2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Akrasia · 26-09-2016 11:42PM

Okay, I've finally figured it out. Trump fans have confused a brass neck for a working brain.

Con artists can be stupid, but as long as they have a brass neck, they have a good chance of getting their mark

frostyjacks · 26-09-2016 11:51PM

Trump just has to be himself in this debate and he'll do well. Hilary has to try and keep up an act for 90 mins, which is no mean feat, especially given her ill health.

Trump is the only real option for the Whitehouse. He will rebuild the country, tackle Islamic terrorism abroad and black terrorism at home. Hail victory!

Akrasia · 26-09-2016 11:58PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Trump just has to be himself in this debate and he'll do well. Hilary has to try and keep up an act for 90 mins, which is no mean feat, especially given her ill health.

Trump is the only real option for the Whitehouse. He will rebuild the country, tackle Islamic terrorism abroad and black terrorism at home. Hail victory!

Trump has learned enough to know how to play the moderator in these debates. He will lie and lie and lie, and if he gets called on any lies, he will accuse the moderator or his opponent of being a liar or 'treating him unfairly'

I think Trump will do a lot better than Hillary because he will drag the debate into the gutter where he is most comfortable.

Another candidate may have been able to rise above it, but Clinton is so unpopular and distrusted that she's crippled from the start

Peist2007 · 27-09-2016 12:40AM

Both candidates are completely dishonest, that shouldnt even be up for debate. One is dishonest in a narcissistic self aggrandising manner. The other dishonest in a murderous, corporate-pillaging manner. Has to be admired that people have been fooled into supporting the latter.

RobertKK · 27-09-2016 05:26AM

New poll for Minnesota, moves from Clinton to a toss up

Clinton 43%
Trump 43%

Overheal · 27-09-2016 06:17AM

Collected polls show I'll take several days to reflect debate changes.

The press is already going a bit mad over Trumps tax gaffe. "That makes me smart" his response to not paying taxes.

He went into the spin room after the debate and complained to journalists that he had been furnished with a defective microphone which as you could see had you watched the debate, is just a pants on fire claim.

This will all surely make the media interesting to eyeball tomorrow. Prepare thyself for cries of media bias.

TheDoctor · 27-09-2016 10:11AM

Having watched most of last night.

Trump started well, but had a horror show at the end.

Clinton won.

cowboyBuilder · 27-09-2016 10:31AM

Agreed, Trump did start well, but I fell asleep so didn't see the end, but have seen a recap.

Pity, when is the next debate ?

cowboyBuilder · 27-09-2016 10:36AM

Listening to SOR here, they are being quite fair to be honest.

TheDoctor · 27-09-2016 10:44AM

VP Debate - 4 Oct
2nd Pres Debate - 9 Oct
3rd Pres Debate - 19 Oct

Brian? · 27-09-2016 10:50AM

TheDoctor wrote: »

VP Debate - 4 Oct
2nd Pres Debate - 9 Oct
3rd Pres Debate - 19 Oct

The VP debate is going to be a snoozefest. I can't think of 2 less interesting character than Mike Pence and that fella who occasionally shows up with Hillary.

Black Swan · 27-09-2016 11:57AM

Clinton was her unimaginative, bureaucratic, and boring speaker self during the debate, while Donald Trump repeated his performances that occurred during the Republican primary debates by not answering direct questions from moderator, rambling a lot, not respecting time allotments, and frequently interrupting Clinton while she was speaking, so no surprises with either candidate. Of course the Clinton supporters will claim victory, as will the Trump supporters, no surprises there either.

Upon reflection both choices for president are terribly poor indeed, and to claim that one is substantially a better choice than the other, or even a lesser of evils, requires a leap of faith and not one of reason, and certainly not supported by their respective track records in either politics or business, and clearly not supported by the contents or dynamics of this first debate. What a sad commentary this debate was regarding the 2-party system of government in America, given that they have about 318 million people, and they cannot produce more qualified and inspiring candidates than these two terribly below quality nominees for their highest office.

After the debate news media reporters were asking the candidates if they would respect the outcome of the 8 November 2016 election. Regardless of what either of them said, no matter who wins of these two jokers, I personally cannot respect either. What a total craic this presidential election has been.

