US Election 2016, part III

[Pidesco]

lovin' all these unsubstantiated claims about Trump's level of success or lack thereof from you guys

 

Trump hasn't been very successful. Yes, he has. No, he hasn't. Yes, he has. No, he hasn't. Great stuff.

 

As an aside, Trump has spent comparatively very little money on this election vs. Clinton so far. I think the last numbers I saw put Clinton at about 14-15 times as much as Trump (and she had spent somewhere around 50 million).

 

(e): But on the other hand, I'm not sure what criteria those numbers were considering - looking here, where the numbers are completely different, it seems like Hillary has still vastly outspent Trump, but not quite to the effect of 15x as much.

 

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund

 

http://www.alternet.org/story/156234/exposing_how_donald_trump_really_made_his_fortune%3A_inheritance_from_dad_and_the_government's_protection_mostly_did_the_trick

 

Here ya go.

[HoonDing]

A cuckservative who manages a 40% approval rating in a cuckservative state. Seems a good choice for VP.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Trump - putting the 'mate' back in running mate (just remember to be safe when 'announcing your vice presidential candidate' if you know what I mean).

 

Edited July 16, 2016 by Deadly_Nightshade

[Drowsy Emperor]

I still don't understand why people think either candidate will herald a drastic change. Even though I'm rooting for Trump for entertainment value and spite, I see it just as a typical drummed up pre-election frenzy. 

 

People forget that Trump comes from the same social class as Hillary and other US presidential candidates. He's part of the financial elite that runs the country. And he's not going to rock the boat nearly as much as he's trying to convince everyone. Its just that he's upsetting some long standing interests in the Republican party, but at the end of the day, he's cut from the same cloth.

 

The only real difference I see is the change in political discourse, that has become more crude and more savage than ever before - but seems to be a universal thing and hardly a Trump specialty.

 

As for creeping authoritarianism, that started way before Trump, and seems to progress regardless of who is in charge.

Edited July 16, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[Guard Dog]

Drowsy Emperor is, of course, completely correct. The name of the person elected President will make little difference in how the US conducts business. Barack Obama has been President for seven years and six months. When he took office the US had troops in Iraq & Afghanistan. Guantanamo Bay was still holding prisoners. Taxes were lower than the US historical average, you had to buy health insurance if you wanted health care at a reasonable costs and unemployment was 6.5%. After that 7 & 1/2 years the US has troops in Iraq & Afghanistan. Guantanamo Bay is still holding prisoners. Taxes are slightly higher on average but still lower than the US historical average, you have to buy health insurance if you want health care at a reasonable costs and unemployment is 5.1%

Edited July 16, 2016 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

If you guys want to see some actual change then we need a President who is neither a Republican or a Democrat and not beholden to either groups interests. As it happens such a candidate WILL be on everyone's ballot: https://johnsonweld.com/

 

I'm in.

[Drowsy Emperor]

On a related note, Obama is trying to "solve Guantanamo" by shuffling prisoners around the world. A few days ago, out of the blue, local news in Serbia reported that 2 Guantanamo inmates are going to transferred... to Serbian jail.

 

A country that has nothing to do with them on any level. I think they couldn't even find it on Google maps.

 

There isn't even an indictment against them but they were held for 14 years in Guantanamo anyway.

 

How ridiculous is this? Why are they coming here?

 

And what do we do with them, strap them in power armor and send them to fight the Zerg?

Edited July 16, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[Meshugger]

If i was designing the official Trump/Pence logo and being the marketing genius that i am, i would make it subtly so that people would associate it with a basic sexual act, even to such a degree that it comes off as Trump is the one doing the act; then people would share it, alter it, and talk about both on social media and in private. It wouldn't cost a thing and the exposure will be to millions, all talking about him. 

 

Oh, and here we are.

[Hurlshort]

Trump is pretty dang good at marketing.

 

Honestly I have no idea how I will effectively teach my students about Habeas Corpus if they ever manage to shut down Guantanamo Bay.  It's such a perfect example of what happens without it.

