2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's going to be interesting to see how politicised the US judiciary really is.Trump has been saying that since the judge is Mexican, he has been getting unfavourble rulings. That should be enough to convict him for contempt of court (Is that an offense in the US too?)
I would assume whatever the outcome the case goes into appeal. I wonder how a a Republican appointee will rule. The biggest precedent (Bush v Gore) is not promising.
 
Hitlery in full regalia for that speech.

fopospeech-overview-photo.2e16d0ba.fill-1078x360.jpg


She'd rather fight nuclear armed Russia. Who's more dangerous, now?
 
It's going to be interesting to see how politicised the US judiciary really is.Trump has been saying that since the judge is Mexican, he has been getting unfavourble rulings. That should be enough to convict him for contempt of court (Is that an offense in the US too?)
I would assume whatever the outcome the case goes into appeal. I wonder how a a Republican appointee will rule. The biggest precedent (Bush v Gore) is not promising.

That rarely applies outside of an actual courtroom here.
 
It's going to be interesting to see how politicised the US judiciary really is.Trump has been saying that since the judge is Mexican, he has been getting unfavourble rulings. That should be enough to convict him for contempt of court (Is that an offense in the US too?)
I would assume whatever the outcome the case goes into appeal. I wonder how a a Republican appointee will rule. The biggest precedent (Bush v Gore) is not promising.

Now let´s ask Donald how minorities, especially in the South, have done with white judges and all white juries throughout American history without even having insulted a judge´s ethnicity.
 
Last edited:
That rarely applies outside of an actual courtroom here.

The only time I've heard it was used in India was when after 3-4 requests and orders from the bench, some bureaucrats refused to bring files to court (different excuse each time). I'm sure in the less publicised lower courts it must be a frightening weapon in the hands of not-so-honest judges. But it would be fun to see Trump literally explode with rage and little orange-red pieces fly everywhere if it happened.
 
Hillary Clinton: Trump is too dangerous and unstable to have the nuclear codes

“Donald Trump’s ideas aren’t just different, they’re dangerously incoherent. They’re not even really ideas, just a series of bizarre rants, personal feuds and outright lies, He is not just unprepared. He is temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability and immense responsibility.

Imagine Donald Trump sitting in the situation room making life or death decisions on behalf of the United States. Do we want him making those calls? Someone thin-skinned and quick to anger. Do we want his finger anywhere near the button? Making Donald Trump our commander-in-chief would be a historic mistake.”

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...n-donald-trump-speech-foreign-policy-security

The irony of course being that Hillary is probably ten times the warmonger he'd likely be.
 
The irony of course being that Hillary is probably ten times the warmonger he'd likely be.

He'd be far more dangerous given his lack of experience and penchant for improvising based on his mood of the moment. Hardly the characteristics you'd want controlling the most powerful military the world has ever known.
 
The coverage of the speech from the big networks is nauseating.

It was an okay speech, but nothing the people who don't drink the Drumpf Kool Aid haven't been saying for months. Yet somehow, she 'eviscerated', 'schooled', 'kicked him in the shin', despite the fact that it probably will have close to zero influence on his base.

Always have to fashion talking points to drive the ratings. No objective analysis whatsoever. It's a fecking travesty that Jon Stewart retired , giving these clowns a pass nowadays.
 
The coverage of the speech from the big networks is nauseating.

It was an okay speech, but nothing the people who don't drink the Drumpf Kool Aid haven't been saying for months. Yet somehow, she 'eviscerated', 'schooled', 'kicked him in the shin', despite the fact that it probably will have close to zero influence on his base.

Always have to fashion talking points to drive the ratings. No objective analysis whatsoever. It's a fecking travesty that Jon Stewart retired , giving these clowns a pass nowadays.
I thought this was spot on.

https://medium.com/@davepell/yes-the-media-is-to-blame-for-trump-57203e74fd9c#.svlloae0l

The media is to blame for Trump. But maybe it’s not to0 late to turn things around.

This part won’t come as a surprise. The media doesn’t cover the issues. They cover the game. Political races and sports are covered in the exact same way in America. You get predictions about what a competitor needs to do to win, a brief spurt of action, postgame analysis, and a bunch of repetitive talkshows during which former players provide often obvious insights — which consumers continue to rehash around the social media watercooler. Seriously, is Chris Matthews any different from any SportsCenter anchor? If anything, he’s more sports than they are. His show is called Hardball. Even the MLB Network’s shows aren’t called Hardball.

And it’s not just MSNBC, Fox, and the political blogs. It’s every major news source, from PBS’ Shields and Brooks to Charlie Rose’s roundtables to the opinion (and front) pages of the top newspapers.

