2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

ancapailldorcha

SterlingArcher wrote: »

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2016/09/26/wannabe-global-dominatrix-hillary-clinton-never-met-a-war-she-didnt-want-other-americans-to-fight/#5abae2b16aa9

Please don't just dump links here. Thanks.

KingBrian2

Brian? wrote: »

This might come as a shock, but being elected is a Democratic mandate from the electorate. That's far more important than some abstract notion of being "in tune with the wishes of the electorate". Although by winning the election it would be safe for Clinton to assume she is in tune with these wishes.

Anyway, you haven't really replied to my post. Shouldn't a candidate for POTUS be au fait with the nuances of Islam?

No not really since Islam is not one but many religious sects. You have Shia and you have Sunni and you have Wahhabi not to mention Salafi or Hanbali or any secular version so by saying Hillary should know about Islam are we suppose to expect her to pick a side. What she should know is which brand of Islam represents a danger to the world and to peace.

Trump is not suggesting all Muslims are terrorists only the Jihadists who are terrorists and Jihadists are Muslims and have their own ideology separate to but in accordance to the principals of the Quran. So Hamas the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia practice the same version of Islam. Hillary does not mind cozying up the Wahhabi version of Islam and labeling Trump a bigot for being opposed to importing that extremism into Europe and America.

oscarBravo

KingBrian2 wrote: »

No not really since Islam is not one but many religious sects. You have Shia and you have Sunni and you have Wahhabi not to mention Salafi or Hanbali or any secular version so by saying Hillary should know about Islam are we suppose to expect her to pick a side. What she should know is which brand of Islam represents a danger to the world and to peace.

Trump is not suggesting all Muslims are terrorists only the Jihadists who are terrorists and Jihadists are Muslims and have their own ideology separate to but in accordance to the principals of the Quran. So Hamas the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia practice the same version of Islam. Hillary does not mind cozying up the Wahhabi version of Islam and labeling Trump a bigot for being opposed to importing that extremism into Europe and America.

Wow. You just won't give up on the "I'm ignoring what he said in favour of what it suits my argument to believe he meant" line of argument, will you?

It's no wonder Trump supporters claim the media is biased against him. They keep reporting what he said, instead of what it would be charitable to assume he meant.

Quin_Dub

Overheal wrote: »

The FBI/NSA watchlist keeps growing

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-supporter-tells-reporters-hillary-needs-to-be-taken-out/

This kind of stuff is the truly terrifying un-intended consequence of Trumps rhetoric..

I don't for a second believe that in the cold light of day , Trump actually wants people commiting acts of violence etc. , he's just an extreme narcissist with absolutely no control over his thought process.

However , there are enough mentally unstable people out there that will add together the 2+2 of Trumps vitriolic ramblings and come up with 5 leading to the very real risk of bombs and/or gun attacks on polling day or indeed post election acts of violence against a Clinton victory..

It's a frightening thing to contemplate..

alastair

KingBrian2 wrote: »

No not really since Islam is not one but many religious sects. You have Shia and you have Sunni and you have Wahhabi not to mention Salafi or Hanbali or any secular version so by saying Hillary should know about Islam are we suppose to expect her to pick a side. What she should know is which brand of Islam represents a danger to the world and to peace.

I'm pretty sure Hillary is well able to grasp the range of beliefs within Islam, just as she's able to grasp the range of beliefs within Christianity. You seem very concerned on precisely zero evidence. And more worryingly seem very blasé about a man who clearly demonstrates no such grasp.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump is not suggesting all Muslims are terrorists

Strange then that he has a blanket ban policy on Muslim immigration?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

only the Jihadists who are terrorists and Jihadists are Muslims and have their own ideology separate to but in accordance to the principals of the Quran. So Hamas the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia practice the same version of Islam.

No they don't. Perhaps you need to revisit this grasp of the various strands of Islamism, let alone Islam?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Hillary does not mind cozying up the Wahhabi version of Islam and labeling Trump a bigot for being opposed to importing that extremism into Europe and America.

By 'that extremism' you (or Trump in any case) mean, of course, any Muslims.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

No not really since Islam is not one but many religious sects. You have Shia and you have Sunni and you have Wahhabi not to mention Salafi or Hanbali or any secular version so by saying Hillary should know about Islam are we suppose to expect her to pick a side. What she should know is which brand of Islam represents a danger to the world and to peace.

