Donald Trump

Penn

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

That more sounds like a dog whistle for armed white men to show up outside polling stations asking minorities to prove their eligibility to vote.

That's exactly what it is. He said a few nights ago (to a predominantly white audience):

“So important that you get out and vote. So important that you watch other communities, because we don't want this election stolen from us,” Trump said in Ambridge, Pa., northwest of Pittsburgh. “We don't want this election stolen from us. We do not want this election stolen.”

What could he possibly mean about "other communities"? I mean, if he just wanted people to monitor election halls and make sure people weren't voting twice, surely he'd say to monitor their own communities?

Oh wait, I get it! He means Black & Latino people! Of course! Wow, I feel like a genius now that I've cracked his very subtle and almost-impossible-to-crack code!

Billy86

Butters1979 wrote: »

I got it from here,

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/polls.html

Not sure if I'm miss reading it. 'Strong republican' and 'strong democratic' states. Maybe that's a bit different to realclearpolitics.com 'in the bag' interpretation.

Think you might be, that appears to be gauging those numbers based off how Obama and Romney performed in 2012 (they identify it as states win by one or the other in 2012 by 10pts or more), not how Trump and Clinton are currently doing in 2016.

iLikeWaffles

VinLieger wrote: »

Doubt if they pointed the other direction you would be as critical

Also you really should do some research into how polls work

You can have your doubts but what makes you believe I am picking a side.

Please explain it to me if I am getting such a simple thing wrong then...

Feline Grabber

CdeC wrote: »

Ok I get you.
So do you think we would be better that Trump get elected. Let America get it out of their system and then we can all move on in 2020.
Interesting proposal.!!

Don't think he is saying that but there are people who have problems with the world changing around them and if nothing is done then they will continue to blame the government and be attracted to anything that promises change. Unfortunately everyone else knows there won't be any positive change for anyone as there is little that can be done to help them. They want their manufacturing jobs back and don't care if they will just be replaced by machines leaving them back in the same place with a ****ty security net and little educational opportunities because they voted for the party against them. Much like how we saw Greece and the left an example of the right getting a chance and making a complete balls of it would cut down growing far right views.

A Little Pony

[font=arial, sans-serif] need both a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]public[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] and a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]private[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] position .[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Basically she is a liar.[/font]

ohnonotgmail

A Little Pony wrote: »

[font=arial, sans-serif] need both a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]public[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] and a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]private[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] position .[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Basically she is a liar.[/font]

why the need for the funny fonts i dont know. anyhow, your post is nonsense. It is entirely possible for a politician to a public and private opinion that differ.

VinLieger

iLikeWaffles wrote: »

You can have your doubts but what makes you believe I am picking a side.

Please explain it to me if I am getting such a simple thing wrong then...

Well your disagreeing with the polling that shows clinton ahead and not just with the results but the actual method of polling which has been developed and proven to work so it really looks like your picking a side.

Show me how many polls in previous elections have been conducted any differently as far as percentage of voters is concerned and come up with the wrong result? Yes statistically every so often they will have to be wrong but overwhelmingly they are correct.

Also 0.0156% of registered voters is wrong cus you calculated based off of the total eligible population of America (218 million) which displays your incomprehension of election polling.

34,130 as a percentage of current registered voters (148 million) is 0.0230%.

So I ask how would you prefer polling be done? Do you think the scientific, mathematically and statistics driven method that has been developed over the past century is wrong and we should do it another way? Would you like every registered voter be asked? Cus I think thats just called an election.

seamus

sReq | uTeK wrote: »

If Trump had any moral fibre he'd withdraw now.

Problem is that would be handing the election to Hillary.

The GOP are abandoning him in order to deliberately throw the election - they can see that if Trump won, the GOP would be annihilated at the next election. And that in fact, win or lose the damage to the GOP would be enormous if they continued to stand by their nominee.

The republicans are done, they no longer want this election. They're going to regroup, find ways to impeach Hillary and her SC nominees and try again at the next election.

At this late stage, a Trump withdrawal wouldn't mean someone else goes on the ticket. The system is complicated - in some states an alternative nominee may be possible. In other states it wouldn't, and Trump would remain on the ticket.
So for some states, the alternative nominee could potentially win, in others, Trump could potentially win. But either way the republican vote would be fractured and split and there'd be no chance of winning. Short of resurrecting Reagan, it would be a waste of energy for the GOP to put someone else in now; they'd lose either way.

Trump won't withdraw. His ego won't let him. There'll be a book in a couple of years about how he challenged the system and "would have got away with it if it wasn't for the pesky media telling lies about him", and have a bizarre little tranche of idiots hanging on his every word like he's some infallible god.

But at least he'll just be tucked away in the corners of Fox news, unable to have any real effect.

Outlaw Pete

seamus wrote: »

But at least he'll just be tucked away in the corners of Fox news, unable to have any real effect.

Apart from Hannity and O'Reilly, Fox News has all but abandoned him too.. in particular Megyn Kelly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcXtbDDuRw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCVPzVhaEGQ

A Little Pony

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

[font=arial, sans-serif] need both a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]public[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] and a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]private[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] position .[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Basically she is a liar.[/font]

why the need for the funny fonts i dont know. anyhow, your post is nonsense. It is entirely possible for a politician to a public and private opinion that differ.

