many who Trump needed to win over. He just did the exact opposite of what he needed to do.

I still think there's a chance for a campaign against Hillary, the problem for the Republicans is Trump has shown he's incapable of running it! I doubt Cruz would have done any better. Rubio wouldn't have made mistakes like this even with his inexperience.

K-9

Amerika wrote: »

I’ve got to give MSNBC credit for admitting their complete bias. This morning I was watching MSBNC and they were talking about the outright lies Hillary was giving to answers at a press conference over the email scandal. One of the hosts of MSNBC said they will report on her statements, because they have to, but Brzezinski will never speak of it again because of how devastating was for Clinton.

Next up, was Clinton’s careless discussing sensitive intel sources on an unsecured and unauthorized e-mail system lead to nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri, a CIA source, being tortured and executed in Iran for providing America with vital information?

The problem is Trump makes it so easy for them. The reason nobody is talking about the above is because Trump can't help himself.

Amerika

K-9 wrote: »

The problem is Trump makes it so easy for them. The reason nobody is talking about the above is because Trump can't help himself.

Am I reading this correctly... That the media is allowed to be biased in their reporting in favor of Clinton because Trump makes it easy for them?

Billy86

There is a kind of sweet irony that if he fails to make a comeback from the monumental hole he has dug himself, it will have ultimately been a Muslim immigrant family who buried him (or at least, gave him the shovel to bury himself with). It should also offer some solace to the parents that their son's death wasn't only in honour for the US, but could quite literally turn the course of an entire US presidential election and save millions of American Muslims from whatever else Trump has planned.

Billy86

K-9 wrote: »

I still think there's a chance for a campaign against Hillary, the problem for the Republicans is Trump has shown he's incapable of running it! I doubt Cruz would have done any better. Rubio wouldn't have made mistakes like this even with his inexperience.

Kasich would likely be creaming Clinton right now as well (though we may not have had the mysterious DNC email leaks were Trump not running, *ahem*), and Gary Johnson. Johnson also would have been able to make a real go against Obama in 2012 if I recall... and so was naturally one of the very first out of the primary process.

That's the GOP's problem, they're spent decades (especially the last 8 years) race baiting, playing off of the 'white oppressed majority' line for so long, attempting to divide and conquer and work off a politics of fear framework, that their primaries have become little more than a race to see who the most right wing candidate can be. Then when the election comes around, it becomes a race back to the center with the Republican primary electorate taking on a combination of dissatisfaction (of their elected candidate changing their tone) and/or pretending that all the stuff said in the primaries never happened or was said (because they know how unpopular it would be).

What we are seeing here is what happens when the Republican candidate refuses to attempt the race back toward center, among other things.

Billy86

Just a reminder for those of us in reality... and I say that becase some people seem to view the likes of Breitbart as a legitimate news source no different to centrist CNN, right-leaning NBC, or the left-leaning New York Times. Strangely, I don't recall seeing the left side of the argument using DailyKos... it's almost as if that side of the argument can lean on the facts of the matter, rather than having to (predictably) retreat to a "safe space" (the irony of which is just marvelous) that will reaffirm their own biases at every turn and never challenge them to question their world view.

Top left is for news articles, top right for opinion articles (left of the centre bar is left leaning/wing, right of it is right leaning/wing), and in the bottom is how parties are viewed by each outlet (basically all negative).

K-9

Amerika wrote: »

Am I reading this correctly... That the media is allowed to be biased in their reporting in favor of Clinton because Trump makes it easy for them?

Yes, you are reading it incorrectly, I'm not sure if your version is correct anyway as you tend to be a bit sensitive about liberal bias.

Trump keeps making himself the story of the election. Maybe you disagree, I don't know if you've commented on the Khan controversy and what your opinion is.

K-9

That's good analysis billy especially this campaign, you can't appeal to an extreme part of the base the way Trump has done and then try and win Independents, or well, it would take an expert campaign and politician to do it and Trump isn't that.

Even George W. wouldn't make mistakes like Trump is making.

Amerika

K-9 wrote: »

Yes, you are reading it incorrectly, I'm not sure if your version is correct anyway as you tend to be a bit sensitive about liberal bias.

