The 2016 US American Election Thread

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Hes

Also Snoop dogg popped in and invited him to Smoke up

DOGG / BONE 2020: The Ticket America Never Knew It Needed

[Senator Clay Davis]

Shocker, but using Bill's accusers didn't work at all for Trump

Q: Do you think it was appropriate or inappropriate for Donald Trump bring up Bill Clinton’s past personal behavior as a way to attack Hillary Clinton?

37% appropriate, 55% not . Broken down, Men say 44% appropriate 49% not....women say 31% appropriate, 61% not. Another terrible miscalculation.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...e_20161012.pdf

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Um, not to say it worked, but come on. Literally every negative ad campaign gets that response from voters when they're asked about it. There's a reason people do it anyway.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Shocker, but using Bill's accusers didn't work at all for Trump

Q: Do you think it was appropriate or inappropriate for Donald Trump bring up Bill Clinton’s past personal behavior as a way to attack Hillary Clinton?

37% appropriate, 55% not . Broken down, Men say 44% appropriate 49% not....women say 31% appropriate, 61% not. Another terrible miscalculation.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...e_20161012.pdf

I think the last Fox News poll has him down nearly 20% with women compared to Clinton (51-32)...you don't win elections that way. Well not since they gave women the vote anyways.

[GGG]

The other thing is when they parade them around they still focus on what Bill did to them.

The focus is on making a false equivalence between Bill and Trump. If they wanted to use this strategy they should ignore all of the sexual allegations and only discuss what Hillary did to intimidate them and cover it up. By focusing on Bill they completely side track their attack.

[HotHotHeat]

Mike Pence on Friday morning promised that the Donald Trump campaign will present evidence by the end of the day to challenge accusations about Trump's sexual misconduct.

"Before the day is out there will be more evidence publicly that shows and calls into question these latest allegations," Pence said on CBS' "This Morning."

When asked what information would be coming out, Pence told the CBS hosts to "stay tuned."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...te-allegations

Looks like the breitbart investigation team is going to take their work to the mainstream today. Should be entertaining.

[ernie]

Well they've hinted at having e-mails from some of these women asking for jobs or staying in touch etc.

You just need to look at the Bill Cosby case (and numerous sexual assault cases) to see why that doesn't mean a damn thing about whether it (likely) happened or not.

And keep in mind these are things from his own mouth.

HE SAID he has groped and kissed women without consent. Some have said yep he did and I didn't like it.

HE SAID he went into dressing rooms with women in various states of undress and that have been confirmed by women who didn't like it and it was creepy.

HE SAID on more than one occasion that he'd bang/date/marry his daughter if he could.

HE SAID on more than one occasion that in a few years he'd be dating a girl who is currently an adolescent and even someone who hasn't yet reached adolescence.

HE IS being sued for raping a 13 year old.

It is not relevant what "proof" he conjures up. HE has said he has done these things and/or has been observed doing/saying these things and in one case at the very least will have to defend himself in a court of law.


In short, he's going to explain away his actions in a similar manner as he did with "locker room talk". It didn't work before and I doubt it works this time. Passing the blame onto potential victims or excusing behavior because "they talked to me afterwards" doesn't look good. And of course there are the rumours that this isn't the worst thing that hasn't come to light yet. Even if he puts this fire out there will be another big fire to put out right after. The Clinton campaign and concerned people are going for the knockout punch right now given time is too short for the GOP to replace him.

[Plett25]

Originally Posted by ernie

The Clinton campaign and concerned people are going for the knockout punch right now given time is too short for the GOP to replace him.

I don't think this is true.

I don't think HRC is concerned about winning the Presidential election. For the past few weeks (if not months) this election has been about the Senate, and surprisingly now the House might be in play.

The best tactic for the Democratic Party is to let Trump flail away and drag downticket Republicans down with him. If it gets bad enough, the Republicans might be tainted for election cycles to come.

There is a small risk that HRC loses the election with an external event or an October surprise. But the benefit of having a D controlled Senate and House for even 2 years is worth it.

All IMO of course

[Senator Clay Davis]

Another accuser will be coming out today, this time with Gloria Allred. That could push the Trump campaign misogyny into overdrive. Also, today is the last day for the Trump Foundation to file the appropriate paperwork in New York, or be deemed a "continuing fraud". So more meltdowns to come!

[PostandIn]

Originally Posted by Plett25

I don't think this is true.

I don't think HRC is concerned about winning the Presidential election. For the past few weeks (if not months) this election has been about the Senate, and surprisingly now the House might be in play.

The best tactic for the Democratic Party is to let Trump flail away and drag downticket Republicans down with him. If it gets bad enough, the Republicans might be tainted for election cycles to come.

There is a small risk that HRC loses the election with an external event or an October surprise. But the benefit of having a D controlled Senate and House for even 2 years is worth it.

All IMO of course

It's an interesting thought, the idea of Hillary as President and the Dems controlling both houses, but after all the talk and rhetoric of the campaign, does anyone have a sense for what she would do in terms of signature legislation?

Obama did the ACA and dealt with a banking crisis. Obviously there would be a Supreme Court nominee but does any particular legislative vision shine through as this stage?

[PsYcNeT]

[Plett25]

I think HRC would want a public option in Obamacare or Medicare for all.

Balance the budget, push USA closer to single payer health care and 3 liberal or even moderate Supreme Court justices... that would be a pretty satisfying presidency for HRC

[PostandIn]

Originally Posted by Plett25

I think HRC would want a public option in Obamacare or Medicare for all.

