2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

marienbad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Bit late in the day though -

''What we are laying out today is a first-time-in-six-years consensus by the Republicans in the House on what we replace Obamacare with.”

and that was six years utterly wasted in silly repeal notions , but suddenly with an election on the horizon this is unveiled .

marienbad

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Obamacare despite its many imperfections was an essential step on the road to health care reform . It has opened the door on a long overdue process.

Overheal

I'm just laughing at the idea that the GOP finally has cobbled a plan together. Perhaps if they spent more time being constructive than obstructive?

In other news FL Gov Rick Scott's refusal to extend the states voter registration deadline as Hurricane evacuations were underway proved to be a costly mistake for him. His attempt at suppression backfired and a federal judge forced him to extend the deadline. During that extension over 100,000 voters were added to the rolls.

http://slate.me/2f9thIv

I suspect that Trump will not be winning Florida.

AbusesToilets

Overheal wrote: »

I'm just laughing at the idea that the GOP finally has cobbled a plan together. Perhaps if they spent more time being constructive than obstructive?

In other news FL Gov Scott Walker's refusal to extend the states voter registration deadline as Hurricane evacuations were underway proved to be a costly mistake for him. His attempt at suppression backfired and a federal judge forced him to extend the deadline. During that extension over 100,000 voters were added to the rolls.

http://slate.me/2f9thIv

I suspect that Trump will not be winning Florida.

Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin?

Think you mean Rick Scott

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Black Swan

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This is what we call an elaboration of the obvious. Odds are rather good that Obamacare will change "its present forum" in some way, regardless who wins the White House or US Senate 8 November 2016. Democrat Obamacare, modeled on earlier Romneycare (which the Republicans conveniently forget), were both poorly designed health care plans, and both ended up more expensive than originally proposed when put into effect for various reasons. Romneycare singed into law by former MA governor and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney turned out to be extraordinarily expensive for MA, and was repealed after Mitt Romney was no longer governor.

Billy86

InTheTrees wrote: »

Naturally the right wingers hate it but they havent offered any realistic alternatives. Its a bit rich to call it a "complete failure" when conservatives have done nothing but block any attempts to reform the mess that american healthcare had become.

Now that there's a possibility of a democrat in the white house along with a Democratic party controlled senate, they will be working to improve and refine Obamacare. No doubt the republicans will continue to obstruct.

Actually many of them did offer something, and something extremely similar to Obamacare... back in 1993. They did so in an effort to block a different health care plan. Some of those were amongst the most vocally opposed to Obamacare, which again, they in large part proposed all the way back in 1993.

'The party of no' reputation stretches back before 2008.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Billy86

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Fully aware she was, I was only a kid at that time so wouldn't know the full context and doubt she did a wonderful job... but then again, if there is something Newt Gingrich does not ever deserve, it is the benefit of the doubt.

K-9

I think we are assuming Republican opposition to Obamacare is based on policy, logic and critical analysis, when permabear has just shown it's personal and political and goes back to the 90's and Hillary as first lady.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Black Swan

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

First Lady Clinton attempted to champion universal health care for all Americans, and failed due to lack of Democrat and Republican congressional support. She did champion the passage of CHIP that provided federal funds for the health care of 8 million previously uncovered children, which was greatly helpful to the bipartisan legislation led by Senator Ted Kennedy (D) and Senator Orrin Hatch (R) when Republicans controlled congress. So she failed to achieve universal health care for all Americans, but succeeded in helping 8 million children.

Billy86

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Huh...

Like I said, that man deserves no benefit of the doubt. Ever. Not unless his plan was to 'help' Clinton by in his very own words "introducing a monstrosity".

aloyisious

You've just gotta hand it to Don. According to a speech made Sunday, he's still going ahead with the wall that Mexico will build to keep Mexicans illegals out of the US, will deport illegals but will also give Mexican illegal prison terms in US prisons of between two and five years, depending on how many times they had entered the US illegally. Now that's what I call saving the US taxpayer money, though the prison costs may come from this saving: Federal funding for sanctuary cities, which shelter illegal immigrants, would no longer exist, a promise that prompted loud cheers from the crowd in Pennsylvania. though I'd call it giving the illegals a different US postal address (if they - as illegals - had one in the first case).

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/north-america/us-election-2016/trump-draws-up-todo-list-for-first-100-days-in-power-35153609.html

Black Swan

It appears that the Clinton campaign is running ads that tie Republicans running for office to Trump, and some of those Republicans are threatening to sue the telly stations that air them, not wanting to be tied to Trump.

