The OFFICIAL Trump/HRC/2016 General Election Thread...

[hoosierdoc]

There's a huge anti-Ryan sentiment out there. He is not a popular republican. He is part of the problem. When you run for president you can do it how you think it should be done.

Trump is on Twitter giving crap to Paul Ryan, a Republican.

If Trump thought he had a chance in November, he might be focusing on... oh, I don't know... his opponent.

But I guess he hasn't started on her yet. He will though. Soon. Maybe late-November.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

FT reporting that Jared Kushner has informally been discussing a post-election Trump TV network

The goal was never to actually win. Just set up more self-serving industries.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

 

[jamil]

Hell no.

Public servants are absolutely allowed - even expected - to hold private opinions and public positions. They are supposed to serve the will of the people, regardless whether it coincides with their own. If there is a 180 degree difference, they should say so.

That's part of the reason it ain't as easy as people think.

I want to go back to this and see if you want to take another crack at squaring this quote for me............

Yeah. T.Lex, I'm kinda curious about this too.

It's clear to me that this is not what Hillary meant. Her separate public/private opinions aren't for representational reasons. The line between pandering and representing the people is stark.

Just as you and I believe that Trump is pandering to a certain demographic to gain political support, while holding different private opinions, Clinton is doing the same thing. She is claiming her public opinions because if the electorate knew the truth about how deep her hands are into Wall Street pockets, they'd flatly reject her--well, if there were someone to vote for other than a pandering reality TV star/real estate tycoon.

 

[T.Lex]

Yeah. T.Lex, I'm kinda curious about this too.

It's clear to me that this is not what Hillary meant. Her separate public/private opinions aren't for representational reasons. The line between pandering and representing the people is stark.

Just as you and I believe that Trump is pandering to a certain demographic to gain political support, while holding different private opinions, Clinton is doing the same thing. She is claiming her public opinions because if the electorate knew the truth about how deep her hands are into Wall Street pockets, they'd flatly reject her--well, if there were someone to vote for other than a pandering reality TV star/real estate tycoon.

Apologies for missing this. While this thread is frustrating as hell for me, I do try to respond to direct inquiries. (Also, I may have missed it because it looks like liveleak doesn't allow direct linking.)

I guess first I should say that I'm not sure of the context of HRC's leaked email or whatever. I don't really care about her as a candidate, so all the stuff that's coming out about her is only nominally interesting to me. As this campaign has dragged on, I've become more and more convinced I can never vote for her just on the few things that have come up about her.

So, my statement was in the context of the debate. The debate question was broader than whatever the leaked transcript says she said.

I'm not sure if this is what you guys are getting at, but I can use the carried interest issue as an example.

A candidate when speaking to hedge fund managers would be smart to say something like, "Look, I know carried interest is part of your income. The taxation of carried interest is a matter of tax policy that directly impacts you and your business model. I will work diligently to protect your business model. The last thing we need is to see more businesses go to tax-friendly places like Bermuda and the Canary Islands. But this country has real financial issues. I don't need to tell you folks" [knowing nod, maybe even a wink] "about debt maintenance and the time value of money. We need to make tough decisions. You will hear me talk at great length about what we need to secure a solid financial future for all our children and grand children. As this campaign moves forward, I'll be listening to all perspectives to properly shape the best outcome for our nation. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these matters with you today. My staff will always be ready to take your calls on these pressing issues, since I know you have perhaps more to lose than many others. And I hope I can count on your vote."

So, Candidate X has now offered protection to a source of contributions, but also insulated the rhetoric. I don't see an issue with that. Is it pandering? Maybe. That kind of thing happens in every election from high school student board to POTUS. ESPECIALLY, in a broad race (no pun intended) where it is necessary to appeal to different people with different priorities, a candidate has to shape the message sometimes.

For me, that's why character is so important. The message can change; principles should not.

If the message is delivered 180 degrees out of phase from one group to the next, then that's a character issue.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Early voting reveals warning signs for Trump - POLITICO

Democrats appear to be outpacing their 2012 early vote performance in several critical swing states, giving Hillary Clinton a head start on Donald Trump in some of the most important presidential battlegrounds.

In two must-win states for Trump, North Carolina and Florida, Republicans are clinging to narrow leads in the total number of mail-in ballots requested. Yet in both states, Clinton is ahead of President Barack Obama’s pace four years earlier — and the GOP trails Mitt Romney’s clip.

 

[printcraft]

Updated post #2020

The message to the people she is trying to get elected by IS 180 degrees out from the people that are giving her the money (i.e. wallstreet)
She IS lying to the American people when she say she will go after these big bankers when she is absolutely beholden to the same bankers.

CLINTON TALKS ABOUT HOLDING WALL STREET ACCOUNTABLE ONLY FOR POLITICAL REASONS

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927

 

[printcraft]

Early voting reveals warning signs for Trump - POLITICO

In two must-win states for Trump, North Carolina and Florida, Republicans are clinging to narrow leads in the total number of mail-in ballots requested. Yet in both states, Clinton is ahead of President Barack Obama’s pace four years earlier — and the GOP trails Mitt Romney’s clip.

