2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Billy86

TheDoctor wrote: »

McCain is political royalty in Arizona. Trumps comments towards him and McCains un-endorsement obviously hurting Trump in a big red state.

McMullin for Arizona!!

That's the thing with McCain, he's so highly regarded nationally but especially in Arizona that if he had condemned even a democratic nominee he could do noticeable damage to their numbers. It's something those in the trump safe space echo chamber seem entirely unaware of, which also speaks volumes.

Billy86

K-9 wrote: »

Trump is the antithesis of McCain.

McCain rightly tried to calm down the nuttier elements in the GOP in 08, remember him admonishing a woman for his comments about Obama being a Muslim, threat to the country etc.?

Trump sees these people as his base and is actively counting them.

He has set back race relations 50 years by courting these people as he has legitimized this stuff in their eyes.

That was a moment of pure "oh sh*t Frankenstein!!" moments of any election cycle I can remember. During and a little after 08 he let himself down, but he's otherwise been a very classy politician for a very long time. As someone else put it he is royalty - not just republican royalty, but US political royalty across lines.

B0jangles

Kurt Eichenwald has an interesting piece on Trump's extremely shady past in business:

http://europe.newsweek.com/donald-trump-business-busts-victims-511034?rm=eu

Trump regularly cheats at golf, even revising his scorecard after a match to transform defeat into victory, according to two people who have played with him. He persuaded an elderly couple who ran a Florida antique store to let him “try out” two valuable pieces, then refused to return or pay for them, according to someone close to the Trump family. He bought expensive jewelry at Bulgari on Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue, then colluded with the store to have empty boxes supposedly containing his purchase shipped out of state so he could dodge New York sales tax, court records show. After dragging a buddy through years of litigation, Trump told the man he had filed the suit only because he was angry the friend had not given him enough public credit for his success, according to a person who witnessed the conversation.

Another example emerged the following year. Trump purchased an old hotel and adjacent apartment building for redevelopment on Central Park South, one of the toniest streets in Manhattan. A little more than 100 tenants occupied the rent-controlled apartments, but Trump launched a campaign to drive them out, according to court documents filed by city and state officials. He filed a barrage of what the city called “nuisance suits” against the residents. He cut off their heat and hot water. He tried to move homeless people into empty apartments to annoy or even frighten the residents. He decreased security for the building, and over those 18 months, the number of burglaries in the building skyrocketed.

Trump scoffed at complaints from residents and the government, publicly disparaging occupants of the apartments as pampered millionaires—a claim he made with no information to back it up. Instead, the court proceedings showed that many of the residents were elderly or middle class. In 1986, with the legal proceedings dragging on, Trump finally abandoned his plans to tear down the apartment building, and the residents were allowed to remain.

Three years later, Trump sold stock in his newly formed Trump Hotel and Casino Resorts, which owned all three of his Atlantic City casinos and another casino he had started in Indiana. He insisted the stock trade under the ticker DJT—his initials. As chairman of the company, Trump maintained a 41 percent stake, which was worth about $400 million when the stock hit its all-time high of $29.25 a share—less than a year after going public.

Under Trump’s leadership, however, the company was unprofitable every year, and by the end of his time as chairman, it had lost more than $1 billion. By 2004, the stock was selling for 65 cents a share, and the company fell into bankruptcy; people who had put their faith in the Trump name lost more than 90 percent of their investment. During the same time, those who owned funds based on the Standard & Poor’s 500 index more than doubled their money. Even in the greatest stock market ever, and in a business regularly described as a license to print money, Trump left only wreckage in his wake. And investors in Trump hotels saw nothing but losses.

On the other hand, Trump did just fine for himself. Even as his company’s stock price was collapsing and annual losses were piling up, filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission show that during his years as chairman, more than $60 million poured from the public company into Trump’s pockets.

This is the dirty secret behind Trump’s allegedly miraculous financial recovery. What he told the public was a fable: that he had fought his way back with perseverance and skill. In truth, he did it by snatching huge fistfuls of cash from a company that was wiping out the savings of millions of people.

There is a lot more in there and it's all pretty appalling.

Edit: And the Clinton campaign have introduced a delightful new feature to their website - now her supporters can choose to auto-donate every time Trump tweets!

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/troll-trump/

Just...masterful.

Quin_Dub

Even Fox are calling it done..

They have Clinton on 307 , Trump on 181, with 50 in toss-up..

Texas is even in play with the latest poll showing Clinton has narrowed the gap to 3 points, inside the margin of error..

