2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Count Dooku

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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."

RobertKK

Maybe Trump sees a disaster coming to America in the coming years and is trying to lose this election.
I do think maybe the real winner of this election will be the loser, as I think the winning party will have to face some very large crisis.
The national debt is out of control in how it is rising.
The world seems to becoming more and more unstable.
We live in a world where the Philippine leader Duterte has spoken of killing 3 million people involved in drugs whether supplying or using.
North Korea is progressing faster than expected with their nuclear problem, and Kim Jong Un is said to be less restrained than his father - he also kills family members, so dealing with someone like that will be impossible.
The stock market is bloated.

I think this election is like our general election of 2007, FF and the Green have a coalition and then both parties paid a heavy price.
So a Trump win could lead to the decimation of the Republicans and a Hillary win because she is equally not fit will destroy the Democrats.

There is a part of me that wants Clinton to win though I dislike her the most, because she will be there and all her supporters will have to explain why as Obama calls her 'the most qualified ever' continues her record of disaster.
To me she is proven incompetence in politics, while Trump has no experience.

Given the state of the world, I think whoever wins will have a poisoned chalice.

Overheal

Calina wrote: »

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.

I think there's a disconnect between the jobs and the people. May just be a matter of connecting the two in some cases

Black Swan

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe Trump sees a disaster coming to America in the coming years and is trying to lose this election.

Methinks that Trump is just being Trump. He is generally acting now just like he did during the Republican primaries.

RobertKK wrote: »

The national debt is out of control in how it is rising.

The federal deficit doubled for the first time during Ronald Reagan's Cold War arms race with USSR, and has been rapidly rising almost every administration since, regardless of which party controlled the presidency or Congress (Congress being the institution that actually legislates federal debt).

RobertKK wrote: »

The world seems to becoming more and more unstable.

Historically speaking I doubt that it's any more unstable than before, especially if we are comparing war with peace. According to Durant and Durant in The Lessons of History, "History and War" chapter (p.81):

"War is one of the constants of history, and has not diminished with civilization or democracy. In the last 3,421 years of recorded history only 268 have seen no war."

It really does not matter if we are addressing conventional war, nuclear war, or nonconventional war (e.g., terrorism, etc.). Peace has been abnormal and war normal in human history, so today's threats of war or active nonconventional wars are normal, as they were in the historical past.

RobertKK wrote: »

So a Trump win could lead to the decimation of the Republicans and a Hillary win because she is equally not fit will destroy the Democrats.

Methinks the 2016 presidential election is a choice between bureaucrat Clinton and con-artist Trump, neither good choices. And, once again, to say that one is better than the other, or the lesser of evils, requires a leap-of-faith, and not one based upon reason.

Count Dooku

Black Swan wrote: »

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."

I don't think that weight of former Miss U will change as much as the recent Hillary statement about #BasementDwellers. Their addition to #BasketOfDeplorables will be uncomfortable surprise for DNC, especially taking into account how active they are and how they demonstrated it for Bernie nomination
https://twitter.com/princess2684720/status/782074092769808386
https://twitter.com/SilERabbit/status/782123921306816512

Calina

Overheal wrote: »

I think there's a disconnect between the jobs and the people. May just be a matter of connecting the two in some cases

I think this is starting to happen in the tech world - mostly because Silicon Valley is pricing itself out of the market for people to live there. But I don't live in the US so I don't know how much hassle - in practical terms - relocating people is. The extent to which it is facilitated depends on foodchain level.

Another point though will be strategic direction for the future. Here in Ireland we focused directly on technology as an option for the future but I don't see the next wave of industry identifying itself easily except maybe some of the energy source substitution stuff. So I guess I'm suggesting it's not clear that the US can direct effort here in such a way as it supports job creation, and it nay not be desired because the US has a comparatively low unemployment rate, and above all else, the US has half a population who believes the government should stay out of stuff like this (except military related stuff). It's worth reading btl on US sites on pieces about Elon Musk because he gets a lot of vitriol for benefiting from government contracts (Peter Thiel does not seem to get the same vitriol despite Palantir).

So, it goes back again, to my view that the people who are voting for Trump are voting for an ideology - broadly - which does not support job or industry support. Despite the idea that a vote for change in favour of him is driven by people who have not been economically winning since the 1970s or so and they are not going to be winning under him either.

Overheal

Count Dooku wrote: »

I don't think that weight of former Miss U will change as much as the recent Hillary statement about #BasementDwellers. Their addition to #BasketOfDeplorables will be uncomfortable surprise for DNC, especially taking into account how active they are and how they demonstrated it for Bernie nomination
https://twitter.com/princess2684720/status/782074092769808386
https://twitter.com/SilERabbit/status/782123921306816512

Anyone listening to the actual audio though will find that it wasn't a "basket of deplorables" "47%" remark towards millennials. Just actually speaking the truth about the large number of millennials that due to economic factors haven't moved out of family dwelling. This is something her camp will double down on, to her advantage.

