2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

constitutionus

Sofa Spud wrote: »

How so? Last two polls I've seen have her increasing her margin from 2 - 5%....

its on CNN just now.

their polling has them down to within 4 points from 6 and both clintons and barak are legging it there now stump up support.

Omy

constitutionus wrote: »

looking like ILLarys lost michigan.

How so? Would love to see the evidence.

Sofa Spud

constitutionus wrote: »

its on CNN just now.

their polling has them down to within 4 points from 6 and both clintons and barak are legging it there now stump up support.

Hardly means she's lost it and it's fairly standard practice to visit the bigger states to shore up support in the final run...

B_Wayne

constitutionus wrote: »

its on CNN just now.

their polling has them down to within 4 points from 6 and both clintons and barak are legging it there now stump up support.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/michigan/
He presently has a 25% chance of winning Michigan.

Omy

constitutionus wrote: »

its on CNN just now.

their polling has them down to within 4 points from 6 and both clintons and barak are legging it there now stump up support.

You said "looking like ILLarys lost michigan." now you saying she is still ahead by 4 points, I agree it's within the margin but your statement she has last that state is incorrect, it may be correct to say trump is gaining ground but it's incorrect to say she has lost.

Brian?

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Agree with your point re third level funding, but I fear it's a bit more than that - no offense intended to our American cousins, but there seems to be a dearth of critical thinking in their country that is compounded by simplistic, almost childish, media reporting on politics.
How often have you seen or read detailed policy discussions?
How often have you seen or read reportage that could be objectively regarded as non-partisan?
Does nuance even exist anymore in political discourse, or is everything boiled down into simplistic soundbites or twitter friendly emotive outbursts?
The road from where they are to a functioning democracy is long and improbable...

There is a dearth of critical thinking. But this is something can be taught. In fact I'm a firm believer it's one of the most important things you can teach.

Sofa Spud

Brian? wrote: »

There is a dearth of critical thinking. But this is something can be taught. In fact I'm a firm believer it's one of the most important things you can teach.

Again, Brian, I totally agree, but it takes more than teaching - it needs a culture to exist in where facts and journalistic integrity are respected.

In a time when most media is just an echo chamber, the 'quality' media is having to compete in an environment where the momentum is a race to the bottom, where celebrity and cat video's are king and facts are just opinions that can be ignored and opinions become facts, it's hard to see how critical thinking can thrive...

Edit: That seems a bit negative, just feels that critical thinking has been effectively extinguished and it's hard to see how it could be revived and supported, but I'm with ye, it can be taught.

Overheal

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He was live on sky new the other day at a rally, looked like it was in a barn and I would say the place was about 60% empty.

That's pretty much what happened up here at Pickens when he came to the ag center. He filled half the place but his supplied folks up by the flag that came in from a bus and he only accomplished to kick out one of our professors for being too brown and stinking up traffic for hours along a pretty necessary arterial highway in the area.

gosplan

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Again, Brian, I totally agree, but it takes more than teaching - it needs a culture to exist in where facts and journalistic integrity are respected.

In a time when most media is just an echo chamber, the 'quality' media is having to compete in an environment where the momentum is a race to the bottom, where celebrity and cat video's are king and facts are just opinions that can be ignored and opinions become facts, it's hard to see how critical thinking can thrive...

Edit: That seems a bit negative, just feels that critical thinking has been effectively extinguished and it's hard to see how it could be revived and supported, but I'm with ye, it can be taught.

This whole election should be used as a teaching tool.

Critical thinking, bias, fact checking, YouTube videos etc.

K-9

brickmauser wrote: »

I challenge you to fact check everything I said.
Abbedin is imbedded with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Why was Clinton on Epstein's rape plane and rape island?
Why is Podesta mixed up with the Serbian witch?
Why is Hillary associating with these freaks?
Why is she talking money while Secretary of State from rich Arabs and at the same time jihadists - trained in Jordan by US special forces or released from Gitmo - are running amok?

Work it out genius

That isn't how it works around here. The onus is on the poster to provide back up, not others to verify it for you.

K-9

badabing106 wrote: »

The Clintons connected to a massive child trafficking and pedophile sex ring operating within Washington, D.C ?


http://pastebin.com/36Q0yKSM

Mod:

Links to 4chan?

That doesn't cut it as a source around here.

