2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

K-9 · 15-10-2016 07:59PM

True enough, the thought of Donald or Bill near the White House isn't enticing on the dirty old man front, but that's the choice we are left with. Which is best? One as the first gentleman or the actual President?

Unfortunately it seems most ex pm's get paid enormous fees for speeches, Blair and Bertie closer to home examples. I suppose the Clintons will say they give a fair bit to charity.

Will be interesting to see how Obama deals with it. I like to think he just as too much class on a personal level but we'll see. I suppose if it can be put to some good...

Call Me Jimmy · 15-10-2016 09:14PM

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

There is a difference between a politically interested person who takes a side and not really liking one or both sides, and a person who claims to hate both but only posts negative comments about one.

I have not stopped any poster posting I have simply stated my opinion and the weight I give their posts which is zero.

Grasping at straws here

Pro Hoc Vice · 15-10-2016 09:20PM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Grasping at straws here

What straw have I grasped?

ancapailldorcha · 15-10-2016 10:19PM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Grasping at straws here

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

What straw have I grasped?

Post more constructively please.

oik · 15-10-2016 10:23PM

Overheal wrote: »

Do we all need to hashtag our signatures so people don't confuse who's for/against whom. Kinda silly at this point.

Would be more constructive for people to argue the point on it's own merits rather than criticising other posters. That way it doesn't matter who they support.

jobbridge4life · 15-10-2016 10:25PM

oik wrote: »

Would be more constructive for people to argue the point on it's own merits rather than criticising other posters. That way it doesn't matter who they support.

Too true Oik. Such a pity in the actual election, your preferred candidate is running to be Insulter-in-Chief.

oik · 15-10-2016 10:27PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Too true Oik. Such a pity in the actual election, your preferred candidate is running to be Insulter-in-Chief.

America politics has always been pretty brutal.

RobertKK · 15-10-2016 10:27PM

Paul Ryan has dismissed claims by Trump that the election is rigged, by saying he has confidence in the electoral system.
The moat is getting bigger.

oik · 15-10-2016 10:31PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Paul Ryan has dismissed claims by Trump that the election is rigged, by saying he has confidence in the electoral system.
The moat is getting bigger.

It's not always clear what Trump means when he says "rigged"

When he refers to a "rigged system" it's usually in the context of the media and the establishment conspiring to undermine any real opposition, both himself and Bernie. If anyone's not familiar with the recent wikileaks concerning Hillary receiving debate questions ahead of time in the primaries they should look into it.

He probably is also floating the possibility of genuine fraud, but that's not beyond the realm of possibility. If it was ever going to happen it would happen now.

jobbridge4life · 15-10-2016 10:35PM

oik wrote: »

America politics has always been pretty brutal.

Are you saying that this election and Trump specifically hasn't been significantly worse?

Today he literally stated that the election was going to be rigged.

He said Hillary Clinton has 'tremendous hate in her heart'.

He said she was in a conspiracy to destroy the sovereignty of the United States.

He alleged that Paul Ryan, the GOP speaker of the house of representative, was in a conspiracy to defeat him.

He insulted and diminished the record of John McCain, veteran GOP Senator and former presidential nominee, and said 'he was not a hero'.

Black Swan · 15-10-2016 10:41PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wikileaks show what she said in private, her emails

Why is Julian Assange and Wikileaks only hacking Hillary Clinton and Democratic HQ, and not also Donald Trump and Republican HQ? How can Julian Assange assume the moral high ground when he hacks only one candidate, when doing so obviously benefits the other? If Wikileaks is so grand at hacking, it should be a piece of cake for them to hack Donald Trump's tax returns, which Trump is obviously hiding from the American voter for fear of the damage they would do to his campaign if revealed. Julian Assange and Wikileaks, outsiders, are obviously attempting to influence the outcome of presidential election 2016, which makes them suspect, as it makes the emails that they release suspect. What's their motive, has Julian Assange been promised something by the benefiting side, and what does he stand to gain by trying to help Donald Trump win?

oik · 15-10-2016 10:44PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Are you saying that this election and Trump specifically hasn't been significantly worse?