This is Texas - that Romney won by 16 points and McCain by 12...

Sofa Spud

Wasn't he asked in an interview if he's ever asked for forgiveness - I think possibly in relation to his relationship with God - and he, without any sense of hubris, or reality for that matter, replied 'No, why should I, I don't think I have ever done anything that required me to ask for forgiveness'. I think the reality is that he was being genuine and sincere, and not in a good way.....

Agent Smith

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Wasn't he asked in an interview if he's ever asked for forgiveness - I think possibly in relation to his relationship with God - and he, without any sense of hubris, or reality for that matter, replied 'No, why should I, I don't think I have ever done anything that required me to ask for forgiveness'. I think the reality is that he was being genuine and sincere, and not in a good way.....

Really trying to sew up that Christian vote.....

Sofa Spud

Yeah, but Agent Smith (apologies, not enough posts yet to quote another post), the scary bit is how the evangelicals are, by and large, sticking with him despite all the sleaze - considering all the 'family' values guff they came out with during the nineties when they effectively took over the GOP, it goes to show it was just political expediency, and to me, was just a way to distract from the fact that Clinton was doing an effective job with the economy....

TheDoctor

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Even Fox are calling it done..

They have Clinton on 307 , Trump on 181, with 50 in toss-up..

Texas is even in play with the latest poll showing Clinton has narrowed the gap to 3 points, inside the margin of error..

This is Texas - that Romney won by 16 points and McCain by 12...

Still looking forward to tuning into FOX on election night as Clinton edges over 270.

Quin_Dub

TheDoctor wrote: »

Still looking forward to tuning into FOX on election night as Clinton edges over 270.

Clinton could have 200+ EC votes in the bag before the west coast (even before the mid-west) have finished voting if she takes Florida and with the 70 or so West coast votes pretty much a given it will be over very early..

Itssoeasy

Billy86 wrote: »

That was a moment of pure "oh sh*t Frankenstein!!" moments of any election cycle I can remember. During and a little after 08 he let himself down, but he's otherwise been a very classy politician for a very long time. As someone else put it he is royalty - not just republican royalty, but US political royalty across lines.

My abiding memory of McCain and it kind of summed up that on the whole he's a decent guy, was his consession speech when he lost in 2008. He said that he phone Obama to congratulate him on his victory and some in the crowd booed, and to be fair he wasn't having it from the crowd.

Itssoeasy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvgqRKYapU8

Here is McCains speech. I shudder to think what trumps will be if in the increasing likelihood he loses.

Brian?

Itssoeasy wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvgqRKYapU8

Here is McCains speech. I shudder to think what trumps will be if in the increasing likelihood he loses.

McCain is a class act. Always has been. I don't agree with 90% of his policies, but I have huge respect for the man and always will.

Sofa Spud

Ditto - safe to say that Trump won't be so eloquent....

CMOTDibbler

Itssoeasy wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvgqRKYapU8

Here is McCains speech. I shudder to think what trumps will be if in the increasing likelihood he loses.

A very statesmanlike speech and delivered with feeling. Even though some in the crowd booed at Obama's name, they still had the ability to applaud his victory.

That sort of unity is sadly missing these days.

InTheTrees

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Clinton could have 200+ EC votes in the bag before the west coast (even before the mid-west) have finished voting if she takes Florida and with the 70 or so West coast votes pretty much a given it will be over very early..

The news wont report any results until the west coast polls close. The west coast closes (10pm?) and all the news outlets will start announcing the winner based on the exit polls.

Then its a matter of waiting for actual results to confirm that. If its as conclusive as it seems, trump could concede by 10:15?

Quin_Dub

InTheTrees wrote: »

The news wont report any results until the west coast polls close. The west coast closes (10pm?) and all the news outlets will start announcing the winner based on the exit polls.

Then its a matter of waiting for actual results to confirm that. If its as conclusive as it seems, trump could concede by 10:15?

But won't..

He won't even contemplate concession until the 270 is 100% official , which probably means waiting for the West coast to declare , and even then I'd say he'll hang in to the bitter end looking for an opportunity to scream "Fraud!!!!"

Itssoeasy

TheDoctor wrote: »

Still looking forward to tuning into FOX on election night as Clinton edges over 270.

Somehow I don't think that Karl rove will be throwing his toys out of the pram after fox calling a state too soon. Yeah I saw the fact that Texas is now only leaning republican not strongly republican. Dear God trump is going down and even the good people of Texas are thinking "well let's think about this."