There has been a noticeable drop in standards for sources lately, as a guide infowars, Alex Jones and stuff like the above do not meet those standards. We've a conspiracy theory forum on the site for stuff like that.

I know trying to enforce a basic level of quality in political discussion is old hat and boring, but there's is a plethora of sites for slurry spreading in the Internet, this board isn't one of them.

Overheal

K-9 wrote: »

Mod:

Links to 4chan?

That doesn't cut it as a source around here.

There has been a noticeable drop in standards for sources lately, as a guide infowars, Alex Jones and stuff like the above do not meet those standards. We've a conspiracy theory forum on the site for stuff like that.

I know trying to enforce a basic level of quality in political discussion is old hat and boring, but there's is a plethora of sites for slurry spreading in the Internet, this board isn't one of them.

Plus that's a cut and dry piece of garbage for internet trolls to copy and paste everywhere.

Igotadose

Trump's closing ad being slammed by the ADL and other anti-Semitic watchdogs as blatantly anti-Semitic: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-rolls-out-anti-semitic-closing-ad

Just re-using the meme he got from the Breitbart intelligentsia or his friends on the 'alt-right'

Just in time for an election that might hinge on Florida. Trump's campaign is really the gang that couldn't shoot straight.

Iceboy

I'd like to see judge Jeanine as attorney general! Absolutely telling it like it is, unfortunately there are so many blind sheep that refuse to see HRC for the corrupt, lying beast she is and the implications of her becoming president.

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

Christy42

Iceboy wrote: »

I'd like to see judge Jeanine as attorney general! Absolutely telling it like it is, unfortunately there are so many blind sheep that refuse to see HRC for the corrupt, lying beast she is and the implications of her becoming president.

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

I would like you to post evidence about your claims of John Oliver. We can't all get what we want. I am taking your ignorant of these requests as an admission that, much like anonymous and wikileaks, you have absolutely nothing except for random accusations and hope.

gosplan

Iceboy wrote: »

I'd like to see judge Jeanine as attorney general! Absolutely telling it like it is, unfortunately there are so many blind sheep that refuse to see HRC for the corrupt, lying beast she is and the implications of her becoming president.

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

Are you just doing this for a laugh?

You seem to have a very strange process of evaluating information.

Pretty much any theory about 'the lying beast' is fired out as fact but then people on the other side are 'blind sheep'.

Aside from being insulting, it's a bit disingenuous.

But in fairness I could be wrong and you could be very stringent in your analysis of everything you read.

Out of curiosity, are there any anti-Hillary rumours thrown out there in the last 3 weeks that you DON'T believe??

TheOven

Iceboy wrote: »

unfortunately there are so many blind sheep that refuse to see HRC for the corrupt, lying beast she is and the implications of her becoming president.

Many people think she lies and is corrupt. Luckily for her she is running against Trump who is hardly an honest man.

Iceboy

Christy42 wrote: »

I would like you to post evidence about your claims of John Oliver. We can't all get what we want. I am taking your ignorant of these requests as an admission that, much like anonymous and wikileaks, you have absolutely nothing except for random accusations and hope.

Two emails Tying John to the DNC

1)http://dcleaks.com/emails/cApR/html/Clinton_Foundation/00001237.EML.html

2)http://www.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/oliver-email-3.jpg

https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55619

Now can we please discuss more important matters than biased "comedian" John Oliver..

Sofa Spud

Iceboy wrote: »

Two emails Tying John to the DNC

1)http://dcleaks.com/emails/cApR/html/Clinton_Foundation/00001237.EML.html

2)http://www.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/oliver-email-3.jpg

https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55619

Now can we please discuss more important matters than biased "comedian" John Oliver..

OK, I'll bite - what exactly is it that you think those email show?

Christy42

Iceboy wrote: »

Two emails Tying John to the DNC

1)http://dcleaks.com/emails/cApR/html/Clinton_Foundation/00001237.EML.html

2)http://www.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/oliver-email-3.jpg

https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55619

Now can we please discuss more important matters than biased "comedian" John Oliver..

One of those ends with "coincidence you be the judge". Not even they are claiming they have solid evidence for this. It shows that certainly the DNC contacted him but nothing further about a reply from him.