TheDoctor · 27-09-2016 12:08PM

God Bless America

RobertKK · 27-09-2016 12:41PM

Black Swan wrote: »

Clinton was her unimaginative, bureaucratic, and boring speaker self during the debate, while Donald Trump repeated his performances that occurred during the Republican primary debates by not answering direct questions from moderator, rambling a lot, not respecting time allotments, and frequently interrupting Clinton while she was speaking, so no surprises with either candidate. Of course the Clinton supporters will claim victory, as will the Trump supporters, no surprises there either.

Upon reflection both choices for president are terribly poor indeed, and to claim that one is substantially a better choice than the other, or even a lesser of evils, requires a leap of faith and not one of reason, and certainly not supported by their respective track records in either politics or business, and clearly not supported by the contents or dynamics of this first debate. What a sad commentary this debate was regarding the 2-party system of government in America, given that they have about 318 million people, and they cannot produce more qualified and inspiring candidates than these two terribly below quality nominees for their highest office.

After the debate news media reporters were asking the candidates if they would respect the outcome of the 8 November 2016 election. Regardless of what either of them said, no matter who wins of these two jokers, I personally cannot respect either. What a total craic this presidential election has been.

I would call that a fair assessment.

Christy42 · 27-09-2016 12:46PM

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-won-the-debate-which-means-shes-likely-to-gain-in-the-polls/

This raises a good point. If voters don't care about her opponent going into meltdown in the first debate and she doesn't gain in the polls then Hillary is in trouble.

Hillary's performance was by no means perfect but she was well prepared for Trump's debating "style" and was confident of her claims. Trump on the other hand went into meltdown mode. Admitting he doesn't pay tax. Claiming that racially harassing the president for his birth cert was a good thing. He set Clinton up for sound bites ("I am prepared to be president") and had no response to Clinton powering through his (generally wrong) interruptions. That is without mentioning his campaign deleting his tweets that he was contradicting on stage.

If none of that helps Clinton in the polls then nothing in the future debates will.

Billy86 · 27-09-2016 02:43PM

RobertKK wrote: »

New poll for Minnesota, moves from Clinton to a toss up

Clinton 43%
Trump 43%

I see you didn't include the link, so I googled it. Yep... Breitbart. You're taking your news literally from Trump's campaign.

Now you're going to say "oh no, it was Gravis Marketing!" But there is a problem there... Gravis Marketing are run and sponsored by Breitbart.

Try 44 - 38 instead: http://www.startribune.com/tracking-presidential-polls-in-minnesota/392909811/

Billy86 · 27-09-2016 02:45PM

cowboyBuilder wrote: »

Agreed, Trump did start well, but I fell asleep so didn't see the end, but have seen a recap.

Pity, when is the next debate ?

Oct 9th, CNN, moderated by Anderson Cooper.

RobertKK · 27-09-2016 03:17PM

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver says Clinton won and it likely means she will gain in the polls.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-won-the-debate-which-means-shes-likely-to-gain-in-the-polls/

Currently Nate Silver says the chances of winning are
Clinton 55%
Trump 45%

RobertKK · 27-09-2016 03:19PM

Billy86 wrote: »

I see you didn't include the link, so I googled it. Yep... Breitbart. You're taking your news literally from Trump's campaign.

Now you're going to say "oh no, it was Gravis Marketing!" But there is a problem there... Gravis Marketing are run and sponsored by Breitbart.

Try 44 - 38 instead: http://www.startribune.com/tracking-presidential-polls-in-minnesota/392909811/

When I posted I didn't know who did the poll, just heard it on TV.

Though in other polls, the trend in Minnesota has been towards Clinton losing support/Trump gaining, as she was double digits ahead.

Billy86 · 27-09-2016 03:43PM

RobertKK wrote: »

When I posted I didn't know who did the poll, just heard it on TV.

Though in other polls, the trend in Minnesota has been towards Clinton losing support/Trump gaining, as she was double digits ahead.

Robert, I already provided the link. Here is a screenshot.

RobertKK · 27-09-2016 03:58PM

It has still tightened in Minnesota.

Billy86 · 27-09-2016 04:01PM

Her polling numbers are almost identical in Minnesota now to what they were at the start of the month.

gosplan · 27-09-2016 08:10PM

Count Dooku wrote: »

and if despite this Clinton is "not 50 points ahead" Trump, it can mean only that she is least electable POTUS candidate and must resign immediately
Problem is not that Trump is bad, problem is that Clinton is not any better or sometimes even worse that him. At least Trump has some chances to propose something new, while Clinton will continue with failed policies of Obama

I get what you're saying but I think the writings in the wall as regards who and what trump is and what kind of president he would be.