Overheal

His campaign manager, Kellyanne, is starting to differentiate herself from Trump himself, trying to reconcile being his manager and not, explicitly, endorsing the things he seems to believe and say.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/ok-honey-then-well-win-trump-responds-to-kellyanne-conway-telling-him-hell-be-victorious/

She's trying to save herself from an early retirement..

Black Swan

Hey DONALD TRUMP, if you are reading our [US Politics] forum in Eire (or one of your close campaign workers or spokespersons), please, PLEASE bring a lawsuit against the New York Times in the next few days (as you claim you may), and certainly before the 8 November 2016 election. If you do, then the New York Times under legal discovery may obtain all the off-air hot mic videos, recordings, and transcripts from 11 seasons of Celebrity Apprentice, depose all the staff and cast, the entire Trump family, all the contestants of Miss Teen USA, Miss USA, and Miss Universe, and the 11 women who have claimed that you (allegedly) sexually abused them, including all those that may be discovered leading up to the trial of Trump vs Times case.

Igotadose

“Her history is far from being over, I’d like to answer that question in another 15 year from now. I think she’s going to go down at a minimum as a great senator. I think she is a great wife to a president and I think Bill Clinton was a great president… Hillary Clinton is a great woman and a good woman." - Donald J. Trump discussing Hillary Clinton 2008. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/10/24/watch_donald_trump_absolutely_gush_over_hillary_clinton_in_2008_interview.html


Cool! He (was) with her!

johnp001

The third of the Project Veritas videos is less shocking than the first but compiles a strong case that the Clinton campaign has broken campaign finance laws.

Zubeneschamali

Black Swan wrote: »

Republicans are threatening to sue the telly stations that air them, not wanting to be tied to Trump.

In one case, Republican Congressman Coffman claims it is defamation to say he supports the Republican Party's nominee for President.

Defamation!

I hope he wins the case - the headlines write themselves.

TheDoctor

Todays 538 update - Iowa flips back blue but still is basically a tie.

Billy86

johnp001 wrote: »

The third of the Project Veritas videos is less shocking than the first but compiles a strong case that the Clinton campaign has broken campaign finance laws.

Interesting that the guy who is the subject of notorious bullsh*t artist James o'Keeffes latest escape has come out and asked that the full video be released, yet O'Keeffe - who claims to be ever so interested in transparency - seems entirely uninterested in doing so, don't you think?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_580a5ee1e4b000d0b1568093

alastair

johnp001 wrote: »

The third of the Project Veritas videos is less shocking than the first

Even less shocking? Is it possible to go below damp squib levels of shock?

B0jangles

So the 3rd Project Veritas video is heavily edited clips about duck costumes, this is somehow scandalous?

Meanwhile in Trumpland, the Telegraph has published a story about how a Trump PAC was willing to accept 2 million dollars from a fictitious Chinese businessman in exchange for access to President Trump.

Now that's illegal

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/24/exclusive-investigation-donald-trump-faces-foreign-donor-fundrai/

Senior figures involved with the Great America PAC, one of the leading "independent" groups organising television advertisements and grassroots support for the Republican nominee, sought to channel $2 million from a Chinese donor into the campaign to elect the billionaire despite laws prohibiting donations from foreigners.

In return, undercover reporters purporting to represent the fictitious donor were assured that he would obtain “influence” if Mr Trump made it to the White House.

Last week Eric Beach, the PAC’s co-chairman, confirmed to the reporters at an event in Las Vegas that their client's support would be "remembered" if Mr Trump became president.

aloyisious

Igotadose wrote: »

“Her history is far from being over, I’d like to answer that question in another 15 year from now. I think she’s going to go down at a minimum as a great senator. I think she is a great wife to a president and I think Bill Clinton was a great president… Hillary Clinton is a great woman and a good woman." - Donald J. Trump discussing Hillary Clinton 2008. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/10/24/watch_donald_trump_absolutely_gush_over_hillary_clinton_in_2008_interview.html


Cool! He (was) with her!

This link might provide the answer. He switched parties several times, incl from Democrat (2001 to 2009) to Republican in 2009 so his support statement might have been just before he switched.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi-7peC7vXPAhXoCMAKHXJfBpUQFggdMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtontimes.com%2Fnews%2F2015%2Fjun%2F16%2Fdonald-trump-changed-political-parties-at-least-fi%2F&usg=AFQjCNHuw1CqnrMIX0f_Xh2AxMxF_L859A

Zubeneschamali

aloyisious wrote: »

This link might provide the answer. He switched parties several times, incl from Democrat (2001 to 2009) to Republican in 2009 so his support statement might have been just before he switched.