[Gromnir]

Trump is pretty dang good at marketing.

 

Honestly I have no idea how I will effectively teach my students about Habeas Corpus if they ever manage to shut down Guantanamo Bay.  It's such a perfect example of what happens without it.

well, if you wanna teach students 'bout abuses o' habeas corpus, you can always use the bestest example o' a President who wantonly and flagrant ignored such protections: abraham lincoln.  

 

...

 

we will be looking to hear 'bout the un-american middle-school teacher from the bay area.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

The Supreme Court yanked Lincoln up short over that too. But he wasn't around to hear about it. 

[Hurlshort]

I use Lincoln as well.  I'm lucky, I teach at a school where the parents only care about math scores.  

[HoonDing]

On a related note, Obama is trying to "solve Guantanamo" by shuffling prisoners around the world. A few days ago, out of the blue, local news in Serbia reported that 2 Guantanamo inmates are going to transferred... to Serbian jail.

 

A country that has nothing to do with them on any level. I think they couldn't even find it on Google maps.

 

There isn't even an indictment against them but they were held for 14 years in Guantanamo anyway.

 

How ridiculous is this? Why are they coming here?

 

And what do we do with them, strap them in power armor and send them to fight the Zerg?

There's room in Germany.

[Longknife]

And what do we do with them, strap them in power armor and send them to fight the Zerg?

 

TIL Serbia has Power Armor and Zerglings and is therefore the most awesome country ever. Brb while I get arrested for terrorism so I can come too.

Edited July 17, 2016 by Longknife

[Drowsy Emperor]

In Terran penal colony Serbia we're always eager to accept new recruits.

[Guard Dog]

Yesterday Jeb Bush refused to support Trump saying he was considering voting for Gary Johnson: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/jeb-bush-trashes-donald-trump-on-eve-of-republican-convention/. Mitt Romney has already said he's supporting the Johnson/Weld ticket: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/donald-trump-mitt-romney-vote-libertarian-gop-split. Ironically neither of those two are "little r" republicans who might be attracted to the small government, non interventionist foreign policy of the LP. But Trump is making for strange bedfellows and any support we can get is ultimately a good thing. While it would be nice to see Johnson & Weld actually win this thing it's more important that we hit our two biggest goals: Get into the debates and get at least 5% of the popular vote.

 

Gary Johnson is happy to have any defectors from either party: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/11/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-anti-trump-republicans. The last Quinnipiac poll has him at 12%. Inching closer!

[BruceVC]

Yesterday Jeb Bush refused to support Trump saying he was considering voting for Gary Johnson: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/jeb-bush-trashes-donald-trump-on-eve-of-republican-convention/. Mitt Romney has already said he's supporting the Johnson/Weld ticket: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/donald-trump-mitt-romney-vote-libertarian-gop-split. Ironically neither of those two are "little r" republicans who might be attracted to the small government, non interventionist foreign policy of the LP. But Trump is making for strange bedfellows and any support we can get is ultimately a good thing. While it would be nice to see Johnson & Weld actually win this thing it's more important that we hit our two biggest goals: Get into the debates and get at least 5% of the popular vote.

 

Gary Johnson is happy to have any defectors from either party: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/11/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-anti-trump-republicans. The last Quinnipiac poll has him at 12%. Inching closer!

I always thought Jeb Bush  had some reasonable views 

 

Why is any support Trump can get ultimately a good thing for the US?

Edited July 17, 2016 by BruceVC

[Guard Dog]

 

Yesterday Jeb Bush refused to support Trump saying he was considering voting for Gary Johnson: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/jeb-bush-trashes-donald-trump-on-eve-of-republican-convention/. Mitt Romney has already said he's supporting the Johnson/Weld ticket: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/donald-trump-mitt-romney-vote-libertarian-gop-split. Ironically neither of those two are "little r" republicans who might be attracted to the small government, non interventionist foreign policy of the LP. But Trump is making for strange bedfellows and any support we can get is ultimately a good thing. While it would be nice to see Johnson & Weld actually win this thing it's more important that we hit our two biggest goals: Get into the debates and get at least 5% of the popular vote.