InTheTrees

Count Dooku wrote: »

I don't think that weight of former Miss U will change as much as the recent Hillary statement about #BasementDwellers.

Um, riiiight. Because insulting latina women about their weight is so much less offensive than saying "basement dwellers"?

Suryavarman

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe Trump sees a disaster coming to America in the coming years and is trying to lose this election.

Yeah. That's what he's doing. It's nothing to do with him being an incompetent, petulant manchild.

Manach

Black Swan wrote: »

Historically speaking I doubt that it's any more unstable than before, especially if we are comparing war with peace. According to Durant and Durant in The Lessons of History, "History and War" chapter (p.81):

"War is one of the constants of history, and has not diminished with civilization or democracy. In the last 3,421 years of recorded history only 268 have seen no war."

It really does not matter if we are addressing conventional war, nuclear war, or nonconventional war (e.g., terrorism, etc.). Peace has been abnormal and war normal in human history, so today's threats of war or active nonconventional wars are normal, as they were in the historical past.

I would disagree.

Unfortunately war is entering a new phase. The US has stepped back from a leadership position, leading from behind did not really work. Instead, as per the works of Hew Strachen and William Lind, we are in the era of the forth generation war - that instead of nation states, war has developed into one that many non-state actors are now embracing - ie a return to a pre-Westphalian world. Thus after recent administrations missteps from both parties, the cracks are turning into fractures where low intensity warfare risks undermining the international system. One that establishment Clinton seeks to paper over the racks, to uphold for her own material benefit while Trump is clueless about.

Thus neither candidate is capable of steering a path in this multipolar world.

BorneTobyWilde

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.

Hardly the same. Appeared in a film in one location, a cameo. Then film is shot else where.
CNN last night kept saying that no tape exists of Machado, that it's all fiction on Trumps part. That they have no knowledge of tape.
If you google '' machado miss venezuela 20 sec '' then first link is to a vid that looks like her and is labelled as her.
Why is that so impossible for CNN to find.

Black Swan

The first presidential debate occurred across the pond late Monday 26 September 2016. There were several flash polls, but those may have had sampling problems, etc., to get them out-the-door and reported quickly. The national and state-specific polls that may be of interest would be those that began 27 September and after, not before. Of course without adequate controls, there may be other things affecting the polls beginning 27 September, so caution should be used when reviewing them. It should also be noted that national and state polls are conceptually and methodologically different than state ECs that ultimately decide the US presidency with 270 or above, so attempting project ECs based upon state polls may be problematic (e.g., the apples and oranges metaphor comes to mind; both fruit, but different).

InTheTrees

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe Trump sees a disaster coming to America in the coming years and is trying to lose this election.

Thats really what you want in a leader isnt it?

He see's trouble ahead and instead of doing what he can to help his country he's running away?

InTheTrees

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

CNN last night kept saying that no tape exists of Machado, that it's all fiction on Trumps part. That they have no knowledge of tape.
If you google '' machado miss venezuela 20 sec '' then first link is to a vid that looks like her and is labelled as her.

Sex tape? Whatever. It was taken from some spanish language big brother. You cant see anything so they could easily be faking. Its certainly not porn.

The fact is that she's a very popular american soap opera star.

And trump really needs the hispanic vote. And he also really needs womens votes.

So insulting a latina celebrity about her weight. And then prattling on about it for almost a week and not letting up, is basically hammering the last nail in the coffin of trumps Hispanic support for November.

"Miss Housekeeping"? That really resonates with Hispanic voters too.

Overheal

InTheTrees wrote: »

Um, riiiight. Because insulting latina women about their weight is so much less offensive than saying "basement dwellers"?

also, she never used that phrase as far as i've heard.

Count Dooku

InTheTrees wrote: »

Um, riiiight. Because insulting latina women about their weight is so much less offensive than saying "basement dwellers"?

#basementdwellers are trending so well that it might replace some votes from overweight latina women, who were not going to vote for Trump anyway


IMHO the Clinton campaign should just air this insulting

KingBrian2

InTheTrees wrote: »

Thats really what you want in a leader isnt it?

He see's trouble ahead and instead of doing what he can to help his country he's running away?

He has invested heavily in the election. Hardly call that running away by comparison Clinton has received unknown amounts of foreign donations. Once in office she will have to deliver and be supportive of those financers to her campaign.

BorneTobyWilde

InTheTrees wrote: »

Sex tape? Whatever. It was taken from some spanish language big brother. You cant see anything so they could easily be faking. Its certainly not porn.

The fact is that she's a very popular american soap opera star.

And trump really needs the hispanic vote. And he also really needs womens votes.

So insulting a latina celebrity about her weight. And then prattling on about it for almost a week and not letting up, is basically hammering the last nail in the coffin of trumps Hispanic support for November.

"Miss Housekeeping"? That really resonates with Hispanic voters too.

If that is her then that's not big brother, it's full blown hardcore porn.
Looks like her. Labelled as her, ''Machado miss venezuela''

Overheal

Count Dooku wrote: »

#basementdwellers are trending so well that it might replace some votes from overweight latina women, who were not going to vote for Trump anyway

About that,

https://twitter.com/peterdaou/status/782262312489127938
https://twitter.com/_lifestyled/status/782155640487677952

Most of the tweets trending seem to be from @TeamTrump and other users whom a large portion of which can unsurprisingly be seen wearing MAGA hats.

Forgive me and others though if it rings hollow: social media has been rife the last year or two with RWNJs who are eager to shout "get out of the basement" etc. remarks to those that disagree with them. These same people are now suddenly saying, "Wow, I can't believe she said that about y'all, can you?" :rolleyes:

One of the places Trump supporters are well motivated besides a subreddit, is Twitter, where the realm of 140 characters or less suits their conversational level, adhering incredibly suitably to Brandolini's law: the amount of energy needed to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.

InTheTrees

Count Dooku wrote: »

#basementdwellers are trending so well that it might replace some votes from overweight latina women, who were not going to vote for Trump anyway

Florida is a swing state. The hispanic vote is very important in Florida.

Save

PopePalpatine

InTheTrees wrote: »

Um, riiiight. Because insulting latina women about their weight is so much less offensive than saying "basement dwellers"?

It is when you're a Trump diehard.

Overheal

InTheTrees wrote: »

Florida is a swing state. The hispanic vote is very important in Florida.

Save

And the jewish electorate.Clinton holds a ~40pt lead over Trump with the jewish community in FL

InTheTrees

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He has invested heavily in the election. Hardly call that running away.

You said he sees disaster coming so he doesnt want to be president.

SO he's a quitter.

Overheal

How is he invested in it? His campaign owes HIM money. He's turned his whole campaign into a profiteering racket.

gosplan

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He has invested heavily in the election. Hardly call that running away by comparison Clinton has received unknown amounts of foreign donations. Once in office she will have to deliver and be supportive of those financers to her campaign.

What???

You've received unknown amounts of foreign donations, so have I, so has trump.

What kind of a stupid charge is that??

Overheal

Clinton has received unknown amounts of foreign donations. Once in office she will have to deliver and be supportive of those financers to her campaign.

Interesting, because Trump has a metric ton of debt, including hundreds of millions to the Bank of China, and Goldman Sachs, and hundreds of other investors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/donald-trump-debt.html
http://fortune.com/2016/03/23/donald-trump-debt/

And several hunred million more to German lenders

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/30/trumps-unthinkable-conflict-millions-in-debts-to-german-bank-now-facing-federal-fines/

Including owing favors to a Saudi Prince who twice previously bailed him out of debts: http://addictinginfo.org/2016/06/15/saudi-prince-reminds-donald-trump-i-bailed-you-out-twice/

Was your point supposed to be he wouldn't have any conflict of interest in office??

InTheTrees

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

If that is her then that's not big brother, it's full blown hardcore porn.

Now i'm confused. What are you talking about?
I've seen a night vison clip of about about 30 seconds with two people apparently humping under the covers.
There's no nudity.
Its not porn in any way.

bajer101

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

If that is her then that's not big brother, it's full blown hardcore porn.
Looks like her. Labelled as her, ''Machado miss venezuela''

It's not her. That is Angel Dark. Some porn sites are just exploiting the fact that there is supposed to be a sex tape of her and are mislabeling videos with pornstars that look like her. The only "sex tape" is a grainy video from a reality TV show of her under the covers with some guy. Donald Trump however, did appear in a soft porn Playboy video which I would consider more of a sex tape.

Overheal

You'd get similar results if you looked for [insert celebrity name] or something on a porn site. Even for those who have never done anything.

marienbad

So we are back to where sex is worse than stiffing suppliers ,serial bankruptcy, racism etc .

This is the mindset that never understood that most people didn't give fcuk about Bill Clinton's sex life .

PopePalpatine

Overheal wrote: »

Interesting, because Trump has a metric ton of debt, including hundreds of millions to the Bank of China, and Goldman Sachs, and hundreds of other investors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/donald-trump-debt.html
http://fortune.com/2016/03/23/donald-trump-debt/

And several hunred million more to German lenders

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/30/trumps-unthinkable-conflict-millions-in-debts-to-german-bank-now-facing-federal-fines/

Including owing favors to a Saudi Prince who twice previously bailed him out of debts: http://addictinginfo.org/2016/06/15/saudi-prince-reminds-donald-trump-i-bailed-you-out-twice/

Was your point supposed to be he wouldn't have any conflict of interest in office??

The man's a monsoon of ethical compromise.

Speaking of ethical compromises, Eric Trump's charity spent $880k at his dad's resorts.