Balance the budget, push USA closer to single payer health care and 3 liberal or even moderate Supreme Court justices... that would be a pretty satisfying presidency for HRC

Krugman weighs in:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/op...ml?ref=opinion

Increased social safety net for the poor with emphasis on children and massive infrastructure investment paid for by the 1%.

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by ernie

Well they've hinted at having e-mails from some of these women asking for jobs or staying in touch etc.

You just need to look at the Bill Cosby case (and numerous sexual assault cases) to see why that doesn't mean a damn thing about whether it (likely) happened or not.

And keep in mind these are things from his own mouth.

HE SAID he has groped and kissed women without consent. Some have said yep he did and I didn't like it.

HE SAID he went into dressing rooms with women in various states of undress and that have been confirmed by women who didn't like it and it was creepy.

HE SAID on more than one occasion that he'd bang/date/marry his daughter if he could.

HE SAID on more than one occasion that in a few years he'd be dating a girl who is currently an adolescent and even someone who hasn't yet reached adolescence.

HE IS being sued for raping a 13 year old.

It is not relevant what "proof" he conjures up. HE has said he has done these things and/or has been observed doing/saying these things and in one case at the very least will have to defend himself in a court of law.


In short, he's going to explain away his actions in a similar manner as he did with "locker room talk". It didn't work before and I doubt it works this time. Passing the blame onto potential victims or excusing behavior because "they talked to me afterwards" doesn't look good. And of course there are the rumours that this isn't the worst thing that hasn't come to light yet. Even if he puts this fire out there will be another big fire to put out right after. The Clinton campaign and concerned people are going for the knockout punch right now given time is too short for the GOP to replace him.

Politics aside, Trump truly is a disgusting human being. Now, in regards to politics, it is amazing and frightening that the USA electoral system is in such a mess that Trump is a final candidate for president.

[Senator Clay Davis]

It's not really the messed up system that led to Trump, it's the messed up Republican party that led to Trump. They're going to have to do some serious soul searching after this election, because they've basically catered to the extreme elements because they viewed it as the only way they could win a general election....but obviously they still can't actually win a general even with that group, and it's driving too many crucial, growing voting blocks to the Dems. So it'll be fascinating to watch if they will again dismiss the postmortem analysis that says they need to appeal to more women and minorities, and stick with trying to win with the crazy ass alt-right that demeans those groups, or whether they'll finally ditch that faction and focus on trying to embrace the future and not the past.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by PostandIn

It's an interesting thought, the idea of Hillary as President and the Dems controlling both houses, but after all the talk and rhetoric of the campaign, does anyone have a sense for what she would do in terms of signature legislation?

Obama did the ACA and dealt with a banking crisis. Obviously there would be a Supreme Court nominee but does any particular legislative vision shine through as this stage?

gun control I think would be her ACA.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

It's not really the messed up system that led to Trump, it's the messed up Republican party that led to Trump. They're going to have to do some serious soul searching after this election, because they've basically catered to the extreme elements because they viewed it as the only way they could win a general election....but obviously they still can't actually win a general even with that group, and it's driving too many crucial, growing voting blocks to the Dems. So it'll be fascinating to watch if they will again dismiss the postmortem analysis that says they need to appeal to more women and minorities, or whether they'll stick with trying to win with the alt-right.

I feel like I remember some of the more prominent conservative posters in this thread arguing that the rise of Trump was because of liberals, not their own party. Maybe we could rehash that argument for a bit until Don comes out and kicks a grandmother in the vagina or something. Might be nice to pass the time.

[Flash Walken]

Hillary's crusade has always been healthcare reform, and it's the only part of Obama's presidency that she doesn't seem to be focusing on/touting in her stump speeches. It was left out of the video package at the DNC that aired before she came out and she seemed to used it as a stepping off point in the last debate.

Hillary is about healthcare reform and has been since the 90s. If she has political capital and a non-beholden congress and senate that will be her legacy policy initiative: single payer healthcare.

Unfortunately the democratic party is nearly as beholden to insurance and pharmaceutical interests as the republican party so I have my doubts about her ability to pass meaningful reforms even through a democratic senate.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

gun control I think would be her ACA.

that will never ever happen down there. They might do some cosmetic changes, but make no mistake about it, Hillary and the Democrats are just as beholded to gun lobbies as the Republicans are.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Plett25

I don't think this is true.

I don't think HRC is concerned about winning the Presidential election. For the past few weeks (if not months) this election has been about the Senate, and surprisingly now the House might be in play.

The best tactic for the Democratic Party is to let Trump flail away and drag downticket Republicans down with him. If it gets bad enough, the Republicans might be tainted for election cycles to come.

There is a small risk that HRC loses the election with an external event or an October surprise. But the benefit of having a D controlled Senate and House for even 2 years is worth it.

All IMO of course

And I get that. A friendly house would be good for her. But a landslide victory also gives her a similar mandate and should reduce interference. I do think they want to turn some surprise states blue rather than just win the toss-ups. Especially with Texas being withing the margin of error and the superior ground game the democrats are believed to have.

To me, for the US to move forward (and I'm a non-voting resident of it) one of the most important thing is what the GOP is trying to scare everyone about...Supreme Court picks. The court needs to be socially progressive because it appears a large chunk of the population will only be brought into the here and now kicking and screaming. BUt that boils down to my fundamental belief at this stage in my life that if your candidate and party platform doesn't start with the belief that everyone is equal there is no point telling me anything else. You've disqualified yourself right out of the gate.