The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

Pounded Right in the [Presidential Election Thread]

19495969798100»

Posts

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Clinton can shake the whole health thing extremely easily and make everyone that ever commented on it look like a fool in the debates.

    She just needs to look healthy.

    It's bullshit that she should even have to worry about that. What other healthy politician has had to take steps to ensure they "look" healthy because wackjob conspiracy theorists (I am including the entire fucking media establishment in this category) get their britches in a knot over a fucking single cough?

    Oh, right, none. Clinton Rules, both side same, horse race, Eat at Arbys, vote Trump.

    Why is this still a thing? It has been brought up in the past, health concerns of candidates, and is not special to Clinton. Now I agree it is dumb over some stupid cough but to state "Clinton rules" blindly is a bit of a reach. I remember McCain for example being ragged on for health issues.

    McCain wasn't being ragged on for health issues. McCain was being ragged on for his dangerously underqualified VP-pick, who would be president in the not entirely unlikely event he died or was incapacitated while in office.

    Of course now we have a possible President Trump. Where that happening is vaguely likely to increase the actual suitability of the person in the big office.

    Yes he was. And the other thing too.

    The difference is McCain was 72, had major publicly apparent health issues including degenerative arthritis, hadn't released the results of a medical exam or records (although reporters saw them privately) and had had cancer at least four times including one Stage 2 melanoma. Clinton, also suboptimally old yet younger than her opponent or McCain, coughed.

    Holy shit. How could I miss that, and I was paying close attention to that election.

  • ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    Sleep wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    m!ttens wrote: »
    Athenor wrote: »
    Listening to NPR interviewing one of the admirals who is supporting Trump is an exercise in mental gymnastics.

    Holy shit, this. I was screaming into the ether pretty much every time that shitheel rear admiral opened his mouth. Kudos to Inskeep for at least trying to get him to answer questions while staying within whatever boundaries of decorum the ombudsman sets.

    I was listening to this on my ride into work, and it was fucking astounding.

    Hillary is a traitor to our nation's causes.
    Why?
    E-mails.

    Why do you think Trump's qualified to be Commander in Chief with no experience?
    He surrounds himself with top people.
    But he's said he ignores advisors and knows more about ISIS than anybody.
    I think he knows enough for where he is now. And both sides say things you can't take at face value.

    When fighting terrorists, the past administrations told them what our plans are, but Trump has a plan and isn't telling anybody what it is. That proves he knows what he's doing.

    Do you think the US army should be in the torture business like Trump says?
    Well, no, but sometimes you HAVE TO waterboard people.
    So what if the US's enemies use that as justification to torture US soldiers?
    They can't do that. That's a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

    Ah there's my rage, I had misplaced it, thanks for helping me find it again.

    http://www.npr.org/2016/09/07/492926666/88-former-military-leaders-come-out-in-support-of-donald-trump

    Enjoy. It's seven minutes of pure horrifying.

    ztrEPtD.gif
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Clinton can shake the whole health thing extremely easily and make everyone that ever commented on it look like a fool in the debates.

    She just needs to look healthy.

    It's bullshit that she should even have to worry about that. What other healthy politician has had to take steps to ensure they "look" healthy because wackjob conspiracy theorists (I am including the entire fucking media establishment in this category) get their britches in a knot over a fucking single cough?

    Oh, right, none. Clinton Rules, both side same, horse race, Eat at Arbys, vote Trump.

    Why is this still a thing? It has been brought up in the past, health concerns of candidates, and is not special to Clinton. Now I agree it is dumb over some stupid cough but to state "Clinton rules" blindly is a bit of a reach. I remember McCain for example being ragged on for health issues.

    McCain wasn't being ragged on for health issues. McCain was being ragged on for his dangerously underqualified VP-pick, who would be president in the not entirely unlikely event he died or was incapacitated while in office.

    Of course now we have a possible President Trump. Where that happening is vaguely likely to increase the actual suitability of the person in the big office.

    Yes he was. And the other thing too.

    That is not what I recall. There was no concern that McCain wouldn't be able to carry out the duties of the Presidential office because he was old and potentially in ill health. There was a major concern that McCain might die in office because he was old, and Sarah Palin might become President.

