2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

oik

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The actual reason Trump doesn't give details on his policies is that he doesn't know what they are and doesn't care. He has campaign flunkies to copy Mitt Romney's policies and stick them on the website.

But if he does try your clever plan, he will find that the Clinton campaign read his website and that of the Republican party and Hillary has critiques ready in case Donald learns a few soundbites.

But really, that isn't his style.

And what will those critiques be?

Itssoeasy

oik wrote: »

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Oik a genuine question. Why exactly do you seem to be so behind Donald trump ?

Because I actually want him to win.

Thanks. I'm just wanted to know.

Zubeneschamali

oik wrote: »

And what will those critiques be?

Who cares?

Not Trump.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

Because I actually want him to win.

Grand but there's no need to suspend rationality just because you want him to win.

'I want him to win despite his faults because I have a deep mistrust of Hillary Clinton and I think she will do no good for the country.'

That's fine

'That's just locker room talk. Loads of guys say they grab women by the pussies'

THAT'S NOT FINE!!!

Read Marco Rubio's recent comments for how to do it.

Anyone saying Trump is right about everything is just showing themselves up to be an idiot.

You may as well be telling us who your favourite wrestling star is.

oik

gosplan wrote: »

Grand but there's no need to suspend rationality just because you want him to win.

'I want him to win despite his faults because I have a deep mistrust of Hillary Clinton and I think she will do no good for the country.'

That's fine

'That's just locker room talk. Loads of guys say they grab women by the pussies'

THAT'S NOT FINE!!!

Read Marco Rubio's recent comments for how to do it.

Anyone saying Trump is right about everything is just showing themselves up to be an idiot.

I don't give a bollocks what he says as a joke in private.

If it was Hillary who was caught in private saying something inappropriate I wouldn't be personally offended or outraged either, but I would sincerely hope it would damage her campaign, because like I sad I want him to win.

It takes a lot to offend me, I'm not sure there's anything either of them could say which would make me legitimately upset or angry.

This isn't me suspending rationality. This is me being perfectly rational. There's nothing rational about outrage.

oik

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Who cares?

Not Trump.

She won't engage Trump on policy because if she even does that she lends him legitimacy she doesn't want him to have.

ebbsy

The Don is right to be angry with Ryan. He should have called to congratulate him after he ripped Hillary a new one in the second debate.

Has anyone noticed how far up Clinton ass the Irish press are ? It's embarrassing that they can't think for themselves.

George Hook is the exception.

Overheal

Conservative strategy piece suggests the GOP should torpedo Trump to save itself; that the two worst case scenarios for the long term survival of the party are 1) Hillary wins by a narrow margin or 2) Trump winning in anything other than a landslide (which won't happen at this stage)

https://www.facebook.com/mediaite/posts/10150770412944963

oik

ebbsy wrote: »

George Hook is the exception.

He loves his Trumpy

oik

Overheal wrote: »

Conservative strategy piece suggests the GOP should torpedo Trump to save itself; that the two worst case scenarios for the long term survival of the party are 1) Hillary wins by a narrow margin or 2) Trump winning in anything other than a landslide (which won't happen at this stage)

https://www.facebook.com/mediaite/posts/10150770412944963

Conservatives are idiots.

How many of Hillary's immigrants are going to vote Republican?

Try selling conservatism to a population that's almost 40% black/hispanic/other.

If anyone but Trump wins conservatism is over thanks purely to demographic changes and that includes Rubio, Bush, Cruz, et al. because they're all pro-amnesty.

If he thinks that after 4 years of Clinton, conservatism has a hope of making a comeback I've a bridge to sell him.

If she wins and grants amnesty there are two possibilities.

1. Republicans drop conservatism forever.
2. They never win the presidency.


One way or another there will be a major political realignment after this election.

LostinKildare

oik wrote: »

The phrase "FOB" which stands for "Friends of Bill" has now entered the American political lexicon.

Very catchy.

You're 24 years behind the times. "FOB" entered the American political lexicon when Bill was running for president in 1992.