You posted up this claim and it took at least 3 posts from me and more from others to get this far so no we can't move on. You keep posting up claims with tenuous links and claims without any back up and are being rightly called on it. Shockingly when you keep switching topics as soon as you get called on something it gets taken as a hint that the rest of your posts are also full of ****.

gosplan

Iceboy wrote: »

Two emails Tying John to the DNC

1)http://dcleaks.com/emails/cApR/html/Clinton_Foundation/00001237.EML.html

2)http://www.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/oliver-email-3.jpg

https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55619

Now can we please discuss more important matters than biased "comedian" John Oliver..

Hmmm so Oliver's name is in a mail along with prominent conservative commentators.

But Oliver's in league with HRC.

Doesn't the same logic apply to everyone on that list now?

Iceboy

Sofa Spud wrote: »

OK, I'll bite - what exactly is it that you think those email show?

*Facepalm*

John Oliver has attacked every single presidential candidate visiciously on his show besides ever mentioniong a certain Hilary Clinton, he has devoted hours to attacking Trump and even had segments slating Green Party candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Gary Johnson, but absolutely nothing on Hilary and her email scandal..zero,nada zilch.

Does it really take a genius to put together the very obvious bias/collusion John Oliver has with the DNC.

Anyway, I refuse to talk about John Oliver anymore with just a few days to go until the election, their are far more important issues that can be discussed here like what is going on with the latest wikileaks and FBI investigation

Sofa Spud

Iceboy wrote: »

*Facepalm*

John Oliver has attacked every single presidential candidate visiciously on his show besides ever mentioniong a certain Hilary Clinton, he has devoted hours to attacking Trump and even had segments slating Green Party candidate Jill Stein and Libertarian Gary Johnson, but absolutely nothing on Hilary and her email scandal..zero,nada zilch.

Does it really take a genius to put together the very obvious bias/collusion John Oliver has with the DNC.

Anyway, I refuse to talk about John Oliver anymore with just a few days to go until the election, their are far more important issues that can be discussed here like what is going on with the latest wikileaks and FBI dumps

Not sure what to respond with - you were eager to talk about John Oliver up to a few mins ago, and now there are more important issues to discuss?
Does not really add a lot of credibility to whatever point it was you were trying to make.

cnocbui

Iceboy wrote: »

I'd like to see judge Jeanine as attorney general! Absolutely telling it like it is, unfortunately there are so many blind sheep that refuse to see HRC for the corrupt, lying beast she is and the implications of her becoming president.

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

I'd like to see you respond to my critique of one of your earlier fly-bye garbage dumps before coming back for another try.

Iceboy

All of Hillary's supporters need to do honestly is just look back at what Michelle and Barack Obama were saying about Hillary in 2008. Hillary hasn't changed and Trump is basically saying what Obama has been saying in 2008 only they've switched to campaigning for her and now Obama has the nerve to say "Shes the most qualified person to run for president in HISTORY!!"

Politics at it's finest, These people lie and say anything to get what they want.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGqD8-a-REQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mESHzW0arRo

conditioned games

I previously wondered why John Oliver was so pro Hillary, with his connections to the Democratic party it looks like he is another paid troll

gosplan

Iceboy wrote: »

All of Hillary's supporters need to do honestly is just look back at what Michelle and Barack Obama were saying about Hillary in 2008. Hillary hasn't changed and Trump is basically saying what Obama has been saying in 2008 only they've switched to campaigning for her and now Obama has the nerve to say "Shes the most qualified person to run for president in HISTORY!!"

Politics at it's finest, These people lie and say anything to get what they want.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGqD8-a-REQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mESHzW0arRo

OK I get it. You have an intolerance for lies.

But what about Trump's investigators in Hawaii and the times Trump spoke about what a great woman Hillary was?

Calina

I really think the US is screwed when I look at the level of debate of Trump supporters.

Iceboy

Calina wrote: »

I really think the US is screwed when I look at the level of debate of Trump supporters.

I really think the US is screwed if they elect a person who is currently under FBI investigation...for a second time

Calina

Iceboy wrote: »

I really think the US is screwed if they elect a person who is currently under FBI investigation...for a second time

Come back to me when Trump is not the subject of a fraud case. That's 28 November. It's a bit more immediate and concrete than a wishy washy pile of froth which is what the FBI current investigation is.

Inquitus

Calina wrote: »

I really think the US is screwed when I look at the level of debate of Trump supporters.