Mail in ballots requested by whom?

 

[T.Lex]

I want to go back to this and see if you want to take another crack at squaring this quote for me............

ETA: can't find the image..... here is the meat of it along with a bunch of other meat. Pretty meaty.



https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927

Updated post #2020

The message to the people she is trying to get elected by IS 180 degrees out from the people that are giving her the money (i.e. wallstreet)
She IS lying to the American people when she say she will go after these big bankers when she is absolutely beholden to the same bankers.


https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927

I'm still not following.

From that email, which confirms to me that the Lincoln response she gave WAS actually in context as an example of what she's talking about, she's saying what I said above.

And again, I haven't paid much attention to her positions since I'm not voting for her, where is she saying that she's going after big bankers? By raising their taxes on carried interest (a position Trump endorses)? By greater regulation (a position Trump endorses)?

Politics is like sausage making. Very unpleasant to know how certain things happen. Ever thus it has been; ever thus it shall be. And here's the real problem: who was she lying to? I think the odds are at least as good that she was lying to them to get their money with the intention of regulating them.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Clinton campaign is launching a one-week ad buy in.... Texas.

 

[JettaKnight]

I don't think some people understand that alot of people are sick and tired of the GOPs S. Old S.My favorite is "We will take on that fight after MY next election!"

I'm guessing the what you describe as the "S. Old S." is what others describe as "doing what's required to win elections." And many (most?) if not you included, would prefer DJT run, yet HRC end up in the WH, rather that see Jeb in the WH.

Jeb won't end up in the WH, and as to the rest...



So what do you think will happen? A new GOP will be reborn that's what, more right wing? Is that what you want? A new party that's so conservative and libertarian that it can't win general elections?

What made the GOP the way it is up till now is winning (or attempting to win) elections. Call it Darwinism if you will, hard right wingers lose, more centrist candidates win. Why did Mourdock lose after Luger won so much?


I see so much anger directed to the GOP and hear the squeals of giddy glee from Trump supports as they stick up their middle finger. I have to ask, "If you can remake the GOP, what do you want it to become?"

Is it more of the nationalist flavor of Trump? Dismissing social issues? Libertarian? Bombastic?

Does the GOP fracture into several smaller parties?



And how many years do the Dems dominate from here on out?

 

[printcraft]

....... I think the odds are at least as good that she was lying to them to get their money with the intention of regulating them.

[video=youtube;_n5E7feJHw0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0[/video]

 

[JettaKnight]

Updated post #2020

The message to the people she is trying to get elected by IS 180 degrees out from the people that are giving her the money (i.e. wallstreet)
She IS lying to the American people when she say she will go after these big bankers when she is absolutely beholden to the same bankers.

This stuff would get a lot of traction in the news cycle if Trump didn't do everything he could to dominate it. Instead of talking about HRC's problems, I had to listen to a piece of DJT claiming vote rigging. No evidence, just talk about "certain places" and MSM being in the tank for HRC - we all know the latter is true, but that's not "vote rigging", just partisan news organizations.

 

[printcraft]

hitlary clintons new 2016 theme song.......

[video=youtube;TcV4B-74pDk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcV4B-74pDk[/video]

 

[printcraft]

This stuff would get a lot of traction in the news cycle if Trump didn't do everything he could to dominate it. ..........

This stuff will NEVER be covered or promoted before this election at a minimum. The news is partisan and in the tank for hitlary and the demoncrats in general.
They won't risk handing this election to the Republicans by covering the truth of her lies and selling out of this country.

Now, if it DOES come up after the election, well, they will get the ratings, hitlary will be safe from prosecution.....
and if in the million to one chance she is impeached they still have the whitehouse via kaine. Win win win.

 

[Tombs]

Early voting reveals warning signs for Trump - POLITICO

I'm not surprised, they've been burning ballots and caught on tape being told to do as such.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

New news that Trump has at least 249 companies located in Russia, based on official paperwork of Trump LLC via Russian gov

(Trump said he had no investments in Russia.)

Not sure if it's enough to get a news article yet, but if so, I'll update this post.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Also, Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit was trolled regarding the postal worker junking Trump ballots. It's a fake story. A fake story that Drudge was careful enough to link to.

Just careless "journalism"

http://ijr.com/2016/10/715678-popul...tter-joke-as-evidence-of-liberal-voter-fraud/

 

[Tombs]

Also, Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit was trolled regarding the postal worker junking Trump ballots. It's a fake story. A fake story that Drudge was careful enough to link to.

Just careless "journalism"

Popular Conservative Blog Gateway Pundit Uses Twitter Joke as Evidence of Liberal Voter Fraud

Nope

https://youtu.be/-NTq1tlBwqI?t=3m37s

There you go.

 

[pudly]

Hillary decided to remind people: