2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Overheal · 30-09-2016 08:38PM

Brian? wrote: »

Is there actually any new information in that article?

I would call it more of an editorial. And therefore no. No actual reporting done.

Amerika · 30-09-2016 08:38PM

Overheal wrote: »

Hot air. They have suspended useful work of congress to investigate her and her actions in a dozen instances, at taxpayer cost, and have pinned nothing to her. A similar impeachment hearing would be a waste of the American people's time and money, and would still end up with her being the POTUS

She would first need to become POTUS in order to be impeached.

ebbsy · 30-09-2016 08:41PM

As long as this dirty and sordid episode stays in the news Trump will be happy.

Hillary is not that far ahead, even with all this **** going on. Not good for her.

She could be bet out the gate in November.

Overheal · 30-09-2016 08:41PM

Good odds that she will win, given the rate at which Donald can't keep himself from flying off the handle.

Amerika · 30-09-2016 08:52PM

Brian? wrote: »

Is there actually any new information in that article?

Maybe not spelled out entirely in this article but it has recently been reported that Cheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson, John Bentel, and the computer specialist who deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails despite orders from Congress to preserve them were all given immunity from criminal prosecution. All four of these people should have been charged by the FBI, not given immunity (some of which allegedly lied to FBI agents after they got the immunity deals and still escaped prosecution by the FBI). If that doesn't smell like a coverup, I don't know what would.

Brian? · 30-09-2016 08:53PM

ebbsy wrote: »

As long as this dirty and sordid episode stays in the news Trump will be happy.

Hillary is not that far ahead, even with all this **** going on. Not good for her.

She could be bet out the gate in November.

If Trump had the good sense to stay off Twitter, this race would be nearly over.

Billy86 · 30-09-2016 08:56PM

Amerika wrote: »

Maybe not spelled out entirely in this article but it has recently been reported that Cheryl Mills, Heather Samuelson, John Bentel, and the computer specialist who deleted Hillary Clinton’s emails despite orders from Congress to preserve them were all given immunity from criminal prosecution. All four of these people should have been charged by the FBI, not given immunity (some of which allegedly lied to FBI agents after they got the immunity deals and still escaped prosecution by the FBI). If that doesn't smell like a coverup, I don't know what would.

So... no.

Overheal · 30-09-2016 08:59PM

LawNewz now indicating that Miss U might have a legitimate defamation suit against Trump, for falsely claiming she was in a sex tape.

http://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/fmr-miss-universe-may-have-a-defamation-case-against-trump-for-his-tweetstorm/

Billy86 · 30-09-2016 09:02PM

Overheal wrote: »

LawNewz now indicating that Miss U might have a legitimate defamation suit against Trump, for falsely claiming she was in a sex tape.

http://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/fmr-miss-universe-may-have-a-defamation-case-against-trump-for-his-tweetstorm/

That'll tie in well with the current multiple fraud cases he's under investigation for, the alleged child rape case, and the 3,500 other one he's been through. I'm sure they're all frivolous.

ebbsy · 30-09-2016 09:09PM

Brian? wrote: »

ebbsy wrote: »

As long as this dirty and sordid episode stays in the news Trump will be happy.

Hillary is not that far ahead, even with all this **** going on. Not good for her.

She could be bet out the gate in November.

If Trump had the good sense to stay off Twitter, this race would be nearly over.

He can't stop himself bud. I think he must be bored.

Count Dooku · 30-09-2016 09:53PM

If Hillary is doing so well, why is so much panic in WaPo that anti-Trump votes will go to Gary Johnson or Jill Stein?
Both third-party candidates would be terrible presidents

Billy86 · 30-09-2016 10:03PM

Strange how the polls - you know, the same polls that were spot on about Trump winning the primaries all through 2016 - show Clinton ahead, isn't it?

Suryavarman · 30-09-2016 10:06PM

Count Dooku wrote: »

If Hillary is doing so well, why is so much panic in WaPo that anti-Trump votes will go to Gary Johnson or Jill Stein?
Both third-party candidates would be terrible presidents

That isn't panic. That's just stating the obvious; all third party candidates are pretty poor.

Count Dooku · 30-09-2016 11:18PM

Suryavarman wrote: »

That isn't panic. That's just stating the obvious; all third party candidates are pretty poor.

And?
They don't have any chances to be elected and what is the reason to whine if people don't want to vote for both Clinton and Trump?

Overheal · 30-09-2016 11:22PM

Count Dooku wrote: »

And?
They don't have any chances to be elected and what is the reason to whine if people don't want to vote for both Clinton and Trump?

You have eligible voters, who are going to the polls, and they aren't voting for you, so yeah you're going to try to sway the few of them you can to change their mind. Why not.

Overheal · 30-09-2016 11:31PM

He seems to have woke from his midday nap

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781926033159249920

"It's 3AM. Do you know where your Donald is?"

Billy86 · 30-09-2016 11:32PM

Overheal wrote: »

He seems to have woke from his midday nap

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/781926033159249920

Haha, couldn't see the tweet on boards but all I was thinking off your comment was "who's going to be there to answer the phone at 3pm!?"

uncleoswald · 30-09-2016 11:51PM

Count Dooku wrote: »

If Hillary is doing so well, why is so much panic in WaPo that anti-Trump votes will go to Gary Johnson or Jill Stein?
Both third-party candidates would be terrible presidents

Hardly a panic. Whatever happens it's going to be a fairly close election and if Trump does win a large part of that will be third party candidates taking youth votes away from Hillary. Shedding light on their lack of credibility is entirely reasonable.

Overheal · 01-10-2016 01:24AM

Well look who's breaking federal law now

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/09/30/breaking-phoenix-police-issue-cease-and-desist-to-trump-campaign-for-violating-federal-law-video/

Overheal · 01-10-2016 06:52AM

So "somehow" this audio "leaked" from Hillary Clintons mouth, where she talks about millennials in their parents basement.

Except pretty much what it is is a message TO millennials, not her "47%" moment.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/in-leaked-audio-clinton-talks-about-sanders-supporters-living-in-parents-basement/

Have to say I found the remarks terribly accurate. My working experience has been mostly retail jobs where my coworkers were either already holding bachelors degrees or in progress like myself, entirely overqualified for the pay or the work. Whether you blame NAFTA or something else, the high education jobs just aren't there in sufficiency. The economy leans too heavily in favor of the service industry.

Still thinking not to vote for her but at the same time can't help but hear it and joke, "the beacons have been lit; Gondor calls for aid!" - which I guess makes me Theoden in that analogy cos I'm like meh and worm tongue is all like "bbbut the emails! DNC fraud! Etc" and Gandalf Sanders is all like "the billionaire class bla bla" /rant /it's late

gosplan · 01-10-2016 09:17AM

Amerika wrote: »

The more information that comes out the more it looks like Hillary’s email scandal investigation was a FBI coverup of criminal behavior by Hillary, her top aides, and the company that destroyed subpoenaed emails from Clinton’s server.

Since both the FBI and DOJ refuse to do their jobs (or even worse... are corrupt in the matter), I wonder if Congress can take action, or would they need to impeach her for gross misconduct in order for justice to be served?

http://nypost.com/2016/09/28/the-fbis-hillary-email-probe-is-looking-even-more-like-a-coverup/

First time I've read this thread in a few days.

Pretty sure the last thing I read was you citing a spectrum of media bias and dismissing anything not in the middle.

Now you're citing the nypost.

What a joke.

alastair · 01-10-2016 10:06AM

Amerika wrote: »

She would first need to become POTUS in order to be impeached.

No she would not. U.S. Senators can be impeached. Problem is that there's nothing warranting an impeachment at play here.

Pro Hoc Vice · 01-10-2016 10:18AM

alastair wrote: »

Amerika wrote: »

She would first need to become POTUS in order to be impeached.

No she would not. U.S. Senators can be impeached. Problem is that there's nothing warranting an impeachment at play here.

I thought she was the ex senator for New York, I assume only sitting senators can be impeached.

Suryavarman · 01-10-2016 10:26AM

gosplan wrote: »

First time I've read this thread in a few days.

Pretty sure the last thing I read was you citing a spectrum of media bias and dismissing anything not in the middle.

Now you're citing the nypost.

What a joke.

It was more likely that he was dismissing anything that wasn't on the right.

Calina · 01-10-2016 10:27AM

Overheal wrote: »

So "somehow" this audio "leaked" from Hillary Clintons mouth, where she talks about millennials in their parents basement.

Except pretty much what it is is a message TO millennials, not her "47%" moment.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/in-leaked-audio-clinton-talks-about-sanders-supporters-living-in-parents-basement/

Have to say I found the remarks terribly accurate. My working experience has been mostly retail jobs where my coworkers were either already holding bachelors degrees or in progress like myself, entirely overqualified for the pay or the work. Whether you blame NAFTA or something else, the high education jobs just aren't there in sufficiency. The economy leans too heavily in favor of the service industry.