The US is completely screwed, it needs some Bernie to sort it out, social welfare, good free, or close to free, education for all, Jobs that pay a living wage. At the moment well over half the country is just being left behind, blue collar jobs that pay well don't exist any more, more and more people falling into the poverty bucket, it's a terrible place altogether imho, I have spent about 5 months there the past 18 months with work, visiting various places from the deep south to up near the Canadian border, and outside of the big cities on either coast, huge chunks of it are just a disaster.

Iceboy

People are afraid of what Trump might do when he is president rather than be worried what Hillary has already done as SoS. I don't understand people's logic.

Nody

Iceboy wrote: »

People are afraid of what Trump might do when he is president rather than be worried what Hillary has already done as SoS. I don't understand people's logic.

How about you enjoy Thunderfoot's summary then of the candidates; that should give you plenty of examples:

It includes the actual interviews with Trump stating how great Hillary is, how unfair the attacks on her has been, how great she has been as a politician and how much she has achieved, how he was going to handpick the teachers for Trump University, Trump admitting to watching underage girls, the number of failed business he's run, the number of failed lawsuits he's run where he'd not step settle (and then settled anyway), the number of failed lawsuits where he got ruled against, him admitting to bribing politicians, how his VP believes in creationism, how he believes in autism from vaccines which has zero actual medical studies backing it up and that's only some of the issues and plenty more in the video. All with Trump actually stating the information and facts rather than some made up conspiracy source this is from Trump's own mouth...

How about that for a starters?

Hank Scorpio

In fairness to Hillary, she did say she deleted emails about her daughters wedding.



http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/emails-foundation-resources-used-for-chelsea-clintons-wedding/article/2606615

TheOven

Iceboy wrote: »

People are afraid of what Trump might do when he is president rather than be worried what Hillary has already done as SoS. I don't understand people's logic.

Of course people are more afraid of what someone plans on doing rather than what they have already done. No wonder you don't understand people's logic when you come out with stuff like that and infowars. You need to understand the concept of logic first.

Overheal

Iceboy wrote: »

People are afraid of what Trump might do when he is president rather than be worried what Hillary has already done as SoS. I don't understand people's logic.

What did she do that was so reprehensible

aloyisious

The polls are so different in their estimates.....

The link below has a range of poll results from newspapers etc and there are stark differences between them on Hillary V Don in Michigan. The LA Times has D @ 48 to H @ 43 in the general election. There are differences state to state, Ohio and Florida has H just BEHIND D in the CBS/YouGov polls while the Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch has H 1 point ahead of D.


https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiQntGz8ZTQAhXnL8AKHSNECZQQFggqMAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.realclearpolitics.com%2Fepolls%2Flatest_polls%2F&usg=AFQjCNGhpWDXMkKAZJIW1PLkKgTbkXgmcg

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

What did she do that was so reprehensible

Benghazi cover up is one example.

KP = attack survivor Kris Paronto

"RT: Obviously, you think people have lied, mistakes were made. What’s important for the public to find out?"

"KP: First of all, listen to the guys that are on the ground. Listen to the team that was there. Listen to the guys that sacrificed their lives. Listen to the guys that bled there. Listen to the family members who on multiple occasions said that Hillary did lie to them and that she went on TV and called them liars. I think that’s a travesty. I think you’ve got a very bad person, and it’s my opinion, that’s running for president that’s got the democratic nomination. I think she is trying to cover this up because it could have a very negative and it still is having a very negative effect on her becoming the president of the US, which I’m against. I would say that with honesty, I’m against her becoming the president of the US. Failures were made and there is no reason to think that those failures or some more failures won’t be made if she becomes president of the US and people’s lives will be lost again they are going to get covered up."

Source: https://www.rt.com/op-edge/346092-hillary-clinton-benghazi-attack/

Nody

Also it just struck me that Trump would be a great boon for UK if elected; finally there will be a bigger baboon spouting more **** than Boris out there to write about so UK will once again be able to feel like USA light with each having **** talkers making fools of themselves consistently in international press so they can get "their special relationship" back on track.

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Benghazi cover up is one example.

KP = attack survivor Kris Paronto

"RT: Obviously, you think people have lied, mistakes were made. What’s important for the public to find out?"