Calina

oik wrote: »

His strategy has been brilliant. The execution has been off at times with the Khans and some other comments. You can't strategise against old videos getting leaked. But his strategy has been superb.

Eh, no it hasn't. A key performance metric for "brilliant strategy" would be "leading in the polls" and "not being rejected by your own party senior members".

Currently he's failed on both those. Nor is it Hillary Clinton's fault that he has failed on both those. The Democrats came up with the candidate that a Republican was most likely to be able to win against. They did the near equivalent of leaving an open goal given how utterly unpopular Clinton can be.

Trump has been kicking the balls into his own goal.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

I don't give a bollocks what he says as a joke in private.

If it was Hillary who was caught in private saying something inappropriate I wouldn't be personally offended or outraged either, but I would sincerely hope it would damage her campaign, because like I sad I want him to win.

It takes a lot to offend me, I'm not sure there's anything either of them could say which would make me legitimately upset or angry.

This isn't me suspending rationality. This is me being perfectly rational. There's nothing rational about outrage.

Jesus. You don't see what it's a bit bigger than your opinion.

Justifying sexual assault as 'casual guy stuff' is not OK.

I'm not outraged. I just think it's a very bad thing for society.

It's not a PC issue, it's an assaulting women issue.

oik

LostinKildare wrote: »

You're 24 years behind the times. "FOB" entered the American political lexicon when Bill was running for president in 1992.

Never heard it before this election, just seeing in the MSM for the first time.

RobertKK

TheDoctor wrote: »

What were the toss ups?

Sorry I was away...


Ohio, Arizona and after that I forget.

oik

gosplan wrote: »

Jesus. You don't see what it's a bit bigger than your opinion.

Justifying sexual assault as 'casual guy stuff' is not OK.

I'm not outraged. I just think it's a very bad thing for society.

It's not a PC issue, it's an assaulting women issue.

There was no sexual assault on that video. Just men talking.

InTheTrees

gosplan wrote: »

Jesus. You don't see what it's a bit bigger than your opinion.
Justifying sexual assault as 'casual guy stuff' is not OK.
I'm not outraged. I just think it's a very bad thing for society.
It's not a PC issue, it's an assaulting women issue.

As Obama said, Trumps comments on the tape would disqualify him for a job at 7/11...let alone the presidency.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

There was no sexual assault on that video. Just men talking.

About the times they've sexually assaulted people.

Billy86

ebbsy wrote: »

The Don is right to be angry with Ryan. He should have called to congratulate him after he ripped Hillary a new one in the second debate.

Has anyone noticed how far up Clinton ass the Irish press are ? It's embarrassing that they can't think for themselves.

George Hook is the exception.

You see, the thing is

1. Ryan dropped Trump before the election.
2. Trump didn't 'rip Hillary a new one' in the election, he came over just as poorly and probably even worse than her.

That's the problem, and no matter how much you try and blindly claim otherwise it doesn't change that fact.

oik

Calina wrote: »

Eh, no it hasn't. A key performance metric for "brilliant strategy" would be "leading in the polls" and "not being rejected by your own party senior members".

Currently he's failed on both those. Nor is it Hillary Clinton's fault that he has failed on both those. The Democrats came up with the candidate that a Republican was most likely to be able to win against. They did the near equivalent of leaving an open goal given how utterly unpopular Clinton can be.

Trump has been kicking the balls into his own goal.

He's not leading in the polls because of gaffes he made, nothing to do with his strategy which was working well. Gaffes by their nature are not part of the strategy.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

He's not leading in the polls because of gaffes he made, nothing to do with his strategy which was working well. Gaffes by their nature are not part of the strategy.

Let trump be trump.

oik

gosplan wrote: »

About the times they've sexually assaulted people.

He's clearly not being serious.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

He's clearly not being serious.

So it's down to opinion again.

You know he's been accused of that, right?

But let me get this right.

Sexual assault - wrong

Bragging about sexual assault - no problem

KingBrian2

gosplan wrote: »

Jesus. You don't see what it's a bit bigger than your opinion.

Justifying sexual assault as 'casual guy stuff' is not OK.

