2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was always going to implode at some point.. surprised it lasted this long.
 
Congress GOPers are shitting their pants at the thought of Drumpf bringing up Lewinsky and Flowers. Literally. Morning Schmoe just whined about it yesterday.

The last time they did that, Grinch lost his Speakership, they came within 4 seats of losing the House majority and the Clintons enjoyed a 61 and 67% favourability rating respectively.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Congress GOPers are shitting their pants at the thought of Drumpf bringing up Lewinsky and Flowers. Literally. Morning Schmoe just whined about it yesterday.

The last time they did that, Grinch lost his Speakership, they came within 4 seats of losing the House majority and the Clintons enjoyed a 61 and 67% favourability rating respectively.
Click to expand...

:lol: He just lost his shit on Fox News too. He's just said that you cannot be President if you are sat up tweeting about sex tapes at 3am. It's not the first time he's publically chastised Trump, but his patience does appear to be running out. I said it the other day that there will come a time where Trump will say something so indefensible that even his staunchest supporters can't stick around because it will harm them too much. I think it may be getting close to that time for people like Newt. He has his career to think about and Toxic Trump could damage far more than he helps.
 
On another note, I think the post-debate reaction has worked out a dream for Hillary. The polls have swung, swing states have solidified, light red states have moved toward her, and most importantly the news cycle has been utterly dominated by Trump's foot in his mouth, with the only one talking about Clinton's negatives being The Don himself to Hannity et al :D

Devastatingly poor performance now in retrospect. If it does go down as the moment a ridiculous campaign finally fell apart, it'll be taught as a case study for years in PR courses, Management courses, Politics courses etc etc ...
 
unchanged_lineup said:
On another note, I think the post-debate reaction has worked out a dream for Hillary. The polls have swung, swing states have solidified, light red states have moved toward her, and most importantly the news cycle has been utterly dominated by Trump's foot in his mouth, with the only one talking about Clinton's negatives being The Don himself to Hannity et al :D

Devastatingly poor performance now in retrospect. If it does go down as the moment a ridiculous campaign finally fell apart, it'll be taught as a case study for years in PR courses, Management courses, Politics courses etc etc ...
Click to expand...

I think it definitely helped, but contrary to what the pundits like us to believe i.e it was a 'game changing', 'pivotal' moment, it just accelerated the solidification of Clinton less enthused voters. Her upward trend began before the debate.

Been pretty much like that all cycle. Clinton with a big lead then Drumpf 'reset', and once he crept near her there's a collective freak out and the 'hold my nose' voters return and bring her to equilibrium again ( ~ 5 pts lead). Hence Sam Wang's remark that it's the most stable presidential polling in 60 years.
 
Loads of juicy stuff this morning. I'm not even sure which is the juiciest. You've got this pile of crap..
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...nton-support-election-winner-debate-interview
Donald Trump said on Friday that he would not necessarily accept the results of the presidential election in the event that Hillary Clinton defeats him, reversing his statement four days earlier that he would “absolutely” respect them.

After the first presidential debate on Monday, the Republican nominee told reporters “absolutely I would” honor the results of the election should he lose. In an interview with the New York Times on Friday, he backtracked: “We’re going to have to see. We’re going to see what happens. We’re going to have to see.”

Earlier that day at a rally in Detroit, Trump resurfaced fears of voter fraud and his unsubstantiated complaints of a “rigged” election. He told supporters that voter fraud is “a big, big problem in this country”, although research has found a few dozen potential incidents of in-person voter fraud in 14 years of US elections. He also urged them to “go and watch the polling places and make sure it is on the up and up”.

Trump’s campaign chief, Steve Bannon, was found earlier this year to have registered to vote at an empty house in Florida.

The Republican nominee also spoke at length about the marital infidelities of former president Bill Clinton, insisting: “Hillary was an enabler, and she attacked the women who Bill Clinton mistreated afterward. I think it’s a serious problem for them, and it’s something that I’m considering talking about more in the near future.”