    Try to recall how astonishing Palin's obvious lack of fitness for office was when she first hit the airwaves after being announced. Nowadays we're used to far-right craziness, but in 2008 we were living in a happy reality where that fringe shit was actually fringe shit. Then all of a sudden you had this blustering, obviously ignorant, clearly poorly-vetted VP candidate who might actually become President. Because it's not like the VP has anything else to do! She could be a pretty bauble for the McCain campaign to put on their secular holiday tree in the White House and just be attacked for being a loon all 8 years but ultimately not cause much harm. Except the one important thing a VP is expected to do is take on the office of the Presidency in the horrific event that the President cannot, and here we had a VP pick who was demonstrably unfit for that task.

    italics.

    There was also concern for his general state of health due to the whole Vietnamese prison camp thing not generally being good for you. But yes, most all of the attention was initiated because Palin was a profoundly horrible choice for VP, so suddenly you really cared a hell of a lot about McCain's health.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Donald Trump is ending a practice most journalists think he never should have started: his "blacklisting" of news outlets.

    Effective on Thursday, the Trump campaign says it will approve requests for press credentials from The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, and other news organizations that were previously blocked by Trump.

    A campaign spokeswoman confirmed the change on Wednesday. Trump provided a cheeky statement to CNN about the restoration of credentials: "I figure they can't treat me any worse!"

    Heh. I guess he figured it's better to play along at least a bit. Or someone on his team convinced him.

    Keeping it 1600 yesterday talked a bit about the obvious double-sided strategy the Trump campaign is undertaking--one spearheaded by Kellyanne Conway, the pollster with a seemingly rational head on her shoulders, trying to get the campaign to do campaign-like things that will play well in the press (largely due to the outrageously steep curve Trump is graded on, including going to Mexico and the scripted meeting at the black church); the other by Steve Bannon, carrying out the Lewandowski philosophy of "let Trump be Trump" (including his outbursts on Twitter, the bizarre about-face with the crazy Arizona immigration speech).

    It worked with Mexico because he still got credit from the press for not shitting his pants next to the Mexican President, but the black church meeting did not fare so well. So the Kellyanne contingent has likely persuaded him in this instance that he's got to do a bit more to get the press less hostile to him so they continue to grade his cynical, poorly-executed outreach efforts to appear somewhat Presidential on the absurd parabola of credit he's afforded.

    But to a crowd of all white supporters in a Trump Rally it's gonna be all pure uncut Trump all the time, babyyyy

    Yeah, his campaign is schizophrenic. My first thought, though, was this is a reactionary move to Clinton's hot new plane and a possibly (?) more press friendly approach.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    Sleep wrote: »
    ArcTangent wrote: »
    m!ttens wrote: »
    Athenor wrote: »
    Listening to NPR interviewing one of the admirals who is supporting Trump is an exercise in mental gymnastics.

    Holy shit, this. I was screaming into the ether pretty much every time that shitheel rear admiral opened his mouth. Kudos to Inskeep for at least trying to get him to answer questions while staying within whatever boundaries of decorum the ombudsman sets.

    I was listening to this on my ride into work, and it was fucking astounding.

    Hillary is a traitor to our nation's causes.
    Why?
    E-mails.

    Why do you think Trump's qualified to be Commander in Chief with no experience?
    He surrounds himself with top people.
    But he's said he ignores advisors and knows more about ISIS than anybody.
    I think he knows enough for where he is now. And both sides say things you can't take at face value.

    When fighting terrorists, the past administrations told them what our plans are, but Trump has a plan and isn't telling anybody what it is. That proves he knows what he's doing.

    Do you think the US army should be in the torture business like Trump says?
    Well, no, but sometimes you HAVE TO waterboard people.
    So what if the US's enemies use that as justification to torture US soldiers?
    They can't do that. That's a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

    Ah there's my rage, I had misplaced it, thanks for helping me find it again.

    http://www.npr.org/2016/09/07/492926666/88-former-military-leaders-come-out-in-support-of-donald-trump

    Enjoy. It's seven minutes of pure horrifying.

