2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

ancapailldorcha

Guys, if you see below standard posts please ignore and report them.

Thread cleaned up and bans dispensed.

aloyisious

Sometimes I think Don has it off to a T, "hey, what do I know" followed by a shrug and tilt of the head to the left, shoulders raised, arms out sideways, palms to the front, and the audience eats out of his hands. Sorry, I don't buy into the "I love Trump" thing. I have this vision of day 01 of the Trump White House, Don walking around inside with his architect and casino staff deciding the best spots to put the slot machines for the W/W tours. I keep wondering why it is that Don is bothering to stay in the race, thinking maybe it's because his opponent is a woman and he can't stand to be bested by anyone, let alone a woman. He is an All-American hot-blooded boy after all.

jobbridge4life

Slieve Gullion wrote: »

Young and naive innocents along with those media gullible brick swallowers will back Clinton. It is such a pity for such honest to goodness regular decent salt of the earth folk from the once greatest nation on earth to have been manipulated and had their hands forced. Trump out of both of them is the better option. Just believe me ok.

Okay two reactions...

Either no thanks I can think for myself.

Or...

Kudos on this excellent satire.

alastair

Slieve Gullion wrote: »

Trump out of both of them is the better option. Just believe me ok.

Donald? Is that you?

https://youtu.be/zDTeMNhuPTc

Overheal

Slieve Gullion wrote: »

Trump out of both of them is the better option. Just believe me ok.

No.

KingBrian2

gosplan wrote: »

What exactly makes Trump a safe bet?

His inability to follow protocol and adhere to legalities?

His bankrupting economic plan?

His near total detachment from reality?

His ability to make enemies and pick fights with people?

The guy can't run a campaign, has lost countless supporters and backers, but he's a safe bet?

He is supported by the lovers of the US constitution while Hillary is a war monger and her commitment to America is suspect. The mysterious deleted e-mail scandal is proof to a lot of Americans that she has a secret past which has yet to be uncovered. This election cycle has already brought to light the sordid sex life of Bill Clinton.

Billy86

Donald Trump vs. The US Constitution - http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/08/2016-donald-trump-constitution-guide-unconstitutional-freedom-liberty-khan-214139

Just gonna link dump this here and save anyone else both hassle of even bothering. Some absolute gems in there, starting with this! :pac:

From early in his campaign, critics have been consistently astonished by his seeming indifference to the Constitution, as he has launched attacks on the press, on mosques, and on other institutions explicitly protected by the Bill of Rights.

Or consider Trump’s private meeting with Republican members of Congress, when the candidate expressed his admiration for Article 12 of the Constitution, apparently unaware that there are only seven Articles.

jobbridge4life

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He is supported by the lovers of the US constitution while Hillary is a war monger and her commitment to America is suspect.

So the people who support Hillary don't love the US constitution?

And on that point, Trump has demonstrated repeatedly that he neither comprehends nor respects the US constitution, as displayed most powerfully by his commitment to ban Muslims from entering the US, a prime facie unconstitutional proposal, not to mention his repeated promise to prosecute and jail his opponent should he win or allegations, in the face of repeated studies demonstrating the opposite, that the election will be rigged.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The mysterious deleted e-mail scandal is proof to a lot of Americans that she has a secret past which has yet to be uncovered. This election cycle has already brought to light the sordid sex life of Bill Clinton.

If by mysterious you mean thoroughly investigated then yes, as the Republican aligned director of the FBI determined there were no grounds for prosecuting her. As for a secret past... Hillary, having been the First Lady of Arkansas, the First Lady of the United States, Senator for New York, presidential candidate, and Secretary of State over the last few decades, is perhaps the most scrutinized individual to have ever stood for the Presidency and at the end of the day the most damning thing you have to say about her is that her husband has had questionable dealings with women, all of which have themselves been intensively tested, and come to nothing, since the early 90s.

Why not just make it easier for all of us and admit you are a moral bankrupt, willing to support a fascist blowhard because it makes the hairs on your arms stand up and give you a sense of strength?