Trump refused to speak about his affair with Marla Maples during his first marriage to Ivana Trump, which was aired widely in tabloids in the 1990s, as was his subsequent divorce and third marriage.
Click to expand...

Video depositions by Trump and Trump jr have been released... Buzzfeed leading the way again by requesting them:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/danielwagner/trump-video-depositions?utm_term=.djVk6LOKO#.kgZpGEmXm

Trump's Charity "lacks certification to run as a charity" :D
https://gma.yahoo.com/trump-foundat...ty-source-033707825--abc-news-topstories.html
The Trump Foundation, which is under investigation by the New York Attorney General's office, never obtained the necessary certification to solicit money from the public during its nearly 30-year existence, an investigation by the state's attorney general's office has found, a source briefed on the investigation tells ABC News.

New York State law requires any charity that solicits more than $25,000 a year from the public to obtain a specific kind of certification.

The allegation about the Donald J. Trump Foundation's lack of certification, first reported by theWashington Post, comes about two weeks after New York State attorney general Eric Schneiderman -- a Hillary Clinton supporter -- announced he had opened a broad inquiry into the foundation.

The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment and the AG's office declined comment.
Click to expand...

Yahoo is running a series on the downticket picture, which I wouldn't know much about but they've done in a very comprehensive way:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/down-tic...own-ballot-politics-in-general-215438886.html
Basically, the Rep candidate here has attacked his opponent's Mexican heritage, his campaign even using the term "hispandering", which she in turn has doubled down on and thrown back at him by giving a speech as a Hispanic museum the very next morning. Apparently the maths is that if she can get all Hispanic registered voters to vote for her, it would be in the bag. However, polls show Heck has a lead currently and pulling slightly ahead, though it is apparently a very difficult state to poll.

Machado hits back: Revenge of the Machado:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/alicia-machado-instagram-donald-trump-162627092.html

This is playing out so, so badly for him.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Haaaaaa!! On the first one, it's a bit of a messy case but sure the bottom line will have great play.
Click to expand...

:lol: With all the links you and I have posted just in the last 24 hours, it's amazing he's still a candidate. He is getting battered now and there are so many stories out there and more developing or being uncovered every hour that the news channels are seriously having trouble on which ones to follow and report. I suspect there are many more that will come out over the next month or so. The UK press are famous for it, and they love drip feeding stories about a person to the public before dumping huge stories right at the end. They literally break people by doing so and the way this is going it appears the US media is playing exactly the same game.

Whatever though, as you said there is absolutely no talk about Hillary at the moment, it's all about Trump, and none of it is good. The Cuba story in particular seems to be getting the most negative reporting, many saying it's highly illegal and it could really land him in trouble. The Trump boys charity fraud doesn't look great either, especially not when you put it next to the Trump foundation stories as well.
 
I would love, LOVE IT, if the final outcome of Trump's self-serving candidacy results in numerous court cases and charges, ending with Trump and his minions losing their businesses, fortunes, and going off to serve some time.
 
Is all this talk about fraud, rigging, etc. not because Trump wants the office so badly, but more that he wants to not be called a loser?
 
MrMarcello said:
I would love, LOVE IT, if the final outcome of Trump's self-serving candidacy results in numerous court cases and charges, ending with Trump and his minions losing their businesses, fortunes, and going off to serve some time.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree 100%

Grinner said:
Is all this talk about fraud, rigging, etc. not because Trump wants the office so badly, but more that he wants to not be called a loser?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think he is just getting his excuses in and hedging his bets. Being called a loser is probably the biggest insult you could call him.
 
Nigel Farage is heading back to the States to coach Trump in debating skills. Feck my life. Probably two of the most despicable cnuts on the planet. What a shame it would be if the building collapsed on them.
 
Ubik said:
This is wishful thinking.
Click to expand...
For the first time in history the 3rd party candidates hold almost 15% of the votes. A majority of those voters are people aged 18-33. The millenials. And who did the majority of them support? Bernie Sanders! And who is trying so hard to win them now? Hillary Clinton? Will she succeed? That remains to be seen. The only reason that so many are voting for the likes of the Johnsons and the Steins is because Sanders isnt in the race. If Sanders was in the race, he would have the support of the majority of these 15-20% and that would be put him well and truly clear of Trump. If fecking Hillary could hold her ground and tie or as of this week slightly take the lead over Trump, Sanders would be well in the clear of Trump.
 