 

Gary Johnson is happy to have any defectors from either party: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/11/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-anti-trump-republicans. The last Quinnipiac poll has him at 12%. Inching closer!

I always thought Jeb Bush  had some reasonable views 

 

Why is any support Trump can get ultimately a good thing for the US?

 

You didn't read that close enough. The "we" I was referring to is the Libertarians.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Yesterday Jeb Bush refused to support Trump saying he was considering voting for Gary Johnson: http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/jeb-bush-trashes-donald-trump-on-eve-of-republican-convention/. Mitt Romney has already said he's supporting the Johnson/Weld ticket: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/donald-trump-mitt-romney-vote-libertarian-gop-split. Ironically neither of those two are "little r" republicans who might be attracted to the small government, non interventionist foreign policy of the LP. But Trump is making for strange bedfellows and any support we can get is ultimately a good thing. While it would be nice to see Johnson & Weld actually win this thing it's more important that we hit our two biggest goals: Get into the debates and get at least 5% of the popular vote.

 

Gary Johnson is happy to have any defectors from either party: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/11/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-anti-trump-republicans. The last Quinnipiac poll has him at 12%. Inching closer!

I always thought Jeb Bush  had some reasonable views 

 

Why is any support Trump can get ultimately a good thing for the US?

 

You didn't read that close enough. The "we" I was referring to is the Libertarians.

 

Ah, yes I see your point 

 

My bad 

[Guard Dog]

Fred Barnes is a writer for the Weekly Standard and a very smart man. But there isn't much here we didn't already know: http://www.weeklystandard.com/yup-shes-crooked/article/2003312

[Meshugger]

Fred Barnes is a writer for the Weekly Standard and a very smart man. But there isn't much here we didn't already know: http://www.weeklystandard.com/yup-shes-crooked/article/2003312

 

The article mentioned something about cattle futures in 1978, here's what i found about it: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/02/02/Why-37-Year-Old-Clinton-Financial-Scandal-Still-Relevant

 

Interesting.

[Guard Dog]

Well heck Mes, it's not like they can just CALL it a bribe!

[Pidesco]

Fred Barnes is a writer for the Weekly Standard and a very smart man. But there isn't much here we didn't already know: http://www.weeklystandard.com/yup-shes-crooked/article/2003312

 

The idea that Clinton is more corrupt than any other politician is hopelessly naive. Seems to me like Barnes is a guy with an agenda if he singles out Clinton for corruption. She is a politician in a major party, of course she is corrupt. Stating that she is more corrupt than any other politician is either stupidity or a deliberate attack. Given that her opposition is a textbook example of corruption, I also don't see a point in singling out Clinton for corruption.

[Agiel]

The biggest mark against her in my book is the email scandal, however almost anything is better than handing the keys to 1500 offensive strategic warheads on 5 minute alert to a man who doesn't know what a nuclear triad is, let alone someone who had this to say on how to handle arms reduction negotiations:

 

 

 

Trump once even expressed a wish during the Reagan years to lead the negotiations with the Soviets to reduce strategic nuclear weapons. At a reception in New York City around 1990, he ran into the U.S. START negotiator, Ambassador Richard Burt. According to Burt, Trump expressed envy of Burt’s position and proceeded to offer advice on how best to cut a “terrific” deal with the Soviets. Trump told Burt to arrive late to the next negotiating session, walk into the room where his fuming counterpart sits waiting impatiently, remain standing and looking down at him, stick his finger into his chest and say “F*** you!”

[Valsuelm]

Trump isn't particularly successful. He was just born really rich.

 

Lots of people inherit a million or two dollars. Lots of people get fronted similar amounts of money by their parents when they start out. Extremely few turn that money into billions as Trump has.

 

You are uninformed or a fool if you don't see that.