The New American Politics thread

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by peter12

Would it be any worse than the litany of sins committed by Trump and Clinton?

Yes. Yes is clearly the answer. Has no one paid attention for the last eight years? Socialist is one of the dirtiest words in America period because in many minds here that's as anti American as you can be.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by peter12

Would it be any worse than the litany of sins committed by Trump and Clinton?

Probably no, but that's the point. Once Bernie started getting hammered (as he was totally left alone by Hillary in the primary), his big lead over Trump in the hypotheticals would have gone down to right where we are right now, a horserace. Acting like Bernie was just gonna coast because people liked him is a little naive.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by nik-

If Clinton loses, does history remember her as top 3 worst campaigner seeking the highest office?

Kind of reminiscent of Paul Martin. Established in Government, finally gets his chance, and just blows it by not really doing anything in the campaign.

[nik-]

Sanders would probably be doing just as good as Clinton is now even with the Socialist boogeyman.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

No offense, but you just don't understand American politics do you? Bernie kicking it with anti-American socialists is a major problem in American politics, even if you'd like to think it isn't.

Sorry, did I say anything to suggest that this wasn't a negative? Would you like to talk about Clinton's negatives or Trumps? All potential candidates in this race have warts. The reality is, Sanders would win against Trump in a landslide if the election were held today.

You've been little more than a mouthpiece for the anti-Sanders crowd since this thread began.

Maybe you can tell us where he touched you on the doll in your next post. It might actually explain your behavior.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Sorry, did I say anything to suggest that this wasn't a negative? Would you like to talk about Clinton's negatives or Trumps? All potential candidates in this race have warts. The reality is, Sanders would win against Trump in a landslide if the election were held today.

You've been little more than a mouthpiece for the anti-Sanders crowd since this thread began.

Maybe you can tell us where he touched you on the doll in your next post. It might actually explain your behavior.

This is totally a hypothetical fantasy.

But there is some room for speculation. For one, Sanders, an old man, had more spit and vinegar (so to speak) in a 5 minute speech than Clinton has had in her entire career.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

The media isn't covering the "positives" because Clinton isn't talking. She hasn't given a press conference since 2015 and rarely takes questions that are off script.

Trump puts himself out in front of every single camera out there, so he gets a heck of a lot more face time.

First bold is false, Clinton has provided press conferences since 2015. I remember recently her having answered questions while on a plane flight. Check out this second video: Katy Tur asserts that Clinton has given 5 conferences in the past few weeks while Trump has given none. http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/don...ium=socialflow

Second bold. The Commander in Chief forum had ten minutes of Matt Lauer hammering her on the email controversy. She knows its a bad thing for her campaign, but yet she still answered it.

Trump is a lying sack of ####.

But all this tightening is good for Clinton, ensures her base is motivated to get out and vote. I think complacency among her voting group is a bigger concern - bigger than independents stealing votes or voting for trump.

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by nik-

If Clinton loses, does history remember her as top 3 worst campaigner seeking the highest office?

Fascinating that H. Clinton is a horrible campaigner and B. Clinton - in my view - would be a great one who would win this election by a stupid amount.

And yet the end product that people are supposedly voting for - H. or B. - when actually governing - would be nearly identical.

Kind of goes to show just how large that disconnect is. It's American Idol. And the Reality Show guy is doing fine.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Sorry, did I say anything to suggest that this wasn't a negative? Would you like to talk about Clinton's negatives or Trumps? All potential candidates in this race have warts. The reality is, Sanders would win against Trump in a landslide if the election were held today.

You've been little more than a mouthpiece for the anti-Sanders crowd since this thread began.

Maybe you can tell us where he touched you on the doll in your next post. It might actually explain your behavior.

Originally Posted by Izzle

First bold is false, Clinton has provided press conferences since 2015. I remember recently her having answered questions while on a plane flight. Check out this second video: Katy Tur asserts that Clinton has given 5 conferences in the past few weeks while Trump has given none. http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/don...ium=socialflow

Second bold. The Commander in Chief forum had ten minutes of Matt Lauer hammering her on the email controversy. She knows its a bad thing for her campaign, but yet she still answered it.

Trump is a lying sack of ####.

But all this tightening is good for Clinton, ensures her base is motivated to get out and vote. I think complacency among her voting group is a bigger concern - bigger than independents stealing votes or voting for trump.

Well, this is a weird thing.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Izzle

First bold is false, Clinton has provided press conferences since 2015. I remember recently her having answered questions while on a plane flight. Check out this second video: Katy Tur asserts that Clinton has given 5 conferences in the past few weeks while Trump has given none. http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/don...ium=socialflow

Second bold. The Commander in Chief forum had ten minutes of Matt Lauer hammering her on the email controversy. She knows its a bad thing for her campaign, but yet she still answered it.

Trump is a lying sack of ####.

But all this tightening is good for Clinton, ensures her base is motivated to get out and vote. I think complacency among her voting group is a bigger concern - bigger than independents stealing votes or voting for trump.

Yeah, she's had press conferences. The big rub against her was that she hadn't taken open questions in any of them in like 9 months. She recently did though, but I'm not sure if that was a one off or has continued.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Izzle

First bold is false, Clinton has provided press conferences since 2015. I remember recently her having answered questions while on a plane flight. Check out this second video: Katy Tur asserts that Clinton has given 5 conferences in the past few weeks while Trump has given none. http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/don...ium=socialflow

Second bold. The Commander in Chief forum had ten minutes of Matt Lauer hammering her on the email controversy. She knows its a bad thing for her campaign, but yet she still answered it.

Trump is a lying sack of ####.

But all this tightening is good for Clinton, ensures her base is motivated to get out and vote. I think complacency among her voting group is a bigger concern - bigger than independents stealing votes or voting for trump.

I guess she gave one last week, but it was the first in 9 months according to CNN.

Link

Hillary Clinton gave her first formal press conference in more than nine months on Thursday and, all things considered, it was a non-event.

[dino7c]

Honestly it is better for Hillary if the polls are tied rather than say a 2 or 3 point lead

In a close race dems will do a better job of actually getting people to the polls

[Izzle]

This twitter of a guy posting pictures of things inside trumps hotel.

https://twitter.com/American_Bridge

Made in "not america"

[Street Pharmacist]

It comes down to what you consider a formal press conference.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

It comes down to what you consider a formal press conference.

Taking questions. It's pretty basic for a presidential nominee.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

I guess she gave one last week, but it was the first in 9 months according to CNN.

Link

Hillary Clinton gave her first formal press conference in more than nine months on Thursday and, all things considered, it was a non-event.

Fair enough.

Outside of the CiC forum where both Trump and Clinton were questioned. When was the last time Trump gave a press conference where he had to answer tough questions? I suppose he did a Jimmy Fallon interview last night, he did go on Dr Oz, he had one this morning, but no questions were asked.

[temple5]

US media has given an answer to this question (sort of). Her campaign hoped that if she just let "Trump be Trump" that he would tank on his own. He started to tank and then righted the ship. They either didnt notice the righting of the ship or didnt think it would continue and Hillary continued softball type interviews and fundraising

She spent the whole summer fundraising so I would expect to see a shat tonne of advertisements in the last 60 days of the campaign.

I think Trump is making a mistake not campaigning more in the high $ media states like NY (especially NY), CA, etc. Even if he isnt going to win those states it will force Democrats to spend money which can then not be spent on OH, IL, IN etc. Everytime I see something he is doing a rally in the flyover states which yes he needs to win, but he also needs to try to force liberal money to be spent in liberal states where they havent had to in the last few elections.

The recent Ford announcement has very strange timing given the tone of the election. Its too bad, I like Ford (only us Automaker not to take bailout money) and we were looking at getting a Focus Sport 2 years from now.

But I think Hillary is on a potential upswing, she has started attacking Pepe the frog

The debates are going to be interesting and probably the highest rated in recent memory.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Acting like Bernie was just gonna coast because people liked him is a little naive.

I think you're probably right about this; people making this leap of logic are ignoring the fact that he'd be actually subject to negative campaigning far, far in excess of anything Clinton tried during the primary. But at the same time, a lot of people apparently just don't care about policy in this election. It's too boring for them, I guess.

Sanders would at least have been able to get away with breathing a lot more fire at Trump without his favourability going into the toilet, simply because he's more likeable. And voter turnout would probably have been better for the Dems than it will be with Clinton, given that the biggest driver of that right now is fear that Trump might actually pull this off rather than anything resembling actual enthusiasm. Sanders certainly had enthusiasm behind him.

So I have no idea what that hypothetical reality where he'd gotten the nomination would actually look like.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Sorry, did I say anything to suggest that this wasn't a negative? Would you like to talk about Clinton's negatives or Trumps? All potential candidates in this race have warts. The reality is, Sanders would win against Trump in a landslide if the election were held today.

You've been little more than a mouthpiece for the anti-Sanders crowd since this thread began.

Maybe you can tell us where he touched you on the doll in your next post. It might actually explain your behavior.

The reality is you are admitting you don't understand American politics.

Reminder:

Romney was tied or ahead in polls later in the process than this against Obama
McCain was tied or ahead after unleashing Sarah Palin.

Media needs a horserace, or why adbuy? Hillary has no reason to if it looks like she'll coast, and Trump is cheap so if he thinks he's going to lose he won't spend either. Bernie would be in the exact same position right now, guaranteed. People need to calm the #### down, this is how the process works.

I was anti-Sanders because Bernie supporters were very annoying, didn't understand (or care to understand) how the process works, and they were anti-Math and I just can't stand for that. The became the left wing Tea Party, and nobody wants any part of that ####.

[ernie]

I hate the Trump campaign and everything it represents. But, I've always had a healthy respect for Ivanka who seems like a very intelligent and astute person. It's pretty shocking that she hastily ended an interview when things got tough. Maybe the apple didn't fall far from the tree after all.

Donald Trump Jr. on the other hand has never been impressive and he continues to prove that day in and day out. The excuse on the tax returns a day or so ago was not following the campaign script but was laughably pathetic. And not he drops a "warming up the gas chambers" line. Of course he didn't mean it to reference or make light of the holocaust or anything. He was just substituting out electric chair in a speech he made a few weeks ago. Honest. There is not anyone in the western world that equates "gas chamber" with capital punishment. Gas chambers are associated with the holocaust first and foremost and perhaps are to the point of only being associated with the holocaust. It wasn't a shout out to the alt-right supporters or anything. Honest. So maybe in this instance he wasn't stupid as he likely did exactly as he intended to do.