Today he literally stated that the election was going to be rigged.

He said Hillary Clinton has 'tremendous hate in her heart'.

He said she was in a conspiracy to destroy the sovereignty of the United States.

He alleged that Paul Ryan, the GOP speaker of the house of representative, was in a conspiracy to defeat him.

He insulted and diminished the record of John McCain, veteran GOP Senator and former presidential nominee, and said 'he was not a hero'.

This is the first time in years there's been any real opposition between the two candidates.

Both have very divergent views with very little if anything in common. That has not been the case in recent elections.

But you can't just point the finger at Trump.

Hillary neglected to say anything nice about him at the last debate. She copped out and complimented his kids. He actually complimented her. She's just as nasty as anyone.

8-10 · 15-10-2016 10:45PM

Black Swan wrote: »

Why is Julian Assange and Wikileaks only hacking Hillary Clinton and Democratic HQ, and not also Donald Trump and Republican HQ? How can Julian Assange assume the morale high ground when he hacks only one candidate, when doing so obviously benefits the other? If Wikileaks is so grand at hacking, it should be a piece of cake for them to hack Donald Trump's tax returns, which Trump is obviously hiding from the American voter for fear of the damage they would do to his campaign if revealed. Julian Assange and Wikileaks, outsiders, are obviously attempting to influence the outcome of presidential election 2016, which makes them suspect, as it makes the emails that they release suspect. What's their motive, has Julian Assange been promised something by the benefiting side, and what does he stand to gain by trying to help Donald Trump win?

Wikileaks aren't doing the hacking

ECO_Mental · 15-10-2016 10:46PM

Its getting tiresome now with the crap the Donald is spouting out he is now saying that Hillary was drugged up at the last debate and that she she take a drugs test like an athlete.

“I think we should take a drug test. At the beginning of the last debate, she was all pumped up ... but at the end she was,” he told the crowd without finishing his sentence. “Anyway I’m willing to do it.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/15/trump-insists-election-rigged-call-for-drug-test-for-him-clinton-before-debate.html#

Its getting beyond pathetic at this stage has the man any shame?! and just take his beating like a grown man. Study up for the next debate and try and win that instead of crying "its not fair, booo hooo"

Christy42 · 15-10-2016 10:47PM

oik wrote: »

It's not always clear what Trump means when he says "rigged"

When he refers to a "rigged system" it's usually in the context of the media and the establishment conspiring to undermine any real opposition, both himself and Bernie. If anyone's not familiar with the recent wikileaks concerning Hillary receiving debate questions ahead of time in the primaries they should look into it.

He probably is also floating the possibility of genuine fraud, but that's not beyond the realm of possibility. If it was ever going to happen it would happen now.

That is far more thought than Donald has put into this. He is losing and therefore is crying chest. End of. There were plenty of kids who did the same.

If he had put this much thought into it he would he explain it as such. As is there is no point in going into such detail tryang to spin everything from him into a good thing (must be tough when he so clearly hasn't thought about it himself for longer than the time it took him to say it).

oik · 15-10-2016 10:50PM

Christy42 wrote: »

That is far more thought than Donald has put into this. He is losing and therefore is crying chest. End of. There were plenty of kids who did the same.

If he had put this much thought into it he would he explain it as such. As is there is no point in going into such detail tryang to spin everything from him into a good thing (must be tough when he so clearly hasn't thought about it himself for longer than the time it took him to say it).

Well he has explained it in this way. Any time he talks about the media he reminds people it's a rigged system and he goes from the rigged system straight to Bernie.

So based on that "rigged system" seems to refer to the system as a whole rather than the electoral system.

I've not heard any direct implication from him about voter fraud, as far as I can tell that's the media's interpretation.