So Trump changing from Democrat to Republican made Hillary change from "great" to "crooked" without Hillary actually doing anything crooked.

TheDoctor

Just makes up his political views as he goes along.

Right now it suits him to be Republican.

Amerika

alastair wrote: »

Even less shocking? Is it possible to go below damp squib levels of shock?

The three recent Project Veritas videos underscore the democrats propensity to lie to us just to get elected, the inciting of violence in the campaign, and their disregard for campaign laws. Yet with a straight face tell us on the stump that they are against all three. Liar, liar, pants on fire! And our lovely mainstream media ignore them for the most part, refuses to seek the truth of the matter, and keys only on the fact that they MAY have been edited. Every one of the main characters in these videos should be facing criminal charges.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/24/project-veritas-part-three-illegal-coordination-clinton-campaign-outside-groups/

Billy86

Amerika wrote: »

The three recent Project Veritas videos underscore the democrats propensity to lie...

You have to wonder if the irony in these kinds of posts is intentional or not, considering the well known and proven lies of James O'Keeffe (among others..........) and their unwillingness to release the full video despite the person they are trying to smear saying they should.

Why does James o'keefe/Veritas not want anyone to see the full video?

Why indeed. :rolleyes:

Christy42

Billy86 wrote: »

You have to wonder if the irony in these kinds of posts is intentional or not, considering the well known and proven lies of James O'Keeffe (among others..........) and their unwillingness to release the full video despite the person they are trying to smear saying they should.

Why does James o'keefe/Veritas not want anyone to see the full video?

Why indeed. :rolleyes:

I am sure the IRS is simply auditing the full video and that is why he doesn't release it.

Or that it is all a hoax from the Chinese.

Or we could ask Hannrity as he has seen the full video.

Amerika

Trump should put Gloria Alverez on stage at every rally from now to election day. And she should beseech the millions of immigrants in America to watch this video of why immigrants fled broken societies led by bad government policies, and why it is so crazy to support those same policies when they get here.

https://www.prageru.com/courses/political-science/immigrants-dont-vote-what-you-fled

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

The three recent Project Veritas videos underscore the democrats propensity to lie to us just to get elected, the inciting of violence in the campaign, and their disregard for campaign laws.

No actual laws broken.
No 'incitement' to violence - that reaction to bird-dogging is entirely down to the knuckle-dragger Trump supporters.
Which 'lies' have you discerned in these videos that get Democrats elected?

As I said - it's damp squib material.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

Trump should put Gloria Alverez on stage at every rally from now to election day. And she should beseech the millions of immigrants in America to watch this video of why immigrants fled broken societies led by bad government policies, and why it is so crazy to support those same policies when they get here.

https://www.prageru.com/courses/political-science/immigrants-dont-vote-what-you-fled

Hmm:

In short, you came to the United States to participate in what Americans call the American Dream. But have you ever asked yourself: Why is the United States so free, so much less corrupt, and so much more affluent than any Latin American country?

The answer lies first and foremost in the unique American belief in limited government. Why? Because the smaller the government, the less the corruption. And the smaller the government, the more individual freedom and personal responsibility.

Let's see how those 'small governments' do on the corruption charts, compared to social democratic and 'nanny state' systems then:

Amerika

alastair wrote: »

Hmm:


Let's see how those 'small governments' do on the corruption charts, compared to social democratic and 'nanny state' systems then:

That sure looks good on PAPER. But the simple fact is immigrants are fleeing their home countries to come primarily to the United States, not those countries on the top of your chart.

Sam Russell

Amerika wrote: »

That sure looks good on PAPER. But the simple fact is immigrants are fleeing their home countries to come primarily to the United States, not those countries on the top of your chart.

I think a lot are heading to the EU, with Germany and the UK being particularly favoured. US is only favoured by South Americans, probably because it is nearer.

Amerika

alastair wrote: »

No actual laws broken.
No 'incitement' to violence - that reaction to bird-dogging is entirely down to the knuckle-dragger Trump supporters.
Which 'lies' have you discerned in these videos that get Democrats elected?

As I said - it's damp squib material.

Let's just look at the latest video. Hillary Clinton violated federal election campaign laws after she ok'd the use of Donald Duck costumes at Trump rallies.

And I can understand the Left saying there is nothing to see here. They seem to feel it’s quite okay to circumvent the law to achieve their goals, or outright ignore the laws they don’t agree with.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

That sure looks good on PAPER. But the simple fact is immigrants are fleeing their home countries to come primarily to the United States, not those countries on the top of your chart.