    Nah I'd rather not have to explain the screaming to my coworkers. I've heard enough to know it's dog shit.

  • Mild ConfusionMild Confusion Smash All Things Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    .
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Donald Trump is ending a practice most journalists think he never should have started: his "blacklisting" of news outlets.

    Effective on Thursday, the Trump campaign says it will approve requests for press credentials from The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, and other news organizations that were previously blocked by Trump.

    A campaign spokeswoman confirmed the change on Wednesday. Trump provided a cheeky statement to CNN about the restoration of credentials: "I figure they can't treat me any worse!"

    Heh. I guess he figured it's better to play along at least a bit. Or someone on his team convinced him.

    Those press credentials are gone in the second they don't suck Trump's balls.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they never got them back. It would be entirely consistent with Trump's behavior to end the blacklist but never actually credential those he blacklisted.

    Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. It's totally within Trump's character to say he'll give them access, wait for the media to say he's "softening" his blacklist, and then not do it.

    steam_sig.png

    Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Donald Trump is ending a practice most journalists think he never should have started: his "blacklisting" of news outlets.

    Effective on Thursday, the Trump campaign says it will approve requests for press credentials from The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, and other news organizations that were previously blocked by Trump.

    A campaign spokeswoman confirmed the change on Wednesday. Trump provided a cheeky statement to CNN about the restoration of credentials: "I figure they can't treat me any worse!"

    Heh. I guess he figured it's better to play along at least a bit. Or someone on his team convinced him.

    He can see how much cover fire the ones he hasn't boxed out are providing for him. I do wonder if WaPo will start to tilt anti-Clinton now that they've got their precious access back.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Orlando Sentinel columnist (warning: highly obnoxious autoplay) is calling for a federal investigation of Bondi.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    I'm looking forward to the commander in chief forum tonight. It will be interesting to see Clinton and Trump ale questions directly from members of the military.

    Only shitty thing is that Hillary goes first, so Trump can come out after and just lie about her without any real way for her to respond.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Also in continuing shades of 2000 (though Bush did lead the whole way it only tightened late): PPP finds Clinton ahead in Florida in the 2 way but not the 4 way.

    The idea that your vote is a moral statement about you or who you vote for is some backwards ass libertarian nonsense. Your vote is about society. Vote to protect the vulnerable.
  • Jubal77Jubal77 Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    Jubal77 wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Clinton can shake the whole health thing extremely easily and make everyone that ever commented on it look like a fool in the debates.

    She just needs to look healthy.

    It's bullshit that she should even have to worry about that. What other healthy politician has had to take steps to ensure they "look" healthy because wackjob conspiracy theorists (I am including the entire fucking media establishment in this category) get their britches in a knot over a fucking single cough?

    Oh, right, none. Clinton Rules, both side same, horse race, Eat at Arbys, vote Trump.

    Why is this still a thing? It has been brought up in the past, health concerns of candidates, and is not special to Clinton. Now I agree it is dumb over some stupid cough but to state "Clinton rules" blindly is a bit of a reach. I remember McCain for example being ragged on for health issues.

    McCain wasn't being ragged on for health issues. McCain was being ragged on for his dangerously underqualified VP-pick, who would be president in the not entirely unlikely event he died or was incapacitated while in office.

    Of course now we have a possible President Trump. Where that happening is vaguely likely to increase the actual suitability of the person in the big office.

    Yes he was. And the other thing too.

    The difference is McCain was 72, had major publicly apparent health issues including degenerative arthritis, hadn't released the results of a medical exam or records (although reporters saw them privately) and had had cancer at least four times including one Stage 2 melanoma. Clinton, also suboptimally old yet younger than her opponent or McCain, coughed.

    Yeah I remember that. It all comes down to people found that acceptable because "reasons" valid or not. They were not apparently. I remember it got to the point McCain dumped his medical records to select media. That might have been because of the one major outlet attacking his cholesterol levels, again if I remember correctly.

    Now I will concede its not to the extent of Hilary. But I would not agree that is because "Hilary" but because of "media".