BorneTobyWilde

Trump will win more states, it's the case that most of those states have very little say. It's why Hilary wants more and more refugees that she can make citizens, this gives her more votes next time too . It's all those citizens that were not born in US that will win her this race. The latina vote is huge, each year they make a millions of them US Citizens. They vote Democrat because of this.

Billy86

Well to be fair Brian has already admitted that Trumps unconstitutional plans to ban all Muslims from entering the US is a reason he supports Trump. Of course that was after months of claiming Trumps call to ban all Muslims was distorted by the media (by which he was referring to Trumps own official website) and that he didn't want to ban all Muslims, despite Trump doubling and trebling down on it.

Midnight you, his reasoning is that he views Muslims as a problem; the enemy. He let that one slip after weeks of claiming he had nothing against Muslims and didn't view them as a problem.

Just a heads up on Brian's sense of logic.

ebbsy

I think what would be very helpful is if those women that Hillary has dredged up release their latest bank statements, to confirm no recent strange lodgements have been made.

As for the drug test if she has nothing to hide she will take it.

KingBrian2

Billy86 wrote: »

Well to be fair Brian has already admitted that Trumps unconstitutional plans to ban all Muslims from entering the US is a reason he supports Trump. Of course that was after months of claiming Trumps call to ban all Muslims was distorted by the media (by which he was referring to Trumps own official website) and that he didn't want to ban all Muslims, despite Trump doubling and trebling down on it.

Midnight you, his reasoning is that he views Muslims as a problem; the enemy. He let that one slip after weeks of claiming he had nothing against Muslims and didn't view them as a problem.

Just a heads up on Brian's sense of logic.

The problem you are having is that those who are voting for Trump are Libertarians and they do not believe in the Imperial presidency and you keep making the same points that Trump will have extreme power when if he is elected it will be Congress & the Judiciary that will perform the duty the constitution already states they have. So far we see only the President making all the decisions with Congress acting as a consulting body.

Christy42

ebbsy wrote: »

I think what would be very helpful is if those women that Hillary has dredged up release their latest bank statements, to confirm no recent strange lodgements have been made.

As for the drug test if she has nothing to hide she will take it.

And those tax returns...

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He is supported by the lovers of the US constitution while Hillary is a war monger and her commitment to America is suspect.

That is not even a rational argument. This is literally how that sounds,

Trump has been reported saying some pretty unconstitutional and unethical things, such as a strong desire to commit war crimes (expansion of torture, targeting civilians loosely associated with combatants, indiscriminately bombing "every square inch" of ISIS controlled territory), block people from entering the country based on a religious test, even expressing the desire to make it illegal to report bad things about him - the kind of thing self-absorbed dictators do.

More to the point though: your rhetoric is dangerous, and creates a climate of "Us vs Them" and is how civil wars start. A rational person will understand that people all over the political spectrum mean well for our country (again, you're an outside observer Brian) but they all have differing viewpoints on how to best meet those goals.

Pro Hoc Vice

ebbsy wrote: »

I think what would be very helpful is if those women that Hillary has dredged up release their latest bank statements, to confirm no recent strange lodgements have been made.

As for the drug test if she has nothing to hide she will take it.

If Trump has nothing to hide he can release his last 20 years of tax returns. Also would be an idea to on live TV do a full medical check up, would make great reality TV! Of course he has nothing to hide!

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

The problem you are having is that those who are voting for Trump are Libertarians

Pretty sure Libertarians are voting for Libertarians.

https://www.johnsonweld.com/

frostyjacks

Billy86 wrote: »

Well to be fair Brian has already admitted that Trumps unconstitutional plans to ban all Muslims from entering the US is a reason he supports Trump. Of course that was after months of claiming Trumps call to ban all Muslims was distorted by the media (by which he was referring to Trumps own official website) and that he didn't want to ban all Muslims, despite Trump doubling and trebling down on it.