Itssoeasy

Also speaking of Fox News and the election night coverage. How smug will Megyn kelly if I assume she is co hosting it like other years ?

ebbsy

Whatever happens Trump has buried a whole party and 16 candidates to boot,without having a cent of political experience.

He has shown up a lot of people.

Christy42

InTheTrees wrote: »

The news wont report any results until the west coast polls close. The west coast closes (10pm?) and all the news outlets will start announcing the winner based on the exit polls.

Then its a matter of waiting for actual results to confirm that. If its as conclusive as it seems, trump could concede by 10:15?

I remember watching last time and CNN were happy to call states as they closed and called the election for Obama as soon as they called enough states to push him to 270 (though I think that took till California).

They also kept updates going on how each state was going if they hadn't already called it. So potential swing states they held off until they felt enough votes had been counted. They also made a big deal out of each one. Even states like Kansas that they called the second the ballots closed they made a big deal of calling when it was mind numbingly obvious who would win that state.

Overheal

The 538 model makes it pretty plain that even without the swing states she's got form control of enough EC votes to surpass 270.

Sofa Spud

On a slightly separate note, anyone watching the Keith Olbermann 'The Closer' clips on youtube? Partisan as always, but watchable all the same.

jobbridge4life

ebbsy wrote: »

Whatever happens Trump has buried a whole party and 16 candidates to boot,without having a cent of political experience.

He has shown up a lot of people.

Indeed. All of his supporters and abettors.

John Kasich sitting pretty for 2020 if Trump does lose.

jobbridge4life

frostyjacks wrote: »

96% of campaign donations from journalists have gone to Hillary.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/10/17/20330/journalists-shower-hillary-clinton-campaign-cash

If we don't have an impartial media, then we don't have a fair election. The whole process has lifted the lid on the globalist cabal who are intent on subverting our western, Christian society. They must be stopped, and Trump is the man to stop them.

Those donations were made publicly. Do you suggest prohibiting journalists from having a political opinion? Because if you do you won't of course actually be preventing journalists from having a political opinion you'll just be making it more difficult for the public to determine what it is.

Also I see we have abandoned any pretenses to this not being a religious war. Who would have thought that the man to save Christian society was a charlatan, serial philanderer, double divorcee, with a penchant for indulging in all things sexual and sordid. Remind me the next time you feign concern for societal values.

jobbridge4life

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

He's got Breitbart, InfoWars and Roger Ailes in his camp. How long before he alienates them I wonder.

Surprise!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-ailes-no-longer-speaking?utm_content=buffer43524&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Billy86

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Yeah, but Agent Smith (apologies, not enough posts yet to quote another post), the scary bit is how the evangelicals are, by and large, sticking with him despite all the sleaze - considering all the 'family' values guff they came out with during the nineties when they effectively took over the GOP, it goes to show it was just political expediency, and to me, was just a way to distract from the fact that Clinton was doing an effective job with the economy....

Well many evangelicals are simply fundamentalists, and once he railed against the Liverpool to their Man Utd (because let's face it, that's one of the most apt analogies for American politics that there is - pick your rivals, Barca/Madrid etc) that's all they needed to know and absolutely nothing else mattered.

4068ac1elhodqr

PaddyPower paid out $1.1m already on HC backers, the thing is, DT's odds are shortening and he may well do very well tonight.

If an early market opens for the facepage chap: Zuckerberg (for 2020) at around 1000/1 may well consider a few shillings on it.

It said on the news that HC has been resting for the last 2weeks, sounds a bit peculiar....

Overheal

For wide-scale fraud to really be an issue, there would have to be systematic fraud in the counting. But remember: most state governors are republicans



And many previous claims of voter fraud were later investigated and found to be without merit - like the situation in South Carolina, where SLED couldn't find one single case of an alleged dead-person's vote. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/nikki-haley-voter-fraud_n_3566194.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

But try to convince the die-hard Trump crowd there isn't going to be fraud. Some of them are already prepared to take up arms. It is dangerous.

Billy86

ebbsy wrote: »

Whatever happens Trump has buried a whole party and 16 candidates to boot,without having a cent of political experience.

He has shown up a lot of people.

A lot of Republican politicians and voter, yeah.

Roanmore

Is there any indication on how the House and Senate elections are impacted by the Trump / Clinton campaigns?

Billy86

Sofa Spud wrote: »

On a slightly separate note, anyone watching the Keith Olbermann 'The Closer' clips on youtube? Partisan as always, but watchable all the same.

Ah I absolutely can't stand that guy, to be fair. Not huge on Rachel Maddow either, but she's a huge step up on him... they're all a bit preachy. That's fine for John Oliver & Jon Stewart, but I'd rather keep that off my actual news-feed - too easy to get sucked into an alternate reality that Fox/Breitbart/Trump supporters currently find themselves in.

Billy86

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

It said on the news that HC has been resting for the last 2weeks, sounds a bit peculiar....

I googled 'Clinton resting' and all I got was results on 'Clinton resting b*tch face', just curious where you read that?

Though sitting back and letting Trump continue his never-ending implosion probably is the easiest route to victory for her all the same! :pac:

Billy86

Roanmore wrote: »

Is there any indication on how the House and Senate elections are impacted by the Trump / Clinton campaigns?

I was actually just thinking this reading Overheal's post about governors - if I recall it has hurt them quite a bit, though their race to distance themselves from him seems to have put a better face on it lately. It will be interesting to see how they do potentially without the Trump bloc, though.

The Senate will be close but the feeling a week or so ago seemed to be that it was edging in the Dem's favour. 10 Dem seats and 24 Reps are up for grabs, the Reps have a 54-44 lead, though really more 54-46 as the two independents (King, Sanders) are much more on the Dem side of things. So a gain of 4 would basically give the Dems an effective majority while keeping them in check, 6 would seal it for them. Tim Kaine will be Senate president with the deciding vote for tie-breakers, remember.

The House seems very safe to remain Republican, though the Dems are expected to make gains that could cause a good few issues given how fractured the GOP are post-tea party, but especially post-Trump.

Overheal

Roanmore wrote: »

Is there any indication on how the House and Senate elections are impacted by the Trump / Clinton campaigns?

broad question tbh, whether or not HRC has been favorable/unfavorable to party races and similar to Trump. However many GOP candidates distanced themselves quickly from Trump after the sex assault allegations began.

I haven't followed 538 for the Senate and I don't know what its predictability record has been. But when I checked it a few weeks ago the average outcome appeared to be a nearly split Senate, which has shifted to a higher likelihood of a DNC majority.

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



Neither party has a shot at a supermajority (2/3rds). So the odds of Hillary getting impeached, for example, stop right there, as removal from office would require a 2/3rds senate vote. The near split is bad news however, as the parties are both so divisive that they will filibuster one another till the end of time.

As far as the House goes, don't get me started on Gerrymandering.

Overheal

Billy86 wrote: »

I googled 'Clinton resting' and all I got was results on 'Clinton resting b*tch face', just curious where you read that?

Though sitting back and letting Trump continue his never-ending implosion probably is the easiest route to victory for her all the same! :pac:

In fact, she had cleared her schedule for the 5 or so days leading up to the debate for full on debate-prep. It would seem she wants to really put his campaign on ice. Unless he somehow came out *significantly* ahead of her after this debate, he doesn't even have a hail mary shot - and that's just the first step.

PopePalpatine

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

PaddyPower paid out $1.1m already on HC backers, the thing is, DT's odds are shortening and he may well do very well tonight.

I'd say that's due more to punters wanting to bet on Trump in case his odds shorten in the case of a Clinton meltdown tonight.

CMOTDibbler

Billy86 wrote: »

I googled 'Clinton resting' and all I got was results on 'Clinton resting b*tch face', just curious where you read that?

Though sitting back and letting Trump continue his never-ending implosion probably is the easiest route to victory for her all the same! :pac:

Easier to just Google her itinerary.

She was at rallies and other events all over the country last week up until Friday when she appeared on the Ellen de Generes show. Done nothing since.

Concentrating on debate prep I'd imagine.

Billy86

Not as easy a read as their presidential coverage, but RCP do have extensive stuff on the House & Senate too:

Senate:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/senate/2016_elections_senate_map.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/senate/

House
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/house/2016_elections_house_map.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/house/



...and on the subject of RCP, Clinton has now for the first time taken the (very slim) lead over Trump in Arizona - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/az/arizona_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-6087.html

4068ac1elhodqr

Billy86 wrote: »

I googled 'Clinton resting' and all I got was results on 'Clinton resting b*tch face', just curious where you read that?

Was either CNN/Sky/BBC that said 2weeks resting, probably the Kay Burley live broadcast today from LV.

The hinterweb says 'no public appearances' were scheduled for the last week (6 or 7 days). Hiding away for a whole week at this critical time seems a bit odd...

Overheal

Surprised PP paid out already. She can still be shot or something awful

4068ac1elhodqr

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'd say that's due more to punters wanting to bet on Trump in case his odds shorten in the case of a Clinton meltdown tonight.