  • kaidkaid Registered User regular
    Kyougu wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    538 predictions:

    7 August: Clinton 83.4% Trump 16.6%
    7 September: Clinton 67.8% Trump 32.2%

    Not really surprising, right?

    I never bought the idea that it was going to be a landslide victory.

    I still think Clinton will win, but its going to be closer than a lot of people assumed.

    Which is why its important to keep pushing the message that everyone needs to vote.

    I would prefer to see things like that over the aug 7 one. If people think it is going to be a lop sided blow out they won't come out to vote. Best to have people think there is a good chance trump will win so they actually go out and vote.

  • HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Donald Trump is ending a practice most journalists think he never should have started: his "blacklisting" of news outlets.

    Effective on Thursday, the Trump campaign says it will approve requests for press credentials from The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, and other news organizations that were previously blocked by Trump.

    A campaign spokeswoman confirmed the change on Wednesday. Trump provided a cheeky statement to CNN about the restoration of credentials: "I figure they can't treat me any worse!"

    Heh. I guess he figured it's better to play along at least a bit. Or someone on his team convinced him.

    Keeping it 1600 yesterday talked a bit about the obvious double-sided strategy the Trump campaign is undertaking--one spearheaded by Kellyanne Conway, the pollster with a seemingly rational head on her shoulders, trying to get the campaign to do campaign-like things that will play well in the press (largely due to the outrageously steep curve Trump is graded on, including going to Mexico and the scripted meeting at the black church); the other by Steve Bannon, carrying out the Lewandowski philosophy of "let Trump be Trump" (including his outbursts on Twitter, the bizarre about-face with the crazy Arizona immigration speech).

    It worked with Mexico because he still got credit from the press for not shitting his pants next to the Mexican President, but the black church meeting did not fare so well. So the Kellyanne contingent has likely persuaded him in this instance that he's got to do a bit more to get the press less hostile to him so they continue to grade his cynical, poorly-executed outreach efforts to appear somewhat Presidential on the absurd parabola of credit he's afforded.

    But to a crowd of all white supporters in a Trump Rally it's gonna be all pure uncut Trump all the time, babyyyy

    Yeah, his campaign is schizophrenic. My first thought, though, was this is a reactionary move to Clinton's hot new plane and a possibly (?) more press friendly approach.

    i didn't even think of that, that's also true

    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • MayabirdMayabird Pecking at the keyboardRegistered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Clinton can shake the whole health thing extremely easily and make everyone that ever commented on it look like a fool in the debates.

    She just needs to look healthy.

    Eh. She literally has thousands of photos taken of her every day. So long as one of them looks not great that's what will be used if they want to push this narrative.

    Clinton does not eat in public because inevitably there will be a moment when a person who is eating looks silly, and the press would plaster that one second of silly-looking Clinton all over the media. She's had to reorganize her entire life around the fact that the press has had it out for her for decades.

    Mayabird on
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    AP wrote:
    Mexico government spokeswoman: Treasury Minister Luis Videgaray has resigned after Trump visit.

    He's already creating job vacancies for Mexicans and he hasn't served for a day.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    I'm pretty confident NATO could win a land war with Russia. The thing is that afterwards all you have is Russia to show for it.

    You would think that...

    The prevailing idea was that NATO with its high tech weapons like the M1 Abrahams and F-16 Fighter Jet would used their tech edge to destroy Hordes of Soviet opposition leaving NATO standing victorious on a pile of Russian bodies. Totally not racists and de-humanizing of real opponents at all.

    Then the Cold War ended and East Germany became part of Germany. For the First time NATO had access to State of the Art Warsaw Pact weaponry.... And it turned out not only to be just as good as NATO weapons, but in vital areas better. Turns out all the Soviet weapons seen in the 3rd world had been export models with specific parts taken out.

    The T-72 for example had ERA armor that made the M1s 105mm cannon shots bounce off. The Mig-29 had a headset that allowed it to shot down its opponent just by looking at them. Common shit now, but enough to make the US armed forces gently piss themselves in 1990. They promptly started to upgrade their shit, peace dividend be damned

    A conventional war against Russia back then and now would be filled with surprises. The Russians are not stupid, nor cowardly. They just wouldn't fight in a manner we would want and would bleed us dry using ambushes and sneak attacks.