It looks good on paper, because it's been transcribed from actual criteria common across all the states. Not a big shock that Guatemalans are heading to the US as opposed to Finland, but it really highlights the nonsense of some manner of US exceptionalism on corruption due to 'small government'. If anything, greater government oversight in social and welfare issues seems to offer a clearer path to less state corruption.

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

Lest just look at the latest video. Hillary Clinton violated federal election campaign laws after she ok'd the use of Donald Duck costumes at Trump rallies.

Are you managing to keep a straight face with that nonsense? Really?

Billy86

Amerika wrote: »

That sure looks good on PAPER. But the simple fact is immigrants are fleeing their home countries to come primarily to the United States, not those countries on the top of your chart.

non sequitur
nɒn ˈsɛkwɪtə/
noun
a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.
"his weird mixed metaphors and non sequiturs"

Zubeneschamali

Amerika wrote: »

Hillary Clinton violated federal election campaign laws after she ok'd the use of Donald Duck costumes at Trump rallies.

Wow - lock her up!

Amerika

alastair wrote: »

Are you managing to keep a straight face with that nonsense? Really?

Absolutely! We have laws against coordination between candidates and PACs. Unfortunately for us, Hillary Clinton doesn’t seem to think many of our laws apply to her and are only meant for us mere mortals.

RobertKK

It seemed in Austin Texas that Taylor Swift was more favoured for the Presidency that Clinton or Trump.
She performed at the F1 race weekend, and before the concert started the cameras were showing the fans - around 100,000 people at the F1 and concert, anyway, someone had a poster with Clinton, Trump and Swift with a box for voting after their name and it was ticked for Swift, which got a massive cheer, which didn't say much for with Clinton or Trump.
The cheer was so loud that they went back to the poster for a second time and got a similar reaction.
The thing is the US election has two such unpopular people, that is Miss Swift had run for the presidency she would have given the two unpopular front runners a go for their money.

Quin_Dub

RobertKK wrote: »

It seemed in Austin Texas that Taylor Swift was more favoured for the Presidency that Clinton or Trump.
She performed at the F1 race weekend, and before the concert started the cameras were showing the fans - around 100,000 people at the F1 and concert, anyway, someone had a poster with Clinton, Trump and Swift with a box for voting after their name and it was ticked for Swift, which got a massive cheer, which didn't say much for with Clinton or Trump.
The cheer was so loud that they went back to the poster for a second time and got a similar reaction.
The thing is the US election has two such unpopular people, that is Miss Swift had run for the presidency she would have given the two unpopular front runners a go for their money.

Really?

Taylor Swift fans at a Taylor Swift gig, loudly cheer an ironic poster suggesting they vote Taylor for President and you think that's a valid measure of the popularity of Trump/Clinton??

Not suggesting that both candidates don't have "likability" issues , they absolutely do , but the above is seriously weak...

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

It seemed in Austin Texas that Taylor Swift was more favoured for the Presidency that Clinton or Trump.
She performed at the F1 race weekend, and before the concert started the cameras were showing the fans - around 100,000 people at the F1 and concert, anyway, someone had a poster with Clinton, Trump and Swift with a box for voting after their name and it was ticked for Swift, which got a massive cheer, which didn't say much for with Clinton or Trump.
The cheer was so loud that they went back to the poster for a second time and got a similar reaction.
The thing is the US election has two such unpopular people, that is Miss Swift had run for the presidency she would have given the two unpopular front runners a go for their money.

Pop star more popular than politicians shocker. I am not sure I have to words to describe how much that isn't a story.

I guarantee the same result.if repeated 20 years from now with the next version of Taylor Swift and the candidates then.

K-9

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I listened to a great podcast about the American welfare system a few months back, might have been Reveal, but the impression I got was the 90's bill was very aimed at single parent families and there seemed to be a lot of Republican influence around things like marriage counseling and things like that.

Money also goes on university fees, even those on relatively high incomes. They did a funny interview with a family who originally were all for welfare cuts. When it was explained them to them that their daughter's uni fees were part subsidized by the welfare budget...

Quin_Dub

So - As of this morning, RealClearPolitics has Clinton at 272, Trump at 126 and Toss-ups at 140.

The have moved Minnesota from "Toss-up" to "Leans Dem" , with Clinton having an average 5 point lead there.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ancapailldorcha

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Broken is right. If she wins, it means 4 of the last 5 presidents will have come from 2 families. Madness in a country as diverse as the US.