I know this, you know this and I'd bet my house that Hillary knows this. I don't need a lesson on Islam's various sects, and either does Hillary. It's not exactly string theory. I would expect most candidates for federal elections to have this knowledge. Trump clearly doesn't. He wanted to ban all Muslims.

Trump is not suggesting all Muslims are terrorists only the Jihadists who are terrorists and Jihadists are Muslims and have their own ideology separate to but in accordance to the principals of the Quran. So Hamas the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia practice the same version of Islam. Hillary does not mind cozying up the Wahhabi version of Islam and labeling Trump a bigot for being opposed to importing that extremism into Europe and America.

Again, you're quoting me but you're not responding to my post. Any chance to you could?

Billy86

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This kind of stuff is the truly terrifying un-intended consequence of Trumps rhetoric..

I don't for a second believe that in the cold light of day , Trump actually wants people commiting acts of violence etc. , he's just an extreme narcissist with absolutely no control over his thought process.

However , there are enough mentally unstable people out there that will add together the 2+2 of Trumps vitriolic ramblings and come up with 5 leading to the very real risk of bombs and/or gun attacks on polling day or indeed post election acts of violence against a Clinton victory..

It's a frightening thing to contemplate..

To be honest I would love to agree with you, but with some of the comments he has made, his astoundingly vindictive personality, and indeed his own worrying mental instability which has been on full display for the last several weeks, I wouldn't be so sure.

Billy86

oscarBravo wrote: »

Wow. You just won't give up on the "I'm ignoring what he said in favour of what it suits my argument to believe he meant" line of argument, will you?

It's no wonder Trump supporters claim the media is biased against him. They keep reporting what he said, instead of what it would be charitable to assume he meant.

I've been true this already with him in the first thread. At length.

First, it was not what Trump meant because Trump was "all for religious tolerance".

Then, the 'complete and utter shutdown' statement was media spin, something Trump never said. Despite it having been pointed out on multiple occasions to Brian that the statement was taken directly from Trump's website.

It continued to be something "he never said" until I put up videos of Trump reading said statement 100% verbatim.

After this, despite showing other quotes of Trump saying he literally meant 'all Muslims' Brian continued to try and claim it was only terrorists. Despite there already being a terror watch list that has people banned from being in the US.

All this time, Brian was trying to claim that he nor Trump (despite Trump's own words to the exact opposite) saw Muslims as any kind of a problem nor as an enemy. A few weeks later in (if I recall) a different argument relating to Trump, Brian let slip that he does actually see Muslims as a problem and the enemy and supported Trump because he agreed.

Everyone reading can make of the above what they will, though it should be somewhat obvious.

Can't say it here because it would get carded and probably deservedly so even though I don't actually mean it as an insult, but over the course of these two threads... well, just check your PMs.

EDIT: here we are...

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=99927196&postcount=7373

Kingbrian2, June 3rd 2016 wrote:

I have been consistent throughout.Trump has been opposed to Jihadism in America, Jihadism is the same as Islamism. Islamism is the rejection of American values and to be one is to repudiate the Republic. Trump's bellicose is directly at those extremists. People like you are grouping all the Muslims together and shouting Islamophobe, Islamophobe to your hearts content.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100530637&postcount=9090

Kingbrian2, July 31st 2016 wrote:

Yes I do stand by stating that remark because America does have a major problem with Muslims

There is a very obvious reason why I have since put him on ignore since.

Overheal

Trump has turned Alaska into a swing state!

http://www.mediaite.com/election-2016/latest-poll-shows-trump-and-clinton-essentially-tied-in-traditionally-red-alaska/

Ah, what a disaster

KingBrian2

alastair wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Hillary is well able to grasp the range of beliefs within Islam, just as she's able to grasp the range of beliefs within Christianity. You seem very concerned on precisely zero evidence. And more worryingly seem very blasé about a man who clearly demonstrates no such grasp.


Strange then that he has a blanket ban policy on Muslim immigration?


No they don't. Perhaps you need to revisit this grasp of the various strands of Islamism, let alone Islam?



By 'that extremism' you (or Trump in any case) mean, of course, any Muslims.

Trump is in agreement with many in Europe that the refugees arriving have jihadists hiding among them and the irresponsible decisions made by Congress and other western capitals has led to more Jihadists not less Jihadists. People keep accusing me of being a Jihadists yet I opposed the invasion of a Muslim Nation like so many Trump supporters. Many of the anti Jihadists out there are Muslims themselves who i have a great deal of respect for including both the Kurds and the Palestinians who are always excluded from this conversation. I'm not blind to the hazards posed by the crazy policies of the liberals.