Black Swan · 15-10-2016 10:55PM

8-10 wrote: »

Wikileaks aren't doing the hacking

Then by proxi? Look for this hackers. We want to influence the US election for one side only. The larger point is why are they only releasing emails regarding Hillary Clinton and Democratic HQ, and not Donald Trump and Republican HQ too? They cannot assume the moral high ground for so-called secret journalism if they focus on one side exclusively, and not the other.

Pro Hoc Vice · 15-10-2016 10:57PM

oik wrote: »

Well he has explained it in this way. Any time he talks about the media he reminds people it's a rigged system and he goes from the rigged system straight to Bernie.

So based on that "rigged system" seems to refer to the system as a whole rather than the electoral system.

I've not heard any direct implication from him about voter fraud, as far as I can tell that's the media's interpretation.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-voter-id-law-fraud-226832

His words are very clear

oik · 15-10-2016 10:59PM

Black Swan wrote: »

Then by proxi? Look for this hackers. We want to influence the US election for one side only. The larger point is why are they only releasing emails regarding Hillary Clinton and Democratic HQ, and not Donald Trump and Republican HQ too? They cannot assume the moral high ground for so-called secret journalism if they focus on one side exclusively, and not the other.

Do you think NBC, CNN or ABC have set their interns to digging up dirt on Hillary Clinton?

Do you think the NYT and WP have mudrakers combing the country for women who are willing to make an allegation against Hillary Clinton?

Why only demand balance when it starts to affect one candidate and not the other?

oik · 15-10-2016 11:00PM

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/donald-trump-voter-id-law-fraud-226832

His words are very clear

Oh well that's pretty standard.

The fact that the US doesn't have voter ID laws is a shambles.

All the claims about black voter suppression are rubbish.

Black turnout in states with voter ID laws is the same as it was before such laws.

The only incentive to not have them is voter fraud.

jobbridge4life · 15-10-2016 11:04PM

oik wrote: »

This is the first time in years there's been any real opposition between the two candidates.

That is complete nonsense, while the gap may be bigger the idea that there was no real opposition between Obama and McCain, or Obama and Romney is just farcical and undermines your position utterly.

oik wrote: »

Both have very divergent views with very little if anything in common. That has not been the case in recent elections.

They have plenty in common. Both are fabulously rich. Both are white. Both are Boomers... will I go on? As for views both believe in American Exceptionalism, both are pro-military, neither believes marijuana is a gateway drug. There is more. We shouldn't over state the gap in views.

oik wrote: »

But you can't just point the finger at Trump.

Hillary neglected to say anything nice about him at the last debate. She copped out and complimented his kids. He actually complimented her. She's just as nasty as anyone.

That is just patently false, she stated complimented him by saying he had raised good children and that fact reflected well on him. That is one of the greatest compliments any parent could hope for.

jobbridge4life · 15-10-2016 11:05PM

oik wrote: »

Oh well that's pretty standard.

The fact that the US doesn't have voter ID laws is a shambles.

All the claims about black voter suppression are rubbish.

Black turnout in states with voter ID laws is the same as it was before such laws.

The only incentive to not have them is voter fraud.

Which countless studies have demonstrated to be virtually non-existent in the United States.

ECO_Mental · 15-10-2016 11:06PM

This really drives me crazy the president of the evangelical college Liberty University STILL is supporting Trump. You could not get a more selfless godless man than Donald Trump and still this a-hole supports him.

This proves that the Trump campaign is a cult, how can he look his students in their faces and preach all love and hope and giving and sharing etc etc and then support a molester of women like the Donald.

Never trusted or liked evangelicals could never understand their fanatical literal take on the bible and their hatred of the gays/muslims and how we are all doomed to hell when the judgement day comes. arhhhhhhhhh

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/13/politics/liberty-university-jerry-falwell-jr-donald-trump/

Pro Hoc Vice · 15-10-2016 11:13PM

oik wrote: »

Oh well that's pretty standard.

