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

[jamil]

..nevermind.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Here's my pitch. Vote Johnson, with the hopes he get 5% of the popular voter so that the next go round for POTUS, the Libertarian party will be able to get matching funds from the federal govt. Those funds can honestly make the difference between being on the ballot in all 50 states and access to the debates. Kinda ironic given he's a Libertarian, but still, it may break the chains of the 2-party farce we are forced to endure.

I've heard this sort of reasoning before. As screwed up as the dems and the reps are, I'll not now turn to a party that insists on nominating people like Johnson and Weld. Having to choose between the lesser of 3 evils is no better than choosing from the lesser of 2 evils---you still get evil.

 

[jbombelli]

Nope. Even they can sue. The fact that they don't is telling, though. My guess is Trump would lose his ass almost every case. He, like Clinton, is a congenital liar and a buffoon to boot.

There is a much higher burden of proof for public officials. Journalists say "we thought it was true" when they knew damn well it wasn't or they call it satire, and say "furst amendmunt" and that's the end of it.

And you know it.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Breitbart coordinated with liberal activist and organizer who disrupted GOP primary campaign events - POLITICO

 

[mrjarrell]

There is a much higher burden of proof for public officials. Journalists say "we thought it was true" when they knew damn well it wasn't or they call it satire, and say "furst amendmunt" and that's the end of it.

And you know it.

The burden of proof is the same for a politician as it is for you and I. Unlike Drumpf and his supporters I actually believe in and respect the 1st Amendment, (as well as all the others). He wants to change things to suite his egotistical whims. I want things left as they are. If he feels slighted then I suggest he sue, or move his Oompa Loompa ass to England.

 

[actaeon277]

The burden of proof is the same for a politician as it is for you and I. Unlike Drumpf and his supporters I actually believe in and respect the 1st Amendment, (as well as all the others). He wants to change things to suite his egotistical whims. I want things left as they are. If he feels slighted then I suggest he sue, or move his Oompa Loompa ass to England.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

In United States law, public figure is a term applied in the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy. A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or business leader) cannot base a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth).[SUP][1][/SUP] The burden of proof in defamation actions is higher in the case of a public figure.
The controlling precedent in the United States was set in 1964 by the United States Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. It is considered a key decision in supporting the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Trump getting money from China. Hah.


Exclusive investigation: Donald Trump faces foreign donor fundraising scandal

 

[mrjarrell]

Trump getting money from China. Hah.


Exclusive investigation: Donald Trump faces foreign donor fundraising scandal

You think they're going to care that he accepted money from the communists? Hell, he likely raped a 13 year old girl and they don't care.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

You think they're going to care that he accepted money from the communists? Hell, he likely raped a 13 year old girl and they don't care.

"He's just a super-smart business-man! There's no conflict of interest or inconsistency here at all!"

 

[jbombelli]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

In United States law, public figure is a term applied in the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy. A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or business leader) cannot base a lawsuit on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth).[SUP][1][/SUP] The burden of proof in defamation actions is higher in the case of a public figure.
The controlling precedent in the United States was set in 1964 by the United States Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. It is considered a key decision in supporting the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

Oh look. Someone's wrong. Again.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Breitbart coordinated with liberal activist and organizer who disrupted GOP primary campaign events - POLITICO

Seems like this should be more important. I mean, the Breitbart-types constantly blaming others for GOP Sabotage... but it turns out they were the ones sabotaging GOP candidates.

I really wish there was a way to remove Andrew's name from that ****hole.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

To all the "muh scotus" Trump supporters... congratulate yourselves on losing both POTUS and Senate.


Senate Democrats Poised to Pick Up 5-7 Seats


Edit: 13 days before the election, Trump is leaving the scampaign trail to promote grand opening of his new hotel

 

[bwframe]

How long before the NeverTrumper's singing for a Hillary victory cannot compete with how bad she really is?

How much more needs to come out of the cracks about Hillary and gun control before we decide that putting up with the Donald may be the better alternative?

How long are we going to allow the Liberals, media and a few with their own agenda to influence us into making a truly poor voting decision to allow a win by one who openly states and runs on a platform directly opposite our beliefs?

How long will we buy into the foolish belief that this "nasty woman" won't be able to get things done that will change the lives of us, our children and theirs?

 

[printcraft]

How long before the NeverTrumper's singing for a Hillary victory cannot compete with how bad she really is?

How much more needs to come out of the cracks about Hillary and gun control before we decide that putting up with the Donald may be the better alternative?

How long are we going to allow the Liberals, media and a few with their own agenda to influence us into making a truly poor voting decision to allow a win by one who openly states and runs on a platform directly opposite our beliefs?

How long will we buy into the foolish belief that this "nasty woman" won't be able to get things done that will change the lives of us, our children and theirs?

Step 1: They will wail and complain about hitlary, but nobody will be listening to them.
Step 2: They'll just blame Trump.
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Profit.

 

[T.Lex]

How long before the NeverTrumper's singing for a Hillary victory cannot compete with how bad she really is?

How much more needs to come out of the cracks about Hillary and gun control before we decide that putting up with the Donald may be the better alternative?

How long are we going to allow the Liberals, media and a few with their own agenda to influence us into making a truly poor voting decision to allow a win by one who openly states and runs on a platform directly opposite our beliefs?

How long will we buy into the foolish belief that this "nasty woman" won't be able to get things done that will change the lives of us, our children and theirs?

Step 1: They will wail and complain about hitlary, but nobody will be listening to them.
Step 2: They'll just blame Trump.
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Profit.

Not sure the intended targets, but I'll present my own views.
1: I have no illusion about how bad HRC will be. I'm not sure how she could perform lower than my expectations. But, I was only a NeverTrump supporter when it mattered in the primaries.
2: DJT may be better, may be worse than even my lowest expectations for HRC. Not like he has any history to know. If he's bad/worse, I plan on blaming every one of the people I know who supported him in the primaries. If he's better.... well... let's see if he can even get elected first.
3: Let's not rehash the primaries, eh? What's done is done. Trump's the nominee and I believe you voted for him. Glad that you can admit some of the influences that made that happen.
4: Depends greatly on the Senate. If she has the Senate, she'll be able to accomplish some really nasty things, just like some of us expected.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The millennial electoral map

How many of these people do you think will grow out of it? Is it even possible for a right-leaning victory in the future?

Edit: Also, Fox News moves IA from Leans R to Toss-Up, IN from Solid R to Leans R

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Additionally, *Every* poll since the first debate has shown Clinton ahead in North Carolina.

If I were a Trump supporter, I'd be exhausted from all this winning.

Honestly, when they aren't blaming a nonexistent group for their problems, their blaming the polls for being fake or inaccurate.

Will they ever just stop blaming everyone else... and realize the candidate is just ****ing awful? Why feel the desire to look like *******s and try placing blame on those that should be on their side?

 

[T.Lex]

A tagalong question to the above for Trump supporters. Trump recently lashed out at SNL's treatment of him. I believe he said that it was a "hit job."

Do you agree?

If so, how does that compare with how SNL treated the Republicans in the primaries? Oh, let's just use Jeb(ra) as an example. Was he treated better or worse?

 

[foszoe]

Trump supporters watch Saturday night live?

 

[T.Lex]

Trump supporters watch Saturday night live?

They don't have to watch the show to know whether they agree or disagree with Trump's position.