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump is in agreement with many in Europe that the refugees arriving have jihadists hiding among them and the irresponsible decisions made by Congress and other western capitals has led to more Jihadists not less Jihadists. People keep accusing me of being a Jihadists yet I opposed the invasion of a Muslim Nation like so many Trump supporters. Many of the anti Jihadists out there are Muslims themselves who i have a great deal of respect for including both the Kurds and the Palestinians who are always excluded from this conversation. I'm not blind to the hazards posed by the crazy policies of the liberals.

Just blind to the crazy policies of the far right?

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump is in agreement with many in Europe that the refugees arriving have jihadists hiding among them and the irresponsible decisions made by Congress and other western capitals has led to more Jihadists not less Jihadists. People keep accusing me of being a Jihadists yet I opposed the invasion of a Muslim Nation like so many Trump supporters. Many of the anti Jihadists out there are Muslims themselves who i have a great deal of respect for including both the Kurds and the Palestinians who are always excluded from this conversation. I'm not blind to the hazards posed by the crazy policies of the liberals.

It's bizarre how you quote a post and then make several points that are nothing to do with the post quoted. It makes debate difficult.

There is no such thing as a "Jihadist". The literal translation of jihad is struggle. There are may peaceful types of jihad; child birth, working fields and milling wheat are all jihad.

The groups you are referring to are terrorists. Plain and simple. I would have a hard time calling them radical Islamists even. There are people who I'd call radical Islamists and are pacifists. Because they interpret the Quran differently.

Even though I'm an atheist, posting on this thread feels like jihad sometimes. Badum -tish.

Billy86

So much for that 'Trump comeback' narrative... he has just nosedived to an 11.8% chance of winning on 538 - the lowest point of the entire election cycle outside of Aug 14th (10.8%) and 15th (11.1%).

Clinton's odds at the bookmakers (something Trump fans were clinging to eagerly during the second debate) are now as low as 1/8 to win the election, with Trumps as high as 6/1 - http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner

This election cycle was good as done the morning after the first debate, but was completely done within an hour of the 'grab them by the pussy' video being put up.

KingBrian2

Brian? wrote: »

It's bizarre how you quote a post and then make several points that are nothing to do with the post quoted. It makes debate difficult.

There is no such thing as a "Jihadist". The literal translation of jihad is struggle. There are may peaceful types of jihad; child birth, working fields and milling wheat are all jihad.

The groups you are referring to are terrorists. Plain and simple. I would have a hard time calling them radical Islamists even. There are people who I'd call radical Islamists and are pacifists. Because they interpret the Quran differently.

Even though I'm an atheist, posting on this thread feels like jihad sometimes. Badum -tish.

Yes I understand where your coming from. There are Jihadists who are committed to do just that though attack the west and Muslim states. They already existed now they have gone all 21st century on us so this makes them a lot worse. Al Qaeda, ISIS and all the rest have taken passages from the Quran and devote themselves to indiscriminately attacking the world. It is a mistake not to call them Jihadists and not to treat them as such. We also have the whole Shia-Sunni divide which America should not be getting involved in. Literally a conflict going on since the beginning of Islam. This is a Muslim matter let them sort it out themselves.

Billy86

538 image of their current projected EC votes (344 Clinton, 194 Trump)... if it does play out like this, comedians are going to spend the next few years cleaning up on renaming the Bible Belt & flyover states as the Deplorable Belt or something along those lines.

Overheal

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

From just a few hours ago, Hillary has jumped to 88.2/85% and Trump is at 11.8/15% (Polls/Polls+Historical)

The current chance of flipping Arizona is 53.5/43% and of flipping Alaska 34.4/25.6% with the most recent polls showing a statistical tie in AK. Without a momentum shift he will lose Iowa, North Carolina, and Ohio without debate. He is projected to have a 10% chance of winning Pennsylvania, the state where, Trump says, it will be proven the election is rigged and we can look forward to dangerous rhetoric from him about it.



he looks farther and farther away from 270 everyday, and the number of 'solid blue' states in the model has now reached over the finish line. Trump has nothing left to win this election with: "unshackled" from any allies he should have, his surrogates in the media waste their days arguing about airline armrests and the Wikileaks emails do not in any way appear to be making any solid dent on the number of likely voters that will put Clinton into office on November 8th, and not a whole lot of recruitment of people to vote for Trump "on November 28th"

I find the decline really promising: it shows there are still plenty of non-deplorable supporters of his who know when to call it quits. Most of those affected simply won't vote. Turnout will be low, except among the core of Die-hards and the armies of spite votes.