Midnight you, his reasoning is that he views Muslims as a problem; the enemy. He let that one slip after weeks of claiming he had nothing against Muslims and didn't view them as a problem.

Just a heads up on Brian's sense of logic.

Muslims aren't a problem? Sure. I guess it's a coincidence that virtually every terrorist attack around the world is carried out in the name of Islam.

It would be suicidal to allow any more of them into a country without ironclad assurances that they won't be a threat. It's putting one's people first, nothing wrong with that.

Christy42

frostyjacks wrote: »

Muslims aren't a problem? Sure. I guess it's a coincidence that virtually every terrorist attack around the world is carried out in the name of Islam.

It would be suicidal to allow any more of them into a country without ironclad assurances that they won't be a threat. It's putting one's people first, nothing wrong with that.

No they aren't. They really aren't except in right winger's head.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-muslims-carried-out-more-than-90-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html

KingBrian2

Overheal wrote: »

That is not even a rational argument. This is literally how that sounds,

Trump has been reported saying some pretty unconstitutional and unethical things, such as a strong desire to commit war crimes (expansion of torture, targeting civilians loosely associated with combatants, indiscriminately bombing "every square inch" of ISIS controlled territory), block people from entering the country based on a religious test, even expressing the desire to make it illegal to report bad things about him - the kind of thing self-absorbed dictators do.

More to the point though: your rhetoric is dangerous, and creates a climate of "Us vs Them" and is how civil wars start. A rational person will understand that people all over the political spectrum mean well for our country (again, you're an outside observer Brian) but they all have differing viewpoints on how to best meet those goals.

What is more dangerous is not being honest with the people on the seriousness of the threat posed by jihadists and politicians having a sane foreign policy. Of course what is also counterproductive is calling everyone an Islamophobe who is aware of the Jihadist extremists and disagrees with the political elite.

Pro Hoc Vice

frostyjacks wrote: »

Muslims aren't a problem? Sure. I guess it's a coincidence that virtually every terrorist attack around the world is carried out in the name of Islam.

It would be suicidal to allow any more of them into a country without ironclad assurances that they won't be a threat. It's putting one's people first, nothing wrong with that.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-muslims-carried-out-more-than-90-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619

According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%).

Of course that study must be wrong according to you.

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

What is more dangerous is not being honest with the people on the seriousness of the threat posed by jihadists and politicians having a sane foreign policy. Of course what is also counterproductive is calling everyone an Islamophobe who is aware of the Jihadist extremists and disagrees with the political elite.

Well there's a correlation between islamaphobia and an uptick in terrorism. Who would have thought being discriminated against would tend to make someone bitter and uninvested in their society?

KingBrian2

Overheal wrote: »

Well there's a correlation between islamaphobia and an uptick in terrorism. Who would have thought being discriminated against would tend to make someone bitter and uninvested in their society?

Yeah those secular Muslims are being targeted by the same terrorists while the liberals choose to see them all as one community. Their are as many divisions within Islam as their is in Christianity. I don't expect either candidate to be familiar with the nuances of Islam.

Overheal

Breaking News: the NC GOP Headquarters was firebombed

http://breaking911.com/breaking-n-c-gop-headquarters-firebombed-atf-responding/

The building, located at 347 Ja-Max Drive in the Shops at Daniel Boone, was struck overnight with hate graffiti and with a flammable material thrown through a front window of the headquarters. The graffiti — which included a swastika and the words “Nazi Republicans leave town or else” — was spray-painted in black on the side of an adjacent building, Balloons Above Orange, 353 Ja-Max Drive. The damage was discovered this morning by another business owner, who reported it before 9 a.m.

The cynic in me would not be surprised to discover this was friendly fire. The GOP has been losing ground in NC since the trump tapes broke, there was no earthly reason for opposition voters to commit this kind of act, given it will do nothing but boost the GOP turnout at the polls.