"KP: First of all, listen to the guys that are on the ground. Listen to the team that was there. Listen to the guys that sacrificed their lives. Listen to the guys that bled there. Listen to the family members who on multiple occasions said that Hillary did lie to them and that she went on TV and called them liars. I think that’s a travesty. I think you’ve got a very bad person, and it’s my opinion, that’s running for president that’s got the democratic nomination. I think she is trying to cover this up because it could have a very negative and it still is having a very negative effect on her becoming the president of the US, which I’m against. I would say that with honesty, I’m against her becoming the president of the US. Failures were made and there is no reason to think that those failures or some more failures won’t be made if she becomes president of the US and people’s lives will be lost again they are going to get covered up."

Source: https://www.rt.com/op-edge/346092-hillary-clinton-benghazi-attack/

She's told some porkies. So have a lot of politicians. So has Donald Trump - loads of them. But as Secretary of State say, was she worse than Rumsfeld who got us into a war o false pretenses that has cost the taxpayer trillions and bred a whole new generation of terrorist? I don't think so.

If the metric you're arguing here is she's an unqualified liar, then frankly nobody in contention is fit to be president.

cnocbui

Iceboy wrote: »

I really think the US is screwed if they elect a person who is currently under FBI investigation...for a second time

Because people are guilty until proven innocent. You just made the case for the previous posters argument.

It's more a case of of Hillary being drive-by-innuendoed by a registered Republican who is head of the FBI. I will be slightly surprised if he himself isn't investigated for illegal behaviour in breaching the Hatch act.

Since she was exonerated by the first FBI effort, that is proof of no wrongdoing, so referring to it as if it means the opposite is just mischievous.

Hank Scorpio

Overheal wrote: »

She's told some porkies. So have a lot of politicians. So has Donald Trump - loads of them. But as Secretary of State say, was she worse than Rumsfeld who got us into a war o false pretenses that has cost the taxpayer trillions and bred a whole new generation of terrorist? I don't think so.

If the metric you're arguing here is she's an unqualified liar, then frankly nobody in contention is fit to be president.

I believe lying to victims families then going on television and calling them liars is more than just "porkies".

aloyisious

I don't trust J and Wikileaks as they are as capable of messing around and being creative with what they have allegedly found in respect of HRC, as much as others are when it comes to Don. Anyone who accepts what J and Wikileaks publish as HRC's emails being as original as the day they were sent is allowing J and Wikileaks to pull the wool over their eyes. It's well worth being sceptical about Wikileaks info.

We all know neither HRC nor Don are clean. However J and wikileaks have made it obvious they have an agenda, to use a worn-out phrase. They are out for HRC's blood. If they were interested in ensuring the election had the best and the brightest, they would have gone after Don as well and ensured way in advance that neither would have even got as far as the nominations, let alone being the two prime candidates.

Hank Scorpio

More "porkies" from Clinton.

Nody

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I believe lying to victims families then going on television and calling them liars is more than just "porkies".

And what do you call Colins presentation (on behalf of Bush) to the UN of the proof of VMDs in Iraq? Or a draft dodger belittling American prisoners of war for being shot down?

Hank Scorpio

Nody wrote: »

And what do you call Colins presentation (on behalf of Bush) to the UN of the proof of VMDs in Iraq? Or a draft dodger belittling American prisoners of war for being shot down?

Does that make it right or acceptable? Bush administration, in my view, was a disaster.

Overheal

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I believe lying to victims families then going on television and calling them liars is more than just "porkies".

I think going on television and - well, anything Donald trump says, more than just porkies. Recent example makes the blood boil a tinge.

What actually happened

In terms of lies I don't see how hers are any worse than her opponents to be fair. People make it out like her lies will start WW3

Nody

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Does that make it right or acceptable? Bush administration, in my view, was a disaster.

The point being that claiming that this is somehow unique to Hillary is hilarious; every single politician inc. Hillary, Trump etc. does it. So why is it suddenly a huge issue if Hillary does it but Trump should get a pass on it? Either it's an issue which would disqualify both candidates or it's not; don't claim it for one side only.

Hank Scorpio

How can you even compare lying to victims families, going on national TV and calling them liars and lying in a federal investigation to Trump saying Obama was shouting at a protester at a rally. If anything that clip shows the lack of respect Obama's own followers have for him.

Nody

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

How can you even compare lying to victims families, and lying in a federal investigation to Trump saying Obama was shouting at a protester at a rally. If anything that clip shows the lack of respect Obama's own followers have for him.

You want to talk disrespect for victims? How about we talk about Trump and the Khan family then? Or his draft dodging? Or "only weak people get mental health issues from war"? Seriously; you're giving me an open goal here if that's the best complaint you can do.