RDCR07 said:
For the first time in history the 3rd party candidates hold almost 15% of the votes. A majority of those voters are people aged 18-33. The millenials. And who did the majority of them support? Bernie Sanders! And who is trying so hard to win them now? Hillary Clinton? Will she succeed? That remains to be seen. The only reason that so many are voting for the likes of the Johnsons and the Steins is because Sanders isnt in the race. If Sanders was in the race, he would have the support of the majority of these 15-20% and that would be put him well and truly clear of Trump. If fecking Hillary could hold her ground and tie or as of this week slightly take the lead over Trump, Sanders would be well in the clear of Trump.
Click to expand...

I think there's a few different ways of looking at it. This point of view could neglect the key unique factors Hillary is bringing to it, namely right now gender, where she is utterly smashing Trump. Another factor would be the history of her husband and the black voters that brings with it. On the other hand, you could say Bernie would not come in with the rake of scandals she has - he would have this perception of being a "socialist" against him though. Overall, I think the first point of view holds more voters than the second and I don't think he'd be well clear at all, if at all.
 
RDCR07 said:
For the first time in history the 3rd party candidates hold almost 15% of the votes. A majority of those voters are people aged 18-33. The millenials. And who did the majority of them support? Bernie Sanders! And who is trying so hard to win them now? Hillary Clinton? Will she succeed? That remains to be seen. The only reason that so many are voting for the likes of the Johnsons and the Steins is because Sanders isnt in the race. If Sanders was in the race, he would have the support of the majority of these 15-20% and that would be put him well and truly clear of Trump. If fecking Hillary could hold her ground and tie or as of this week slightly take the lead over Trump, Sanders would be well in the clear of Trump.
Click to expand...
Fair point.

Except of course for 1992 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1992
And of course 1968 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968
Oh and 1924 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1924
Aaaand 1912 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1912

Etc.

And it's wishful thinking because you assume that everyone currently supporting Clinton would also support Sanders. It's unlikely, of course, that Clinton's most solid voter base (african americans) would have a collective strop at their preferred candidate not being selected and threaten people with the prospect of Trump as payback, but there might be a bunch of middle of the road types who don't quite feel ready for a socialist.
 
MrMarcello said:
I would love, LOVE IT, if the final outcome of Trump's self-serving candidacy results in numerous court cases and charges, ending with Trump and his minions losing their businesses, fortunes, and going off to serve some time.
Click to expand...

It will fuel the fire about a rigged election. His supporters will withdraw deeper into their own worlds.
 
berbatrick said:
That's what I was hinting at. It's nota grat situation now and making it more inflamed won't be pretty.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you have to draw the line though, liberals don't have their pussy tag for no reason.

Albeit, his base is dying off (age, substance abuse, alcoholism), so there's merit to accomodating them, for the time being.
 
Ubik said:
GUESS WHO

Click to expand...

That is insane. He couldn't name a single foreign leader. Top of my head, even taking into account the pressure of live TV, I think I could name dozens of PMs/heads of state and have a fair idea of their policies.
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
That is insane. He couldn't name a single foreign leader. Top of my head, even taking into account the pressure of live TV, I think I could name dozens of PMs/heads of state and have a fair idea of their policies.
Click to expand...

He could at least have said "Your Mum" to add some hilarity to the event. Much better than not naming anyone at all.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Well done on raising expectations again.

These supposedly liberal journalists are morons, or it's just hubris.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-an-outright-massacre/?utm_term=.222a30203845
Click to expand...
Boom, bust, boom, bust etc...

You'd wonder do they ever sweat about how fine they're cutting this build up, break down cycle in relation to the election date and that if they get it wrong by making Trump out to be competent simply because he didn't screw up totally, they will thereby give him a vote boost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.