I wonder what will happen to SC, it's starting to go very pale in the predictions too..

Quin_Dub

Overheal wrote: »

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

From just a few hours ago, Hillary has jumped to 88.2/85% and Trump is at 11.8/15% (Polls/Polls+Historical)

The current chance of flipping Arizona is 53.5/43% and of flipping Alaska 34.4/25.6% with the most recent polls showing a statistical tie in AK. Without a momentum shift he will lose Iowa, North Carolina, and Ohio without debate. He is projected to have a 10% chance of winning Pennsylvania, the state where, Trump says, it will be proven the election is rigged and we can look forward to dangerous rhetoric from him about it.



he looks farther and farther away from 270 everyday, and the number of 'solid blue' states in the model has now reached over the finish line. Trump has nothing left to win this election with: "unshackled" from any allies he should have, his surrogates in the media waste their days arguing about airline armrests and the Wikileaks emails do not in any way appear to be making any solid dent on the number of likely voters that will put Clinton into office on November 8th, and not a whole lot of recruitment of people to vote for Trump "on November 28th"

I find the decline really promising: it shows there are still plenty of non-deplorable supporters of his who know when to call it quits.

Some of the info around the "Crazy and Not so Crazy Scenarios" are interesting the say the least..

Crazy and not-so-crazy scenarios

Here are the chances we’ll see these election outcomes.

Electoral College deadlock no candidate gets 270 electoral votes 0.3%
Electoral College 269-269 tie 0.2%
Recount at least one decisive state within 0.5 ppt 3.8%
Clinton wins popular vote 91.7%
Trump wins popular vote 8.3%
Clinton wins popular vote but loses Electoral College 4.1%
Trump wins popular vote but loses Electoral College 0.5%
Johnson wins at least one electoral vote 0.8%
McMullin wins at least one electoral vote 5.9%
Clinton majority wins at least 50 percent of the vote 48.0%
Trump majority wins at least 50 percent of the vote 1.1%
Clinton landslide double-digit popular vote margin 26.6%
Trump landslide double-digit popular vote margin 0.2%
Map exactly the same as in 2012 0.4%
Clinton wins at least one state Mitt Romney won in 2012 85.6%
Trump wins at least one state President Obama won in 2012 56.7%

alastair

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump is in agreement with many in Europe that the refugees arriving have jihadists hiding among them and the irresponsible decisions made by Congress and other western capitals has led to more Jihadists not less Jihadists. People keep accusing me of being a Jihadists yet I opposed the invasion of a Muslim Nation like so many Trump supporters. Many of the anti Jihadists out there are Muslims themselves who i have a great deal of respect for including both the Kurds and the Palestinians who are always excluded from this conversation. I'm not blind to the hazards posed by the crazy policies of the liberals.

Quite the evasion of the questions to hand.

New red herrings: You do realise that both the Palestinians and Kurds you admire have engaged in terrorist activities abroad, and that the Syrian refugees have to date contributed precisely zero to terrorist acts in the USA, and had nothing to do with the attcks in France and Belgium? You also realise that Trump supported the said invasion of the Muslim nation?

jobbridge4life

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This kind of stuff is the truly terrifying un-intended consequence of Trumps rhetoric..

I don't for a second believe that in the cold light of day , Trump actually wants people commiting acts of violence etc. , he's just an extreme narcissist with absolutely no control over his thought process.

However , there are enough mentally unstable people out there that will add together the 2+2 of Trumps vitriolic ramblings and come up with 5 leading to the very real risk of bombs and/or gun attacks on polling day or indeed post election acts of violence against a Clinton victory..

It's a frightening thing to contemplate..

Earlier in the campaign I might have agreed with you.However as Donald has been deliberately ratcheting up his rhetoric and has now plumbed depths even the most egregious of previous candidates wouldn't have dared to consider, I am no longer willing or able to give him any benefit of the doubt. Most especially considering that in the wake of Pussy-gate, and the attendant Republican renunciations, Donald declared that he was now free to campaign the way he wants. That indicates he had people advising him, telling him this sort of rhetoric was dangerous, and is now thankful that he is free to ignore this advice and engage in all the base instincts that he chooses.