I don’t need to go on. You know exactly what I’m talking about. And you know it’s true because you’re partly responsible (partly in the nearly completelysense). Whenever the media tries to cover the issues at stake in an election, you turn them off. When they cover the game, you leave them on. You watch their shows and read their columns. You tweet. You post. You talk about it at dinner parties. You can’t talk about the issues themselves in that setting because no one in America ever has dinner with someone who doesn’t agree with them on the issues. And how could that not get boring after a few minutes?

You love the game. The game is easier to learn. Think about the way we cover debates. They are 100% about zingers, every single time (other than those times Ben Carson was participating — the doctor doesn’t zing.)

So Donald Trump knows it’s not about the issues and sees a game he can win. In his earliest days of considering a run, did he gather the team to create a platform? Hell no, he announced he had a winning media strategy. Most politicians don’t like to answer the strategy questions. Trump almost only answers those. He loves that topic. His campaign is not really about a wall or philosophy or an ideology. It’s about winning. I will win because I’m a winner. Because I just won, I will continue to win. You keep criticizing me and trying to get me to become more like the establishment, but last time I checked, I’m winning. So I give the advice. Check the scoreboard. Hit the bench. Grab some pine, Meat. And let me tell you this: Winning.

That’s the exact same in-your-face bravado we idolize in professional athletes. And it’s hard not to be somewhat impressed with it in any realm. If this were a Ping Pong match or stand-up comedy competition, I’d be jumping on thewinning bandwagon faster than Charlie Sheen on tiger blood.

But this is a presidential election. And the media has got to stop covering it like a sport. It’s gone on too far and we’re in danger of getting what we sort of deserve.

This week, Trump lashed out at the press even more aggressively than usual. The headlines of the day were locked in on that topic. And again, the question of the day became a strategic one: Can Trump continue to act like this much of a ridiculous lunatic and still maintain the support of millions of Americans? That question has been asked and answered. And any time spent on Trump’s relationship with media is a victory for Trump because it’s another minute not spent on issues, and a further reinforcement of what we value in a candidate.

This guy is not being judged on his intellect or his seriousness. The absence of both of those just spice up his postgame press conferences. He’s being judged on his ability to out-brand his opponents, out-entertain his opponents, out-zinger his opponents … it’s not about out-witting them, it’s about out-winning them.

Look, I know there are exceptions to the kind of coverage I’m describing. But let’s not fixate how well I’m covering you covering him covering the spread. That’s giving Trump exactly what he wants.

Most of you in the media hate this guy to the core. You’re afraid of what he could do in (or on) the White House. You despise what he’s done to the level of discourse in the country and you’re deeply worried about what his support tells us about America. So do your job and hit him where it hurts: Talk about the stuff that really matters if one intends to be president. He can’t win the game when it stops being one. Make it about the office, not about the running. Play the playa. Don’t play his game.
 
No you're right he only wants to build a wall to keep Mexicans out, ban Muslims from entering the country and commit war crimes by targeting and murdering the families of terrorists. But he's a totally rational person.
I highly highly doubt he's going to implement the first 2. I think it's a strategy to become president but he won't do it when he's actually president.
 
I highly highly doubt he's going to implement the first 2. I think it's a strategy to become president but he won't do it when he's actually president.

I agree, but it's such a moronic strategy that even if it is he should lose horribly on principle. I'd like to think American's aren't as stupid as the stereotype proposes.
 
Apparently things got a little heated last night in San Jose:






https://twitter.com/dcbigjohn/status/738567377755852801?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/CandaceSmith_/status/738568396036415488?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Jacobnbc/status/738548054970630144?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/738567898965233664?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/738562107487059969?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/DefendWallSt/status/738574855206010880?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/738560600612048897?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://www.periscope.tv/w/1OwxWbdgYEkJQ
https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/738565044712017921?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/MeOnAJourney/status/738564126335762432/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/marcusdipaola/status/738572899808743424?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/juliacarriew/status/738565797639917568/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/NickyWoolf/status/738572825385017344?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/TomLlamasABC/status/738580511992381440?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/smahaskey/status/738570881392214017?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/738577323201462273?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/artfulroger1/status/738576898737872899/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/TomLlamasABC/status/738571817388908545?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Jacobnbc/status/738585705513787392
https://www.facebook.com/Dailytrumpmemes/videos/829877953778815/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAAaivvNw_Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0NpqCm2OeM&app=desktop
https://twitter.com/smahaskey/status/738573795896610816
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYXA3_UAv8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNIWixTOy94
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QFpyuEmrIM&feature=youtu.be
@23:40 https://www.periscope.tv/torbahax/1dRJZkLpPXrxB
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0TPZotJZP4&feature=youtu.be
https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/738565925067096065
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/738568861465747456?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/TomLlamasABC/status/738603331258454016?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/738561162980134913?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
 
He'd be far more dangerous given his lack of experience and penchant for improvising based on his mood of the moment. Hardly the characteristics you'd want controlling the most powerful military the world has ever known.