Still thinking not to vote for her but at the same time can't help but hear it and joke, "the beacons have been lit; Gondor calls for aid!" - which I guess makes me Theoden in that analogy cos I'm like meh and worm tongue is all like "bbbut the emails! DNC fraud! Etc" and Gandalf Sanders is all like "the billionaire class bla bla" /rant /it's late

Not specific to the debate at hand but coming from the tech sector, I spend a lot of time reading screeds about how the highly qualified people are not there in sufficient numbers [in the US] hence PLEASE GIVE US MORE 1HBs.

Marc Andreessen has yammered on at some length also about a future where no one works so everyone is doing stuff like art, writing poetry and music and how wonderful a world that would be. He has not, afaik, clearly laid out how he expects people to feed and shelter themselves since the tech industry has completely messed with the income models for the entire creative industry.

What I suspect is the reality is that there are skillset shortages and there are skillset overloads and no one who has jobs recognises that part of that is they allow people to come on board and learn jobs even from wildly differing backgrounds. I did it and it's not impossible to take someone on board and train them for a lot of tech jobs.

The problem as I see it, in the context of the current election, is that I think politicians don't in general understand this, nor, perhaps, administrations, because they more often than not rely on and are formed from a population of generalists. The US has added issues in that policy to fix this is impossible because of the split of duties between the federal and state levels.

In terms of whether Donald Trump can fix it or even provide guidance on fixing it: I think it's a straight no. There is absolutely no evidence in his business dealings of any innovative thinking at all. I suspect of the two of them, Clinton is probably the brighter by some considerable distance. But she's facing the problem that the US is divided so even if she does come up with some solutions about future direction, she's fighting half the people who don't like her because she's her.

alastair · 01-10-2016 10:27AM

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I thought she was the ex senator for New York, I assume only sitting senators can be impeached.

There's been one impeachment process for a resigned congressman, but it fell at senate level as there was disagreement about whether impeachment was applicable post-position. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_W._Belknap

Suryavarman · 01-10-2016 10:30AM

Trump claimed yesterday that Alicia Machado starred in a sex tape and his followers began criticising Hillary Clinton for that. It turns out that Trump starred in a porn film before. I wonder if the people that criticised Hillary yesterday will be doing the same to Trump today. I won't hold my breath.

Pro Hoc Vice · 01-10-2016 10:37AM

alastair wrote: »

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I thought she was the ex senator for New York, I assume only sitting senators can be impeached.

There's been one impeachment process for a resigned congressman, but it fell at senate level as there was disagreement about whether impeachment was applicable post-position. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_W._Belknap

Interesting, but he was not a member of congress, and the impechement must have commenced before he resigned as secretary of war I assume. I would think any impechemet of a senator who has not been in the position for 7 years would be illogical and of dubious legal merit.

gosplan · 01-10-2016 10:48AM

Suryavarman wrote: »

Trump claimed yesterday that Alicia Machado starred in a sex tape and his followers began criticising Hillary Clinton for that. It turns out that Trump starred in a porn film before. I wonder if the people that criticised Hillary yesterday will be doing the same to Trump today. I won't hold my breath.

It's the hypocrisy that makes me feel he's so unsuited to being president.

That and his lack of foresight/reactionary impulsive actions.

Anyone with a clue running for president would make sure

1: they have a campaign plan beyond 'making it up as they go'

2: things in their background that were obviously going to come up would have been dealt with. i.e. Trump foundation,
Tax returns, wife's visa, Cuba dealings and so on

3: avoid the obvious pitfalls. Picking rows with families of soldiers and former miss universes is such a losing move. Why do it.

Perhaps both candidates are unsuitable but HRC and her team can at least plan a campaign.

Trump gets nothing, absolutely NOTHING right beyond his basic appeal to a proportion of America.

He hasn't shown himself capable of actually doing anything.

How can he run a country effectively if he can't run a campaign?

Black Swan · 01-10-2016 12:57PM

There are serious issues that need to be resolved in America, and what does the Republican nominee Donald Trump waste time upon this week? Staying on message and offering solutions, or a petty tit-for-tat all hours of day and night twitter rant with a former Miss Universe? Donald frequently reveals his nature with such tweets, but few are listening to the real message they send about whom Trump is. USA Today was listening, and for the 1st time in their history since being founded the nation's newspaper made a unanimous editorial board decision to tell their readers nationwide not to vote for Donald Trump based upon an extensive list of reasons why Donald Trump was "unfit for the presidency."

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Comments