Whats-more it doesn't take above, or even average intelligence (of which we know Trump has a 'huge IQ') to know that undermining the integrity of an electoral process as a the candidate of a major political party in that election is ispo facto an incitement to violence. Moreover plenty of his own supporters, even relatively high profile ones have been actively calling for an armed insurrection.

It is discomforting to think it but Trump really is the fascist nightmare he portends to be.

KingBrian2

This has possible been the most talked about election ever.

Overheal

This is plausible now:

http://www.270towin.com/maps/OO6jG

CMOTDibbler

Overheal wrote: »

I wonder what will happen to SC, it's starting to go very pale in the predictions too..

Latest poll from there by CNN/ORC has Clinton leading by 1.

Edit: Sorry that's North Carolina.

Brian?

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

Latest poll from there by CNN/ORC has Clinton leading by 1.

Edit: Sorry that's North Carolina.

538 are saying 83% likely to go Trump.

K-9

Alaska is now in play for Hillary.

Itssoeasy

I see Melania trump is saying Donald trump was "egged on" by billy bush. So they are throwing billy bush under the proverbial bus after what was said on the actual bus.

Overheal

K-9 wrote: »

Alaska is now in play for Hillary.

Crazy isn't it? Would be the first time Alaska didn't vote for a republican. They became a state in 1959.

gosplan

Anyone see Paxman special tonight?

A few nuts but mainly they focussed on Trump supporters voting for him based on change.

The I know 'he's a mess but it's something different' line.

That the direction of the country isn't OK with them.

Now if he could stick to that and add a bit of showmanship without 'rigged, drug tests, rapists etc etc etc'

Trumps biggest failing was his public speaking. He had to say stuff to stir up his predominantly white male crowds. But on the other end of the TV cameras were Latinos, African Americans and women and he lost them in doing so.

His followers biggest failing is the nonsense they post trying to make it all true.

You're doing a disservice to the campaign by posting stuff you know is false.

In the second debate, the strongest moment for me of his entire campaign was the 'she's been there for 30 years' argument.

If he had stuck to that and not been so obsessed with grabbing headlines for himself and attacking people, it'd be different.

Zubeneschamali

gosplan wrote: »

Trumps biggest failing was his public speaking.

I think it might also have to do with the fact that he is a racist, a misogynist, a narcissist, a bully and perhaps a sociopath.

aloyisious

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Earlier in the campaign I might have agreed with you.However as Donald has been deliberately ratcheting up his rhetoric and has now plumbed depths even the most egregious of previous candidates wouldn't have dared to consider, I am no longer willing or able to give him any benefit of the doubt. Most especially considering that in the wake of Pussy-gate, and the attendant Republican renunciations, Donald declared that he was now free to campaign the way he wants. That indicates he had people advising him, telling him this sort of rhetoric was dangerous, and is now thankful that he is free to ignore this advice and engage in all the base instincts that he chooses.

Whats-more it doesn't take above, or even average intelligence (of which we know Trump has a 'huge IQ') to know that undermining the integrity of an electoral process as a the candidate of a major political party in that election is ispo facto an incitement to violence. Moreover plenty of his own supporters, even relatively high profile ones have been actively calling for an armed insurrection.

It is discomforting to think it but Trump really is the fascist nightmare he portends to be.

Going on from what Quin_Dub and you talked about, Don has made some really stupid statements/passed some remarks sailing close to winding up people into stupidity. However people will plot & scheme to do things and others will make links between acts and speech after the fact, the links not really a factor in the plotting. The US edition of The Guardian newspaper reporting this about high school students who didn't succeed thankfully in their plotting. If they had, the media would probably have pilloried Don. I chanced upon the report while looking for Colorado voting polls.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj465ifgOPPAhXnDsAKHdJTCWgQFggdMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fus-news%2F2016%2Foct%2F14%2Fnazi-facebook-group-alt-right-execution-jews-black-people-colorado-students-expelled&usg=AFQjCNHm7WWrCJa97m-RjzyDDfZqCw_L2Q

Overheal

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-when-asked-by-fox-reporter-about-media-conspiracy-your-network-hasnt-been-great/

Trump has no inner monologue, admitting that,

"Someone else would say let's focus on jobs (which I do), let's focus on ISIS, let's focus on the 2nd amendment and judges of the Supreme Court Justices [sic], and I agree with that - but, I want the truth to come out"

He has willfully bogged down his own campaign to rail on this sexual assault issue, because his ego is more important to him than his campaign.