He's an isolationist, whereas Hillary's mentor is Henry feckin Kissinger.

I don't envisage either of them crazy enough using nukes but its a bit rich of Hillary of all people to use foreign policy and defense as a stick to bash Trump with (considering there's a million and one other things she can refer to instead).
 
It's going to be interesting to see how politicised the US judiciary really is.Trump has been saying that since the judge is Mexican, he has been getting unfavourble rulings. That should be enough to convict him for contempt of court (Is that an offense in the US too?)
I would assume whatever the outcome the case goes into appeal. I wonder how a a Republican appointee will rule. The biggest precedent (Bush v Gore) is not promising.

The ultimate ridiculous/nightmare scenario... judges to be in contempt... refuses to purge it... get elected while in prison :D
 
He's an isolationist, whereas Hillary's mentor is Henry feckin Kissinger.

I don't envisage either of them crazy enough using nukes but its a bit rich of Hillary of all people to use foreign policy and defense as a stick to bash Trump with (considering there's a million and one other things she can refer to instead).

So he says now, but just wait until there's a terrorist attack. He will break all the rules and not give a shit who cares or which treaties are violated, at which point everyone will be pining for Hillary's "warmongering".
 
:confused:

I'm as left as it gets.


You missed the memo that democrats have to defend war mongering, unlimited campaign financing, cronyism, cuddling with big business and all those other things they hated Bush for. If you don´t defend this behavior, you must be a (right-wing) lunatic.

When Hillary starts a war it will be just and human. She´ll tie a bow around the bombs and everything will be okay. If not, she can still apologize in a couple of years. No harm no foul. She is also not influenced by money, because she is so virtuous. Only those pesky republicans sell out to those lobbyists. You just have to trust her.
 
Last edited:
You missed the memo that democrats have to defend war mongering, unlimited campaign financing, cronyism, cuddling with big business and all those other things they hated Bush for. If you don´t defend this behavior, you must be a (right-wing) lunatic.

When Hillary starts a war it will be just and human. She´ll tie a bow around the bombs and everything will be okay. If not, she can still apologize in a couple of years. No harm no foul. She is also not influenced by money, because she is so virtuous. Only those pesky republicans sell out to those lobbyists. You just have to trust her.

I think loads of us have been on Hill´s case from the get go, precisely for her poor, hawkish foreign policy, vote on Iraq war, and the whole "Shillary" label for her connections to lobbyists and wall street. It´s what we loathe about her. It´s why so many democrats are with Bernie.

So who is this memo directed to???
 
I think loads of us have been on Hill´s case from the get go, precisely for her poor, hawkish foreign policy, vote on Iraq war, and the whole "Shillary" label for her connections to lobbyists and wall street. It´s what we loathe about her. It´s why so many democrats are with Bernie.

So who is this memo directed to???
It is called sarcasm and I quoted Kaos.
 
Bush seemed to get over that hurdle quite easily.

To be fair, terrorists flying planes into buildings and killing thousands on American soil may have a tendency to unify opinions on the Hill. Nevertheless, the matter would be debated and Congress would not likely support a nuclear response to any non-nuclear event.
 
To be fair, terrorists flying planes into buildings and killing thousands on American soil may have a tendency to unify opinions on the Hill. Nevertheless, the matter would be debated and Congress would not likely support a nuclear response to any non-nuclear event.
Cooking up a convenient story and running a suitable propaganda thereof also played a big part. That could well happen again under Trump.

I don't think nuclear war can happen either. My post was aimed at the use/abuse of conventional arms by Bush.
 
Cooking up a convenient story and running a suitable propaganda thereof also played a big part. That could well happen again under Trump.

I don't think nuclear war can happen either. My post was aimed at the use/abuse of conventional arms by Bush.

Frankly, it would be easier and more likely under hawkish Hitlery.
 