Of course people suffering want something new but are we saying ANYTHING new is good?

Clinton may be the useless status quo but I think it's obvious at this stage that Trump would more than likely be a disaster.

conditioned games · 28-09-2016 07:55AM

Obama has already been a disaster. Now 23 trillion in debt and no way out. Trump is their last hope.

B_Wayne · 28-09-2016 08:02AM

conditioned games wrote: »

Obama has already been a disaster. Now 23 trillion in debt and no way out. Trump is their last hope.

Trump's wall alone is considered his fiscally insane. He's expected to be far more damaging for the US economy. So he's an odd choice to reduce the debt that has constantly increased since world war 2 with some exceptions.

conditioned games · 28-09-2016 08:13AM

B_Wayne wrote: »

Trump's wall alone is considered his fiscally insane. He's expected to be far more damaging for the US economy. So he's an odd choice to reduce the debt that has constantly increased since world war 2 with some exceptions.

The debt has doubled in the last 8 years alone, every 12 months over a trillion debt is added. They need to go back to basics and become more competitive domestically rather than relying on debt to maintain their consumer driven economy. The wall is a metaphor for self sufficiency and independence. Continue on the same path is not an option.

Christy42 · 28-09-2016 08:20AM

conditioned games wrote: »

The debt has doubled in the last 8 years alone, every 12 months over a trillion debt is added. They need to go back to basics and become more competitive domestically rather than relying on debt to maintain their consumer driven economy. The wall is a metaphor for self sufficiency and independence. Continue on the same path is not an option.

Donald Trump was not using a metaphor when talking about the wall or the rest of his ridiculous budget.

The fact that even his supporters have to presume his plans aren't real to make him in any way electable speaks volumes.

B_Wayne · 28-09-2016 08:27AM

conditioned games wrote: »

The debt has doubled in the last 8 years alone, every 12 months over a trillion debt is added. They need to go back to basics and become more competitive domestically rather than relying on debt to maintain their consumer driven economy. The wall is a metaphor for self sufficiency and independence. Continue on the same path is not an option.

The wall is a planned wall actually. A very expensive wall...

Quin_Dub · 28-09-2016 09:23AM

conditioned games wrote: »

Obama has already been a disaster. Now 23 trillion in debt and no way out. Trump is their last hope.

Whilst still a huge number it's actually 19.5T

conditioned games wrote: »

The debt has doubled in the last 8 years alone, every 12 months over a trillion debt is added. They need to go back to basics and become more competitive domestically rather than relying on debt to maintain their consumer driven economy. The wall is a metaphor for self sufficiency and independence. Continue on the same path is not an option.

From here

Yes , the debt has almost doubled in the last 8 years , in the teeth of the worst recession in the better part of a 100 years.

The debt in Sept 2008 was 10.6T , in Sept 2012 is was 16T and today it's 19.5T , so the rate of increase is slowing down..

FYI - The Debt was 5.5T in in 2000 and 10.6T in 2008 so it doubled under GWB as well...(it Tripled under Reagan!)

To say that Obama specifically is responsible for the US issues with Debt is disengenuous at best..

The US (not unlike many governments to be fair) has shown itself to be completely incapable of balancing it's books, that has been the case for many decades not just in the lifetime of a specific administration.

Also - Given that Trump would add an additional 5T+ to the debt over a similar period suggesting that he is somehow the economic saviour is a very dubious claim indeed.

Pro Hoc Vice · 28-09-2016 09:26AM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Whilst still a huge number it's actually 19.5T

From here

Yes , the debt has almost doubled in the last 8 years , in the teeth of the worst recession in the better part of a 100 years.

The debt in Sept 2008 was 10.6T , in Sept 2012 is was 16T and today it's 19.5T , so the rate of increase is slowing down..

FYI - The Debt was 5.5T in in 2000 and 10.6T in 2008 so it doubled under GWB as well...(it Tripled under Reagan!)

To say that Obama specifically is responsible for the US issues with Debt is disengenuous at best..

The US (not unlike many governments to be fair) has shown itself to be completely incapable of balancing it's books, that has been the case for many decades not just in the lifetime of a specific administration.

Also - Given that Trump would add an additional 5T+ to the debt over a similar period suggesting that he is somehow the economic saviour is a very dubious claim indeed.

The funny thing the last president to balance the books and reduce the national debt in that he ran 3 surpluses plus set up the first year of the next president for a surplus, was and wait for the drum roll, Bill Clinton.

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Comments