It's going to take no direct provocation from Hillary to watch him fly off on tangents on Wednesday night. He won't bother, if you ask me, even trying to stay on message, or otherwise do anything else that will save his campaign. I think he feels himself that it is lost now, and of course that's the case with the cries of conspiracies, claiming the vote will be rigged, claiming your opponent was doped for the debate. He has no interest in winning the campaign anymore, just in winning face.

Overheal

It had escaped my prior notice until I previewed my ballot that Peter Skewes was on the ticket for the American Party. He's a University professor here. Golly.

https://peterforpresident.us/

Terrible campaigning though if I haven't heard of him on campus!

dwayneshintzy

I love Melania Trump's defense of her husband in the Billy Bush "grab them by the pussy" tape; basically, a bigger boy told him to do it. Exactly what you want in a President.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/17/melania-trump-billy-bush-groping-tape-cnn-interview

Black Swan

1-hour ago FiveThirtyEight gave their forecast if the election was held today: Clinton 88.2% and Trump 11.8%. It will be interesting to see if their forecast narrows as 8 November 2016 draws near, or if it holds.

Overheal

Unprompted at a rally, Trump locks in on a young girl in the crowd and calls her up to the stage, "So beautiful," he says as they bring her up to the stage where he parades her and leans in for a kiss that you can see on the instant replay, is totally going for the lips. Yikes.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-invited-a-little-girl-on-stage-gave-her-a-kiss-and-twitter-had-some-thoughts/

How can you expect the media to talk about emails when you keep making video-tapped, gift-wrapped news like this? No doubt in my mind that he HAS to be deliberately throwing this thing now. No freaking way someone in their right mind would have thought that was a smart move given the weeks events.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yes I understand where your coming from. There are Jihadists who are committed to do just that though attack the west and Muslim states. They already existed now they have gone all 21st century on us so this makes them a lot worse. Al Qaeda, ISIS and all the rest have taken passages from the Quran and devote themselves to indiscriminately attacking the world. It is a mistake not to call them Jihadists and not to treat them as such. We also have the whole Shia-Sunni divide which America should not be getting involved in. Literally a conflict going on since the beginning of Islam. This is a Muslim matter let them sort it out themselves.

Why the insistence on calling them Jihadists? To me it's a smoke screen designed to single out Islam as the reason they are committing acts of terror. There are about 1 billion other Muslims not committing acts of terror.

Islam is not the whole problem, calling people Jihadist or radical Islamists white washes the nuances.

Your line about it being a Muslim problem they should sort out themselves is another piece of white washing. The Shia-Sunni conflict was at a peaceful detant until recently.

Let's call them what they are: terrorists.

CMOTDibbler

Overheal wrote: »

Unprompted at a rally, Trump locks in on a young girl in the crowd and calls her up to the stage, "So beautiful," he says as they bring her up to the stage where he parades her and leans in for a kiss that you can see on the instant replay, is totally going for the lips. Yikes.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-invited-a-little-girl-on-stage-gave-her-a-kiss-and-twitter-had-some-thoughts/

How can you expect the media to talk about emails when you keep making video-tapped, gift-wrapped news like this? No doubt in my mind that he HAS to be deliberately throwing this thing now. No freaking way someone in their right mind would have thought that was a smart move given the weeks events.

There's a strong suggestion that he's going to move into TV and media once the election is over. It was mooted some time back when he started surrounding himself with the likes of Roger Ailes and his strong links with Breitbart and InfoWars.

He's already built himself a following that he could use as a base for a media empire.

Brian?

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

There's a strong suggestion that he's going to move into TV and media once the election is over. It was mooted some time back when he started surrounding himself with the likes of Roger Ailes and his strong links with Breitbart and InfoWars.

He's already built himself a following that he could use as a base for a media empire.

At this stage it has to be a ratings ploy. He's turned on Fox, so he can claim only Trumpnews isn't biased against the right.

TheDoctor

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

I love Melania Trump's defense of her husband in the Billy Bush "grab them by the pussy" tape; basically, a bigger boy told him to do it. Exactly what you want in a President.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/17/melania-trump-billy-bush-groping-tape-cnn-interview

Nothing says Alpha Male more than "the other boy made me do it".

Quin_Dub

Brian? wrote: »

At this stage it has to be a ratings ploy. He's turned on Fox, so he can claim only Trumpnews isn't biased against the right.