    When? The Soviets were essentially bankrupt from the oil crisis on. They lacked the ability to maintain their forces effectively. That's why the USSR fell in no small part. T-72 with ERA armor (T-72B) didn't exist until 1988 and not in substantial numbers until well after 1989 and the 3rd generation ERA armor that can withstand a (single) direct M1 105mm cannon shot didn't exist until even later. By then the US had, among other things, Stealth aircraft.

    The problem with invading Russia wouldn't be Russian tech, it'd be that you were invading Russia.

    Not to mention lots of their troop numbers in Eastern Europe were either completely fictitious or nonfunctional as military units.

  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Trump raised 90 million in August
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican Donald Trump raised about $90 million in August in his campaign for the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election against Democrat Hillary Clinton, Fox News reported on Wednesday.

    The report did not offer a breakdown of the amount raised by he New York real estate magnate, but Trump said at a rally on Tuesday that he himself contributed a lot of the money to his campaign in August.

    In July, Trump took in $80 million
    Trump didn't raise $80 in July, btw. He raised ~36 million and the RNC raised ~44 and about $10 of that was for the convention or otherwise sequestered from campaigning. Clinton raised 140 million between the campaign and DNC in August.

    This is also not the FEC filing so we'll see how real it is. In June he claimed he'd raised 51 but had actually raised 26.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII They wanna get my gold on the ceilingRegistered User regular
    The media could investigate an actual, credible allegation of pay-to-play re Trump/Bondi but Clinton talked to some Clinton Foundation donors while in office and oh actually nothing untoward happened at all.

    It's not a one-off. Remember he gave 35k to the Texas AG too.

    Well, I know that. But the point is the average reader probably does not. I'd bet there are other instances of this kind of conduct worth investigating but the press is more interested in whether Trump the trained monkey can juggle bananas.

    And not whether, you know, he might actually be a corrupt piece of shit.

    Battletag: Threeve#1501; PSN: Threeve703; Steam: 3eeve
  • CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Clinton earns Dallas Morning News' first Democratic endorsement since WWII.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20160907-we-recommend-hillary-clinton-for-president.ece

    I heard this might happen yesterday. It's a conservative news paper for those that don't know.

    If Trump manages to make fucking Texas flip blue...

    He can make Dallas vote blue because we probably would anyway... people don't realize that conservative newspaper or not, Dallas is a lot more liberal than most of the rest of the state (other than Austin). It's getting all those small town Texans to vote for Hillary that's probably never going to happen, unfortunately. But we can still dream.

    "excuse my French
    But fuck you — no, fuck y'all, that's as blunt as it gets"
    - Kendrick Lamar, "The Blacker the Berry"
  • ZythonZython Registered User regular
    Also in continuing shades of 2000 (though Bush did lead the whole way it only tightened late): PPP finds Clinton ahead in Florida in the 2 way but not the 4 way.

    That's...extremely odd, considering how Gary Johnson polls better than other 3rd parties.

    Switch: SW-3245-5421-8042 | 3DS Friend Code: 4854-6465-0299 | PSN: Zaithon
    Steam: pazython
  • SixSix Caches Tweets in the mainframe cyberhex Registered User regular
    Kruite wrote: »
    The strain on MCCAIN after he won the campaign

    Man, I started this and thought you were going to do the whole thing in verse and got all excited

    can you feel the struggle within?
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Zython wrote: »
    Also in continuing shades of 2000 (though Bush did lead the whole way it only tightened late): PPP finds Clinton ahead in Florida in the 2 way but not the 4 way.

    That's...extremely odd, considering how Gary Johnson polls better than other 3rd parties.

    There are still Dem holdouts angry about the primary who have no fucking idea what Johnson's ideology or party platform is, plus conservative but non-whackjob Republicans who prefer Clinton to Trump but a bootstrapper to Clinton. That poll has Clinton with 77% of Obama 12 voters in a 4 way and 84% in a 2 way, while Trump has 83 and 86 of Romney voters.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    555406272_QZs5b-2100x20000.jpg

    smCQ5WE.jpg
This discussion has been closed.