Trump keeps making himself the story of the election. Maybe you disagree, I don't know if you've commented on the Khan controversy and what your opinion is.

I did comment on the Kahn controversy. I commented that then the Kahn's went on national television at the Democratic convention to trash Trump, their hands-off Gold Star protection became null and void and that they were fair game. The same as the mother of the fallen hero to gave his life trying to protect our ambassador at the GOP convention. Hillary Clinton went on to call the Gold Star parents liars. Yet the media gave it no attention, and Trump's actions were non stop news. Is that fair media reporting?

And The New York Times ponders whether the media’s Operation Get Trump is justified. Their conclusion… Why, yes… Of course… Journalistic integrity be damned! Because, well, just because… TRUMP!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html

Several television news reports have cut away when things negative about Clinton were being reported. Watch some of the videos...

http://www.infowars.com/video-abc-cuts-live-stream-when-trump-starts-talking-about-hillarys-support-for-isis/

Yes, I'm sensitive to liberal media bias. Everybody, no matter which side of the political aisle your on, should be. And my account of what happened on MSNBC this morning is correct. It may take a couple of days for the video to become available, but when it does I'll post it.

Quin_Dub

K-9 wrote: »

That's good analysis billy especially this campaign, you can't appeal to an extreme part of the base the way Trump has done and then try and win Independents, or well, it would take an expert campaign and politician to do it and Trump isn't that.

Even George W. wouldn't make mistakes like Trump is making.

For all of his various failings , GWB was always able to remain "on message" sometimes to his detriment , Trump has the opposite problem.

When he does stay on message , he gets some hits in on Clinton and does himself good , but thus far that never seems to last, not even for a whole speech..

If , and it appears to be an If of enormous proportions Manafort et al can actually keep him on message for an extended period of time he could make inroads.. But evidence so far suggests that they will not succeed.

It was interesting to hear the quote from Manafort on Friday I think saying rather pointedly "The Candidate is in full control of his campaign" during a session discussing the week that had just passed and the need for Trump to focus on the key elements of his manifesto etc, seeming to hint that Trump was not listening to guidance from his allies.

Billy86

Above we see what I was talking about, with a poster attempting to use Alex Jones (who also believes the US government were behind the Oklahoma City/Timothy McVeigh bombing, that the moon landing was fake, and who is a 9/11 Truther) as an objective news source.

This by the way for anyone unaware, is Alex Jones:
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/03/alex-jones-freaks-out-about-alien-invasion

Jones: I'm trying to save humanity, I'm trying to have a future for my kids. The globalists are trying to build a world where normal human life is over. it's a total revolution against the planet itself. it's an elite playing God. And I've done my research...it's the devil.

And the churches aren't going to tell you. It's an alien force, not of this world - attacking humanity - like the bible and every other ancient text says...It's not of this world. I don't know exactly what it is or what it's doing, but this is not human intelligence, OK?

IT'S NOT HUMAN INTELLIGENCE WE"RE FACING! I REFUSE TO FIGHT WITH EVERYBODY. ALL THE STUPID RACIST WHITE PEOPLE, ALL THE STUPID RACIST BLACK PEOPLE , ALL THE STUPID RACIST MEXICANS. ALL OF YOU.

I CAN'T STAND YOU, YOU'RE IDIOTS. WE'RE UNDER ATTACK. EVERYBODY'S UNDER ATTACK.

The elite hate Trump. If he is a psy-op, he's the most sophisticated one I ever saw.

Humanity has got to get off world. We have access to life extension technologies. talk about discrimination...I want the advanced life extension!

I WANT TO GO TO SPACE. I WANT TO SEE INTERDIMENSIONAL TRAVEL. I WANT WHAT GOD PROMISED US. AND i WON'T SIT HERE AND WATCH SATAN STEAL IT!!! THAT'S THE FIGHT, THAT'S THE KEY!!

RobertKK

Seems more people that could damage the Clintons have started to die.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-05/lead-attorney-anti-clinton-dnc-fraud-case-mysteriously-found-dead

The list keeps growing...

Billy86

And there we go again, back to the safe space conspiracy theories because there's not much else to cling to at this point.