The fact that the US doesn't have voter ID laws is a shambles.

All the claims about black voter suppression are rubbish.

Black turnout in states with voter ID laws is the same as it was before such laws.

The only incentive to not have them is voter fraud.

You said "
I've not heard any direct implication from him about voter fraud, as far as I can tell that's the media's interpretation."

That was a direct allegation.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/study-finds-no-evidence-widespread-voter-fraud-n637776

If you want to talk about voter fraud and ID set up another thread it's not fair for me to detail this thread.

Pro Hoc Vice · 15-10-2016 11:15PM

ECO_Mental wrote: »

This really drives me crazy the president of the evangelical college Liberty University STILL is supporting Trump. You could not get a more selfless godless man than Donald Trump and still this a-hole supports him.

This proves that the Trump campaign is a cult, how can he look his students in their faces and preach all love and hope and giving and sharing etc etc and then support a molester of women like the Donald.

Never trusted or liked evangelicals could never understand their fanatical literal take on the bible and their hatred of the gays/muslims and how we are all doomed to hell when the judgement day comes. arhhhhhhhhh

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/13/politics/liberty-university-jerry-falwell-jr-donald-trump/

Simple answer abortion. The next justice and possibly 2 more. The funny thing is even if Roe v Wade was to be overturned it may not get what they want.

ArmaniJeanss · 15-10-2016 11:16PM

Black Swan wrote: »

Why is Julian Assange and Wikileaks only hacking Hillary Clinton and Democratic HQ, and not also Donald Trump and Republican HQ? How can Julian Assange assume the moral high ground when he hacks only one candidate, when doing so obviously benefits the other? If Wikileaks is so grand at hacking, it should be a piece of cake for them to hack Donald Trump's tax returns, which Trump is obviously hiding from the American voter for fear of the damage they would do to his campaign if revealed. Julian Assange and Wikileaks, outsiders, are obviously attempting to influence the outcome of presidential election 2016, which makes them suspect, as it makes the emails that they release suspect. What's their motive, has Julian Assange been promised something by the benefiting side, and what does he stand to gain by trying to help Donald Trump win?

Been bugging me as well as I don't see Assange/Trump as a logical 'fit'.

A charitable explanation might be that they don't actually have anything to release on Trump as their sources/methods don't have an 'in' on someone from such a non-political background - might be different if the GOP candidate was someone who'd been in GWBs cabinet or was a career politician who had done three decades on Capitol Hill.

Black Swan · 15-10-2016 11:18PM

oik wrote: »

This is the first time in years there's been any real opposition between the two candidates.

The 2000 presidential election between GW Bush and Al Gore was so close that at the end it depended upon several recounts of butterfly ballots, dimpled chads, electronic vote flaws, late overseas ballots, etc., that resulted in roughly 500 more votes for GW Bush to win the state and finally determine the presidential election.

oik · 15-10-2016 11:24PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

That is complete nonsense, while the gap may be bigger the idea that there was no real opposition between Obama and McCain, or Obama and Romney is just farcical and undermines your position utterly.

Well that would depend on what I mean by "real opposition" wouldn't it.

All candidates before now agree fundamentally on the basics. Free trade immigration etc.

Previous elections the disputes were about the "how" of policy, not the what. Trump has come along and challenged the orthodoxy of American politics.

oik · 15-10-2016 11:25PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

They have plenty in common. Both are fabulously rich. Both are white. Both are Boomers... will I go on? As for views both believe in American Exceptionalism, both are pro-military, neither believes marijuana is a gateway drug. There is more. We shouldn't over state the gap in views.

Of course you would focus entirely on the superficial aspects of their personalities rather than their political beliefs.

aloyisious · 15-10-2016 11:26PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Paul Ryan has dismissed claims by Trump that the election is rigged, by saying he has confidence in the electoral system.
The moat is getting bigger.

Lol, now that's really putting it to Donald.....

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Comments