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yeah those secular Muslims are being targeted by the same terrorists while the liberals choose to see them all as one community. Their are as many divisions within Islam as their is in Christianity. I don't expect either candidate to be familiar with the nuances of Islam.

Well seeing how one of them has actually been overseas multiple times in a political context and has seen the middle east events for herself over the last 30 or so years, I'm willing to bet she does.

Billy86

frostyjacks wrote: »

Muslims aren't a problem? Sure. I guess it's a coincidence that virtually every terrorist attack around the world is carried out in the name of Islam.

It would be suicidal to allow any more of them into a country without ironclad assurances that they won't be a threat. It's putting one's people first, nothing wrong with that.

We're not going to derail this thread with your absurdly incorrect assumptions, I was pointing out Brian's incredible propensity for double think.

ancapailldorcha

frostyjacks wrote: »

Muslims aren't a problem? Sure. I guess it's a coincidence that virtually every terrorist attack around the world is carried out in the name of Islam.

It would be suicidal to allow any more of them into a country without ironclad assurances that they won't be a threat. It's putting one's people first, nothing wrong with that.

This thread is about the election. You're welcome to start a new thread if you want to discuss terrorism.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yeah those secular Muslims are being targeted by the same terrorists while the liberals choose to see them all as one community. Their are as many divisions within Islam as their is in Christianity. I don't expect either candidate to be familiar with the nuances of Islam.

I expect any well educated person standing for office to have a decent understanding of the nuances of Islam.
If not the finer detail, at least the knowledge they exist and are varied.

I would expect anyone running for POTUS to be very well informed of the above. You can bet your bottom dollar that Hillary is.

Call me crazy, but I expect a candidate for POTUS to very well informed on a wide range of subjects. Trump simply isn't.

KingBrian2

Brian? wrote: »

I expect any well educated person standing for office to have a decent understanding of the nuances of Islam.
If not the finer detail, at least the knowledge they exist and are varied.

I would expect anyone running for POTUS to be very well informed of the above. You can bet your bottom dollar that Hillary is.

Call me crazy, but I expect a candidate for POTUS to very well informed on a wide range of subjects. Trump simply isn't.

You also expect a President to not be Intune with the wishes of the electorate.

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

You also expect a President to not be Intune with the wishes of the electorate.

Are you part of the electorate?

Zubeneschamali

Brian? wrote: »

I would expect anyone running for POTUS to be very well informed of the above. You can bet your bottom dollar that Hillary is.

I think it is obvious that Trump had no notion of being the Republican candidate when he entered - he was just going for some publicity. Now he's like a dog that chased a car and caught it - he has no plan for what to do next.

Seriously, look at his speeches. There is nothing concrete in there about what he wants to do as President, because he never wanted to be President. He just thrives on attention.

Unfortunately for him, a yuge number of people are watching him flounder. His entire brand is going to suffer when Hillary brands a giant L for Loser on his forehead next month.

ancapailldorcha

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Unfortunately for him, a yuge number of people are watching him flounder. His entire brand is going to suffer when Hillary brands a giant L for Loser on his forehead next month.

I wouldn't worry about his brand. If anything, it'll be more lucrative than ever.

What I am worried about is the fact that we are now living in a global world with global threats such as terrorism and climate change. Such threats necessitate international cooperation and the USA is a key player in this. With someone as isolationist as Trump as the GOP nominee, it bodes very poorly for the rest of the world.

Zubeneschamali

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

With someone as isolationist as Trump as the GOP nominee, it bodes very poorly for the rest of the world.

When he is beaten by an unprecedented margin, not just beaten but utterly humiliated, thrashed, trounced, beaten into next week by a woman, the most disliked woman in America, this may have a sobering effect on the Republican party.

Or it may just herald the impending death of the Republican party. Either one bodes well for the rest of the world.

jobbridge4life

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

If anything, it'll be more lucrative than ever.

Reports indicate that his brand is already tanking.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-brand-229768

Black Swan

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Unfortunately for him, a yuge number of people are watching him flounder. His entire brand is going to suffer when Hillary brands a giant L for Loser on his forehead next month.

Methinks that Donald Trump is attempting to secure his brand from harm (advance damage control) by constantly claiming publicly that the election is "fixed" or "rigged" against him, that the news media is predominantly anti-Trump and helping to fix the outcome, that the GOP "establishment" has turned against him (Paul Ryan, et al), that some of the state election sites may be tampered with against his election, and that the 7 October released Trump groping tape was innocent "locker room" talk and that the dozen women claiming he assaulted them were part of a "conspiracy," with all these things combined "stealing" the election from him. His hard core followers believe most of these UNSUBSTANTIATED claims at his rallies, as do the odd sort of extremist media sites that have been promoting him this presidential campaign cycle, especially the one that he hired the CEO from to help him with his campaign.

K-9

KingBrian2 wrote: »

You also expect a President to not be Intune with the wishes of the electorate.

You are the one supporting Trump though, not Brian?

Zubeneschamali

Black Swan wrote: »

His hard core followers believe most of these UNSUBSTANTIATED claims at his rallies

Well, yes, but they are bonkers.

He can't run hotels and golf resorts if only the 27% of Americans who are barking mad will set foot in them.

Overheal

He'll expatriate to Dubai where we can belittle woman and shield his money from the IRS more.

meepins

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I think it is obvious that Trump had no notion of being the Republican candidate when he entered - he was just going for some publicity. Now he's like a dog that chased a car and caught it - he has no plan for what to do next.

Seriously, look at his speeches. There is nothing concrete in there about what he wants to do as President, because he never wanted to be President. He just thrives on attention.

It's simply not true that it's a ploy for publicity. He has been a well know public figure for decades, had a television show for many years that apparently was very popular. If it was publicity he was after there is no end to things he could have done that didn't include putting his business empire and, I'm reticent to say, his life in jeopardy.
Trump has talked about running for office for many years and has judged that now is the best chance he will ever get of being elected. He's up against a widely unliked and untrusted candidate and despite the relentless offensive by the entire establishment - I still think he will be president and it will be a remarkable achievement.
As for him having no concrete objectives.. it doesn't get more concrete than a big wall on the border with Mexico.

Black Swan

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

What I am worried about is the fact that we are now living in a global world with global threats such as terrorism and climate change. Such threats necessitate international cooperation and the USA is a key player in this. With someone as isolationist as Trump as the GOP nominee, it bodes very poorly for the rest of the world.

Indeed ancapailldorcha. If the Americans elect Donald Trump as their president, then it appears that they agree with all the statements he has made against NATO, Middle Eastern nations, China, Belgium, Mexico, religion, race, ethnicity, gender, etc., as well as his favourable statements regarding Russia and Putin (obvious aggressors towards former USSR WWII occupied nations), which puts America at a diplomatic disadvantage. And if he loses, there will still be some damage resultant from acknowledging that there were millions of Americans that agreed with Republican nominee Donald Trump's ignorant breach of protocols, discriminatory, and insulting statements.

KingBrian2

K-9 wrote: »

You are the one supporting Trump though, not Brian?

Yes as I regard him to speak for the majority of working Americans who are disillusioned with the est and want to pursue policies that are well and truly overdue. I consider this a worthwhile cause to fight for. It was the Democrats & Republicans that caused all this corruption well before Trump entered the stage. Neglecting working class ghettoes in the Midwest and the damage done by abusive gvt. Trump has appealed to the evangelicals on one extreme to the Sanders supporters on the other. From traditional Republicans to anti-war Democrats so a coalition of American voices share the sentiments that Trump speaks for. The comparison could be drawn with Jeremy Corbyn in the UK. A personality that enjoys a huge amount of grassroots support but disliked by the Labour party.

InTheTrees

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yes as I regard him to speak for the majority of working Americans...

I just dont get that at all. What has Donald trump ever done in his entire life for working Americans?

It doesn't make any sense.

meepins

InTheTrees wrote: »

I just dont get that at all. What has Donald trump ever done in his entire life for working Americans?

It doesn't make any sense.

Gainful employment?

aloyisious

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He is supported by the lovers of the US constitution while Hillary is a war monger and her commitment to America is suspect. The mysterious deleted e-mail scandal is proof to a lot of Americans that she has a secret past which has yet to be uncovered. This election cycle has already brought to light the sordid sex life of Bill Clinton.

It'd be interesting to see what Don might do, if president, when faced with the interests of the US - which include defending the constitution - being put at risk by foreign adventurers. Would his use of U.S military forces and weaponry to end the threat cause him to be labelled a war mongerer?

Hillary, as Sec of State, does not control or use the US Military. That's her boss's - Barak Obama - prerogative and duty, through HIS Sec of Defence. Hillary can advise her boss on the possible diplomatic repercussions of using US Military Pers and force abroad.

The deleted Emails seem (on the face of it) to be, as they're deleted, beyond recovery and their contents uncoverable. I don't know if any of the Wikileaks emails were ones hacked from Hillary's stash before the deletions took place. I'm also confused as to how many emails were deleted as Don, at the last debate, mentioned two numbers: 33,000 and 39,000 od emails.

Bill's admitted sex life has been known about for years, from before the impeachment processes for perjury began while he was the sitting president in the late 90's.

Overheal

meepins wrote: »

Gainful employment?

Uhm..

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-claims-he-employs-many-people-at-honolulu-hotel/

http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/ent-columns-blogs/jose-lambiet/article91353232.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/

http://time.com/4465744/donald-trump-undocumented-workers/

...it's mixed.

InTheTrees

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump has appealed to the evangelicals on one extreme...

The only reason the religious right are sticking with trump is the hope he'll appoint antiabortion supreme court justices. That's all. Thats the only reason. And that support is fraying. They could well be the " silent voters " who actually vote against trump on the day.

Black Swan

Overheal wrote: »

He'll expatriate to Dubai where we can belittle woman and shield his money from the IRS more.

In early to mid-2015 Donald Trump was welcome in Dubia UAE, he and other Arab investors were building the largest golf and resort complex in Dubai, but not now. They removed the TRUMP name from the Dubai resort. And according to a UAE grad student I'm tutoring at my university across the pond (who has a diplomatic passport), Donald Trump is no longer welcome after his anti-Muslim statements. Such statements are not just unwelcome in the Middle East. It should be remembered that Scotland stripped Donald Trump of his honorary doctorate and his Business Ambassador title December 2015 after his anti-Muslim statements. Would Trump also claim that the UK media, Gordon University, and Edinburgh government had joined the "conspiracy" to rig and fix the 2016 presidential election too?

meepins

Overheal wrote: »

Uhm..

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-claims-he-employs-many-people-at-honolulu-hotel/

http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/ent-columns-blogs/jose-lambiet/article91353232.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/

http://time.com/4465744/donald-trump-undocumented-workers/

...it's mixed.

I'm not clicking your links, say what you have to say. Has he or has he not given working Americans employment in his various companies?

InTheTrees

meepins wrote: »

Gainful employment?

Huh? Gainful employment?

Until he decides he doesnt want to pay. Or until he declares bancrupcy. Or tries to bust a union.

He represents the worst kind of selfish uncaring exploitive boss and he'd be a nightmare for working Americans.

aloyisious

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yeah those secular Muslims are being targeted by the same terrorists while the liberals choose to see them all as one community. Their are as many divisions within Islam as their is in Christianity. I don't expect either candidate to be familiar with the nuances of Islam.

Out of interest, how can one be secular and muslim at the same time?

InTheTrees

meepins wrote: »

I'm not clicking your links, say what you have to say. Has he or has he not given working Americans employment in his various companies?

I'm sorry but heavy handed union busting among low paid hotel workers doesn't qualify him as being a fav with American workers.