So basically tell the public what they want to hear, lie like hell to get votes and then in secret have a totally different viewpoint. Sounds utterly ridiculous but that is Hillary Clinton for you. Two faced liar.

ohnonotgmail

A Little Pony wrote: »

So basically tell the public what they want to hear, lie like hell to get votes and then in secret have a totally different viewpoint. Sounds utterly ridiculous but that is Hillary Clinton for you. Two faced liar.

as opposed to Donald 'honest abe' Trump? Clinton is no different to any other politician.

RasTa

Is this thread full of yanks?

VinLieger

A Little Pony wrote: »

So basically tell the public what they want to hear, lie like hell to get votes and then in secret have a totally different viewpoint. Sounds utterly ridiculous but that is Hillary Clinton for you. Two faced liar.

Trump has contradicted himself and bare faced lied too many times to count.

Hillary is no saint either but when your only argument for one side is to point out flaws of the other you've lost the argument

Billy86

VinLieger wrote: »

Trump has contradicted himself and bare faced lied too many times to count.

Hillary is no saint either but when your only argument for one side is to point out flaws of the other you've lost the argument

Especially orally when those flaws are just as, often times more, applicable to the candidate you're supporting. As is and for months has been the case with the accusations of Trump fans.

PopePalpatine

VinLieger wrote: »

Trump has contradicted himself and bare faced lied too many times to count.

Case in point being his continued insistence that the Central Park Five are still guilty.

ohnonotgmail

RasTa wrote: »

Is this thread full of yanks?

I dont think there any americans posting regularly on this thread.

I presume any decent politician should have public and private views.

In fact, when they confuse the two, like Bush telling us that God told him to end the tyranny in Iraq...that was kinda nuts and telling us his private religious thoughts dictated policy...that's when you can get a whole bunch of trouble.

Dyr

I reckon his only hope is that Clinton has a stroke or something

CMOTDibbler

A Little Pony wrote: »

So basically tell the public what they want to hear, lie like hell to get votes and then in secret have a totally different viewpoint. Sounds utterly ridiculous but that is Hillary Clinton for you. Two faced liar.

I'm surprised you haven't realised this. Party politics requires party members to adopt party policy whatever their private views. If they have strong misgivings, they are entitled to raise them within the party structure. They are required not to air those misgivings in public unless specifically allowed to do so on certain topics.

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Apart from Hannity and O'Reilly, Fox News has all but abandoned him too.. in particular Megyn Kelly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHcXtbDDuRw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCVPzVhaEGQ

Its brilliant to see Fox News finally saying there is something wrong with Putin. For the last 4 years plus they have been championing him as a leader and not just Hannity, all of them, O'Reilly included. The one good thing about Trump is he has made Fox eat their own shítty words!

Pence is a right-wing Christian, lest anyone think that he's a sane choice. He's just sane by comparison to oul Donnie boy.

(BTW - Paul Ryan uninvited Trump to one of Trump's own rallies, and invited Pence instead on the weekend just gone)

everlast75

Bambi wrote: »

I reckon his only hope is that Clinton has a stroke or something

She can't - she's been dead for the last 2 months. Haven't you heard? Its a body double!

20Cent

Russians are already playing trump. The govt put out a fake email story about HRC, wikileaks and Benghazi.
Hours later trump is reading it out to the crowd at a rally. Full story here. Imagine a democratic politician fell for that!

http://europe.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635?rm=eu

Butters1979

CdeC wrote: »

Ok I get you.
So do you think we would be better that Trump get elected. Let America get it out of their system and then we can all move on in 2020.
Interesting proposal.!!

Maybe, like a gap year. But i think America is going to get worse before it gets better.

jobbridge4life

I worry about the changing tone of media coverage. From 'its a dead heat' to 'trump is doomed'... could inspire complacency and reduce Democratic (or just anti-trump) incentive to actually get out and vote? Allowing him to sneak a victory.

CdeC

A Little Pony wrote: »

[font=arial, sans-serif] need both a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]public[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] and a [/font][font=arial, sans-serif]private[/font][font=arial, sans-serif] position .[/font]

[font=arial, sans-serif]Basically she is a liar.[/font]

I disagree,

Privately you could be liberal on Drugs but publically you could be against the decriminalisation because of the harm it might do working class communities.
Not a liar just trying to separate your personal beliefs as what might be best for the greater population

jobbridge4life

CdeC wrote: »

I disagree,

Privately you could be liberal on Drugs but publically you could be against the decriminalisation because of the harm it might do working class communities.
Not a liar just trying to separate your personal beliefs as what might be best for the greater population

Isn't that the definition of a hypocrite?

jooksavage

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Case in point being his continued insistence that the Central Park Five are still guilty.

I only watched Ken Burns' excellent documentary about the CP5 last week. Vexing stuff. Trump is surrounded by such a dense cloud of lies that it's actually hard to isolate particular ones - there's definitely an element of "where do you start?" His ongoing persection of the central park five is particularly heinous and goes to show that, like the worst kind of authoritarian, he has no regard for the rule of law. McCain actually cited them in the statement withdrawing his support from Trump. Pity it took so f***ing long.

Winterlong

Loved Obama's comment that the 'Bus tape' would disqualify you from a job in a grocery store, never mind President.

ohnonotgmail

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Isn't that the definition of a hypocrite?

you must have a different dictionary to the rest of us

Feline Grabber

Trump is telling his supporters to vote on the 28th.

I'm sure the (((mms))) will say otherwise in an attempt to rig the election for $hillary killton


Mod-Banned