Can you just imagine it?

Breitbart TV with a dash of Infowars washed down by Roger Ailes produced Trumpism....

Quin_Dub

Quin_Dub wrote: »

This kind of stuff is the truly terrifying un-intended consequence of Trumps rhetoric..

I don't for a second believe that in the cold light of day , Trump actually wants people commiting acts of violence etc. , he's just an extreme narcissist with absolutely no control over his thought process.

However , there are enough mentally unstable people out there that will add together the 2+2 of Trumps vitriolic ramblings and come up with 5 leading to the very real risk of bombs and/or gun attacks on polling day or indeed post election acts of violence against a Clinton victory..

It's a frightening thing to contemplate..

Billy86 wrote: »

To be honest I would love to agree with you, but with some of the comments he has made, his astoundingly vindictive personality, and indeed his own worrying mental instability which has been on full display for the last several weeks, I wouldn't be so sure.

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Earlier in the campaign I might have agreed with you.However as Donald has been deliberately ratcheting up his rhetoric and has now plumbed depths even the most egregious of previous candidates wouldn't have dared to consider, I am no longer willing or able to give him any benefit of the doubt. Most especially considering that in the wake of Pussy-gate, and the attendant Republican renunciations, Donald declared that he was now free to campaign the way he wants. That indicates he had people advising him, telling him this sort of rhetoric was dangerous, and is now thankful that he is free to ignore this advice and engage in all the base instincts that he chooses.

Whats-more it doesn't take above, or even average intelligence (of which we know Trump has a 'huge IQ') to know that undermining the integrity of an electoral process as a the candidate of a major political party in that election is ispo facto an incitement to violence. Moreover plenty of his own supporters, even relatively high profile ones have been actively calling for an armed insurrection.

It is discomforting to think it but Trump really is the fascist nightmare he portends to be.

I know it's not even 24hrs since I posted the above , but listening to what Trump and his proxies have been saying since - I'm now inclined to agree with you all.

He does mean it , he doesn't care if it gets violent , in fact if it does lead to violence it will provide him with some kind of twisted validation that he isn't really a loser and that if it wasn't for that big bad conspiracy he'd have been carried to the Whitehouse on a golden dais.

aloyisious

Brian? wrote: »

At this stage it has to be a ratings ploy. He's turned on Fox, so he can claim only Trumpnews isn't biased against the right.

That might explain why the Fox News item I saw with the host discussing the election with a Christian gent focused solely on the republican party woes, no mention of Don. His opinion: the loss of christianity was the cause of it's, and the US's, problem.

Akrasia

Overheal wrote: »

Unprompted at a rally, Trump locks in on a young girl in the crowd and calls her up to the stage, "So beautiful," he says as they bring her up to the stage where he parades her and leans in for a kiss that you can see on the instant replay, is totally going for the lips. Yikes.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-invited-a-little-girl-on-stage-gave-her-a-kiss-and-twitter-had-some-thoughts/

How can you expect the media to talk about emails when you keep making video-tapped, gift-wrapped news like this? No doubt in my mind that he HAS to be deliberately throwing this thing now. No freaking way someone in their right mind would have thought that was a smart move given the weeks events.

What an astounding video considering all the allegations that have been flying around about him.

It's unbelievable that anyone could think this man is fit to be president of the U.S.A.

And regarding him deliberately throwing the election, I find it hard to believe that anyone would choose to have themselves labelled as a sexual predator, and possible paedophile just to guarantee that he won't become president of the USA. Nobody wants to have even a hint of an allegation that they would prey on children attached to their reputation.

I just think that Trump is such a sociopath, that he genuinely cannot judge what is and is not appropriate behaviour relating to other people. He probably thinks 'I'm a politician, politicians kiss babies, I need black people to like me, there's a little black girl, if i kiss her, it will show that i'm not a racist and that I like kids, people like people who like kids...

He has no idea how he comes across to other people. He thinks he's hitting it out of the ballpark. He's a psychopath. He has learned enough about faking empathy and manipulating other people to get him through life as the son of a millionaire who has been in a position of power over other people his entire life. He has absolutely no idea how to behave when he's the one asking people for something from a position where they have the power. He cannot engage with other human beings. He can only think in terms of playing roles and playing games. He thinks that the way to turn around his election, is to play lip service to demographics, but he has no idea that his act is so transparent to everyone except his blinkered die hard supporters.