Apparently things got a little heated last night in San Jose:






https://twitter.com/dcbigjohn/status/738567377755852801?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/CandaceSmith_/status/738568396036415488?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Jacobnbc/status/738548054970630144?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/NBCNightlyNews/status/738567898965233664?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/738562107487059969?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/DefendWallSt/status/738574855206010880?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/SaraMurray/status/738560600612048897?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://www.periscope.tv/w/1OwxWbdgYEkJQ
https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/738565044712017921?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/MeOnAJourney/status/738564126335762432/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/marcusdipaola/status/738572899808743424?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/juliacarriew/status/738565797639917568/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/NickyWoolf/status/738572825385017344?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/TomLlamasABC/status/738580511992381440?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/smahaskey/status/738570881392214017?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/738577323201462273?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/artfulroger1/status/738576898737872899/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/TomLlamasABC/status/738571817388908545?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Jacobnbc/status/738585705513787392
https://www.facebook.com/Dailytrumpmemes/videos/829877953778815/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAAaivvNw_Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0NpqCm2OeM&app=desktop
https://twitter.com/smahaskey/status/738573795896610816
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnYXA3_UAv8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNIWixTOy94
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QFpyuEmrIM&feature=youtu.be
@23:40 https://www.periscope.tv/torbahax/1dRJZkLpPXrxB
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0TPZotJZP4&feature=youtu.be
https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/738565925067096065
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/738568861465747456?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/TomLlamasABC/status/738603331258454016?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/738561162980134913?ref_src=twsrc^tfw


Bernie supporters, while generally not initiating violence, do occasionally try to limit the free speech rights of Trump and his supporters through protesting and interrupting his rallies. It's counterproductive and stupid. It plays into his whole narrative and incites backlash from his supporters. Trump's rhetoric and racism warrant a response, but this isn't the right one. As a populists, Bernie and Trump, plays heavily on disillusionment and anger among the public so I guess it's not surprising that a group of their most angry supporters would do these things. Neither has much regard for anyone who doesn't support them.

It was stupid when they shut down the Trump rally in Chicago and in other places months ago too.
 
Bernie supporters, while generally not initiating violence, do occasionally try to limit the free speech rights of Trump and his supporters through protesting and interrupting his rallies. It's counterproductive and stupid. It plays into his whole narrative and incites backlash from his supporters. Trump's rhetoric and racism warrant a response, but this isn't the right one. As a populists, Bernie and Trump, plays heavily on disillusionment and anger among the public so I guess it's not surprising that a group of their most angry supporters would do these things. Neither has much regard for anyone who doesn't support them.

It was stupid when they shut down the Trump rally in Chicago and in other places months ago too.

Have to agree with you here. These protests, while understandable, are beginning to undermine what they should be about and Trump will end up benefitting from any ensuing chaos.
 
I think loads of us have been on Hill´s case from the get go, precisely for her poor, hawkish foreign policy, vote on Iraq war, and the whole "Shillary" label for her connections to lobbyists and wall street. It´s what we loathe about her. It´s why so many democrats are with Bernie.

So who is this memo directed to???

I guess to the people who will nominate Hill as the Democratic standard bearer ;)
 
Only with the approval of Congress.

Congress, especially the GOP, has had a tendency over the last 15 years to intervene in diplomatic initiatives (like the Iran deal) and let the president do whatever he likes militarily. The broad terms of the AUMFs have been an issue too, and allow escalation at the president's discretion.
 
She needs to do it over and over IMHO.

I agree.

It's going to be interesting to see how politicised the US judiciary really is.Trump has been saying that since the judge is Mexican, he has been getting unfavourble rulings. That should be enough to convict him for contempt of court (Is that an offense in the US too?)
I would assume whatever the outcome the case goes into appeal. I wonder how a a Republican appointee will rule. The biggest precedent (Bush v Gore) is not promising.

Apparently there are a number of charges he can on for insulting a judge and questioning his authority/credibility in a current case. I can't find the article, but it said the Judge could bring him up on charges if he wanted to, how likely that will be, i'm not sure.


I don't like all this violence at the protests, it's all becoming exceedingly hypocritical and it's losing the intended message of the protests and it's playing right in to Drumpf's tiny little action man like hands. It needs to stop, and quickly, because Donald is slowly imploding, you can see him simmering and each interview has slightly tougher questions and he can't take them. He can't answer anything about policy because he's too thick, and has no policies of his own. The ones he does have of his own are ludicrous and could never be implemented. He also cannot take anything about the University case, or even little things like the World Golf Championships moving to Mexico city. All the time he has to answer about things like that he is losing the plot and liable to explode or say something that he wont be able to explain away or walk away from. Something that will offend too many people and that will stick and cause him too much damage, but all the time these mini riots are happening, or there is violence against his supporters, the more he will be asked about that, or the subject will be changed to that and he can go another week playing the martyr and conning more people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.