I'm not outraged. I just think it's a very bad thing for society.

It's not a PC issue, it's an assaulting women issue.

He did not actually assault anyone so you can exaggerate as much as you like you are sounding like him. Clinton has displayed nothing but arrogance this whole election that she is the only person who can save the Nation from itself. Trump has put himself on the side of the public. He never assaulted a women, it was all talk between guys. Vulgar though it is, not an issue until the chattering classes got a hold of it. What we see is mortification by the political elite.

ebbsy

InTheTrees wrote: »

gosplan wrote: »

Jesus. You don't see what it's a bit bigger than your opinion.
Justifying sexual assault as 'casual guy stuff' is not OK.
I'm not outraged. I just think it's a very bad thing for society.
It's not a PC issue, it's an assaulting women issue.

As Obama said, Trumps comments on the tape would disqualify him for a job at 7/11...let alone the presidency.

Well at least Trump didn't molest those women and t hen have to pay them off.

"The Don did not have sexual relations with those women".

oik

InTheTrees wrote: »

As Obama said, Trumps comments on the tape would disqualify him for a job at 7/11...let alone the presidency.

Do you not see anything wrong with that?

RobertKK

ebbsy wrote: »

The Don is right to be angry with Ryan. He should have called to congratulate him after he ripped Hillary a new one in the second debate.

Has anyone noticed how far up Clinton ass the Irish press are ? It's embarrassing that they can't think for themselves.

George Hook is the exception.

A lot of the western media are biased towards the Democrats, it would be fine if the Democrats were shining beacons of light, but there is something wrong with the media when they clearly favour one side over another.
For me it gives the media a credibility problem as they are trying to influence minds and all they do is harm themselves given they take the people to be stupid.
I think the biggest mistake anyone can make about a fellow human being is to think they are stupid, as it just shows the person who thinks that is likely naive.
This naivety exists with the media and it contributes to anti-establishment feelings.

oik

gosplan wrote: »

Bragging about sexual assault that never occurred - no problem

fixed

B_Wayne

oik wrote: »

fixed

There's a big list of women that Trump sexually harassed developing... The descriptions were always pretty in line with his remarks... But defend away!

oik

Where are all the women Trump sexually assaulted?

The Clinton's are scouring the world for one. They could finish his campaign right now. Where are all these women?

oik

B_Wayne wrote: »

There's a big list of women that Trump sexually harassed developing... The descriptions were always pretty in line with his remarks... But defend away!

I noticed that bait and switch.

gosplan

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He did not actually assault anyone so you can exaggerate as much as you like you are sounding like him. Clinton has displayed nothing but arrogance this whole election that she is the only person who can save the Nation from itself. Trump has put himself on the side of the public. He never assaulted a women, it was all talk between guys. Vulgar though it is, not an issue until the chattering classes got a hold of it. What we see is mortification by the political elite.

Jill Harth
Ivana Trump

gosplan

So all the trumpites here are saying that you don't believe he ever would have groped anyone?

Just to be clear, he wouldn't do that.

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

Where are all these women?

No doubt laughing at the joke that is trumps presidential aspirations.

gosplan

No-ones got more respect for women than me!!!

Tasha Dixon says that during the 2001 Miss USA pageant, she and other contestants were forced to meet with Donald Trump – dressed or not. ‘Our first introduction to him was when we were at the dress rehearsal and half naked changing into our bikinis,’ Dixon recalled. She says Trump ‘strolled in’ while girls were topless and naked, but there was no one to complain to, as he owned the pageant.

gosplan

He's throwing it!!!

Today he's said test the election of Clinton would lead to the almost total destruction of the country and that ISIS would take over the USA.

I guess Don thinks it's better to be a percieved as a nut than a loser.

But yeah, winning strategy???

Overheal

gosplan wrote: »

No-ones got more respect for women than me!!!

Tasha Dixon says that during the 2001 Miss USA pageant, she and other contestants were forced to meet with Donald Trump – dressed or not. ‘Our first introduction to him was when we were at the dress rehearsal and half naked changing into our bikinis,’ Dixon recalled. She says Trump ‘strolled in’ while girls were topless and naked, but there was no one to complain to, as he owned the pageant.