Billy86

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I know it's not even 24hrs since I posted the above , but listening to what Trump and his proxies have been saying since - I'm now inclined to agree with you all.

He does mean it , he doesn't care if it gets violent , in fact if it does lead to violence it will provide him with some kind of twisted validation that he isn't really a loser and that if it wasn't for that big bad conspiracy he'd have been carried to the Whitehouse on a golden dais.

I know it's a good while back and quite easily forgotten with his non stop disgusting behaviour ever since, but his openly calling for violence against protesters at his rallies during the primaries and gloating that he would "pay the legal fees" of anyone who did so was an early indicator of what was to come. The media didn't come down nearly hard enough on him for it which led to the "second ammendment people..." comment... which the media didn't come down nearly hard enough on him for either. And on and on until we are where we are now.

For all the fries about media bias, it is in part the sheer amount of stuff they have let him get away with in the interests of ratings and clicks that have got us to where we are now. I think some have realised their folly and almost complicit nature at this point, and their role in creating a Frankenstein, hence publications offering their first ever endorsements in 100+ years or unprecedented Democratic endorsements for (somewhat ironically) the second most hated-by-Republicans Democratic politician in decades (after her husband - the shared of Obama pales in comparison to both of them and has died down somewhat during hsi se on term, hunting it was more posturing than anything else on their part).

aloyisious

Overheal wrote: »

Unprompted at a rally, Trump locks in on a young girl in the crowd and calls her up to the stage, "So beautiful," he says as they bring her up to the stage where he parades her and leans in for a kiss that you can see on the instant replay, is totally going for the lips. Yikes.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-invited-a-little-girl-on-stage-gave-her-a-kiss-and-twitter-had-some-thoughts/

How can you expect the media to talk about emails when you keep making video-tapped, gift-wrapped news like this? No doubt in my mind that he HAS to be deliberately throwing this thing now. No freaking way someone in their right mind would have thought that was a smart move given the weeks events.

Don is able to see the girl in the audience, points to her "how beautiful she is, all decked out this evening" and the "no more though" like there was a horde rushing the stage. The parents allow her to go up without even following her to below the stage area as a matter of course. The camera didn't even pan around to the approach or where the parents were, remained focused on Don. When she got on stage and was in his arms, Don couldn't even see where her parents were then, the lights in his eyes, despite being able to see her a minute earlier in the audience. Somehow I think this was a Trump campaign attempt to prove he is a man for all the people and it has backfired.

K-9

Trump had a couple of media ventures before and they failed.

The narrative of the election seems to have gone from "how the fcuk did he get here" to "how low in the polls can he go".
And it's all down to Trump, the things that got him here in the first place have proved his undoing. He just doesn't have the temperament or self awareness to stick to what was winning him votes.

Itssoeasy

I'll will admit that I really hadn't thought about the post election problems with trumps supporters as one thing the US say is that pride themselves on the organised and peaceful transfer of power. But the nearer it gets the more I feel that trumps supporters may be angry enough to do something, in the event that trump doesn't win.

TheDoctor

Itssoeasy wrote: »

trumps supporters may be angry enough to do something, in the event that trump doesn't win.

Imagine how pissed they'll be when they turn out to vote on November 28th

CMOTDibbler

TheDoctor wrote: »

Imagine how pissed they'll be when they turn out to vote on November 28th

The ultimate conspiracy.

KingBrian2

Itssoeasy wrote: »

I'll will admit that I really hadn't thought about the post election problems with trumps supporters as one thing the US say is that pride themselves on the organised and peaceful transfer of power. But the nearer it gets the more I feel that trumps supporters may be angry enough to do something, in the event that trump doesn't win.

It would be unfair to say that only the far right engage in violence. Not saying for a moment that Trump does not attract a lot of the extreme right wingers. They gravitate towards him but violent people will behave violently regardless of being left wing or right. It is the big mistake the liberal est is making and by portraying all of Trumps fans as racists is just being condescending and reinforcing the disconnect with wider society.

Brian?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

It would be unfair to say that only the far right engage in violence. Not saying for a moment that Trump does not attract a lot of the extreme right wingers. They gravitate towards him but violent people will behave violently regardless of being left wing or right. It is the big mistake the liberal est is making and by portraying all of Trumps fans as racists is just being condescending and reinforcing the disconnect with wider society.

This is another white wash. The "liberal establishment ", whoever they are, aren't painting all Trump fans as racists.