His odds have shortened (right across the board) by 15-20% in the last 24hrs, perhaps the bookies are worried HC has gone awol, or is having problems getting cryogenically defrosted or something.

Billy86

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

Was either CNN/Sky/BBC that said 2weeks resting, probably the Kay Burley live broadcast today from LV.

The hinterweb says 'no public appearances' were scheduled for the last week (6 or 7 days). Hiding away for a whole week at this critical time seems a bit odd...

Obligatory. And yes it's probably my 3rd or so time in this thread but... obligatory.

CMOTDibbler

Finnley Quaint Wineglass wrote: »

Was either CNN/Sky/BBC that said 2weeks resting, probably the Kay Burley live broadcast today from LV.

The hinterweb says 'no public appearances' were scheduled for the last week (6 or 7 days). Hiding away for a whole week at this critical time seems a bit odd...

And wrong. Last four days would be about right. Not counting today of course.

Date|Location|Type|Speaker
October 10|Columbus, Ohio|Rally|Hillary Clinton
October 10|Detroit, Michigan|Voter Registration Event|Hillary Clinton
October 11|Miami, Florida|Rally|Hillary Clinton & Al Gore
October 12|Pueblo, Colorado|Rally|Hillary Clinton
October 12|Las Vegas, Nevada|Rally|Hillary Clinton
October 13|San Francisco, California|Fundraiser|Hillary Clinton
October 14|The Ellen DeGeneres Show|Television|Hillary Clinton

Black Swan

frostyjacks wrote: »

She is a physical wreck, possibly pumped full of drugs for public appearances

Do you have any substantive support for these drug claims regarding Hillary Clinton, other than what you have heard coming out of Donald Trump's MOUTH from his political pulpit?

Does anyone find the timing of this Hillary Clinton drug unsubstantiated claim by Trump occurring after SNL, Seth Meyers Closer Look, et al, having made fun of Donald Trump's extraordinary sniffing during presidential debates 1 & 2?

ebbsy

Black Swan wrote: »

frostyjacks wrote: »

She is a physical wreck, possibly pumped full of drugs for public appearances

Do you have any substantive support for these drug claims regarding Hillary Clinton, other than what you have heard coming out of Donald Trump's MOUTH from his political pulpit?

Does anyone find the timing of this Hillary Clinton drug unsubstantiated claim by Trump occurring after SNL, Seth Meyers Closer Look, et al, having made fun of Donald Trump's extraordinary sniffing during presidential debates 1 & 2?

Hillary is taking something for sure, very few appearances and eyes glazed over when she does.

No wonder she was sitting down all the time in the 2nd debate.

oscarBravo

ebbsy wrote: »

Not as low as getting women to lie about sexual assaults.

I'd ask you for proof of that allegation, but you're not too keen on answering questions, so why bother?

alastair

Overheal wrote: »

Surprised PP paid out already. She can still be shot or something awful

She'd still win in that case - with a bigger majority.

CMOTDibbler

ebbsy wrote: »

Not as low as getting women to lie about sexual assaults.

If you can't back that up (and I know you can't), this is just mud slinging. Why do you bother? Nobody listens to unsubstantiated crap and even less people believe it.

btw, your definition of low needs revising. If you think that asking for a woman to be shot is not as low as asking someone to lie, then you have a strange set of morals.

Black Swan

21 minutes ago FiveThirtyEight's forecast shows Clinton's chance of winning 86.7% and Trump's 13.3%. These are updated daily, sometimes more frequently given the course of events occurring during the remaining 3 weeks before the presidential election. The forecast will more than likely be updated again hours following tonight's 3rd and last presidential debate. It's still possible that Trump could win, but the odds are very unfavourable this close to the 8 November 2016 election.

Of course, if you are a Trump supporter, you may wish to discount FiveThirtyEight's forecasts, because they do not favour your candidate, and if you have absolute and total faith in every word that comes out of Donald Trump's MOUTH, FiveThirtyEight might be considered a member of some Trump rumoured worldwide group that has been working collectively to rig or fix the election in each of the individual 50 states, DC, and territories so that he loses (through absolutely no fault of his own).

Brian?

ebbsy wrote: »

Hillary is taking something for sure, very few appearances and eyes glazed over when she does.

No wonder she was sitting down all the time in the 2nd debate.

That's absolute nonsense. There is zero evidence that she's "on something".

The reason she sat down so much was there were chairs provided. Trump looked like a mad man, pacing around while Hillary talked.