He's actually on audio elsewhere, I believe on Howard sterns radio show? Bragging about how as the owner of the pageant that he actually had this "privilege" to enter the changing rooms without obstruction

Overheal

Bernie is still an official registered write in in all fifty states

http://embols.com/2016/10/01/apparently-bernie-is-registered-as-a-write-in-in-nearly-all-states/

I guess I'll vote after all

Pro Hoc Vice

ebbsy wrote: »

Well at least Trump didn't molest those women and t hen have to pay them off.

"The Don did not have sexual relations with those women".

Well his first wife swore an affidavit that he raped her, that was withdrawn in a multi million dollar divorce settlement!

oik

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

Well his first wife swore an affidavit that he raped her, that was withdrawn in a multi million dollar divorce settlement!

Are you sure you've told us all the details of that story and not just the juicy bits that fit your agenda?

Pro Hoc Vice

oik wrote: »

Are you sure you've told us all the details of that story and not just the juicy bits that fit your agenda?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/donald-trump-ex-wife-claim-he-raped-her-resurfaces-in-new-documentary-a6836151.html

1 she was divorcing him after he cheated
2 she swore a affidavit to that effect that he assaulted her and raped her.
3 they settle multi million divorce
4 she says it was not rape just he was not loving

Make of it what you want

A few allegations for Trump http://www.vox.com/2016/10/12/13234224/donald-trump-jill-harth-sexual-assault

I have said on this forum I do not think Trump or Clinton are guilty of rape, but if a person going to live by the sword etc.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

Are you sure you've told us all the details of that story and not just the juicy bits that fit your agenda?

Why don't you tell us the details.

I mean surely these allegations and retracted statements against Trump are understandable.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

Are you sure you've told us all the details of that story and not just the juicy bits that fit your agenda?

With due respect buddy. That is a hell of an accusation for a follower of Trump to throw around.

oscarBravo

oik wrote: »

He's clearly not being serious.

It's utterly bizarre that you think this makes it OK.

You actually think that someone who brags about sexually assaulting women is a fit person to be president of the United States, just because you choose to believe that he's lying.

Mind-boggling.

oik

gosplan wrote: »

With due respect buddy. That is a hell of an accusation for a follower of Trump to throw around.

So now because I like Trump I'm automatically dishonest

oik

oscarBravo wrote: »

It's utterly bizarre that you think this makes it OK.

You actually think that someone who brags about sexually assaulting women is a fit person to be president of the United States, just because you choose to believe that he's lying.

Mind-boggling.

You do have a flair for the dramatic



If "they let you do it" it's not sexual assault.

oik

oscarBravo wrote: »

You actually think that someone who brags about sexually assaulting women is a fit person to be president of the United States, just because you choose to believe that he's lying.

JFK probably slapped the arse of his secretary every chance he got. Never was a man more fit to be president.

The job of the president is so important that anyone who would allow a hot mic moment to sway their judgement doesn't deserve a vote.

Pro Hoc Vice

oik wrote: »

JFK probably slapped the arse of his secretary every chance he got. Never was a man more fit to be president.

The job of the president is so important that anyone who would allow a hot mic moment to sway their judgement doesn't deserve a vote.

Love the way you accuse me of being light on facts then when confronted with the full facts you go very quite.

gosplan

oik wrote: »

So now because I like Trump I'm automatically dishonest

No, liking someone is fine.

It's all the untruths you knowingly back here that makes you dishonest.

But you know this.

Your know that everything your posting in here, you're just rehashing the party line, clutching at straws to avoid any actual criticism.

The issue though, and what Trump and Sanders represent is that blind party loyalty is dead in the USA.

But you've just swapped it for blind loyalty to something else. So what's the difference?

The difference between those incapable of critical thought and those that won't apply critical thought is nothing.

Essentially, if you're not a moron, you may as well be.

oscarBravo

oik wrote: »

If "they let you do it" it's not sexual assault.

Strong in this one, the male privilege is.