We thought the first debate was nasty? I think tonight is gonna be the lowest of the low when it comes to Trump. I predict this strategy will backfire on him spectacularly. Hillary is too smart and experienced to get sucked into an argument about her husband's sexual history. She'll simply deflect his attacks and try and steer the conversation towards the actual issues and her policies. It worked like a charm in the first debate, and it'll work for her tonight. All she needs to do is stay on message as much as she can, counter-punch when she sees an opening, and just let Trump hang himself.
The problem with Trump using this strategy is that he has zero evidence that Hillary intimidated these women. Secondly, and more importantly, Bill Clinton isn't running for president. But at this point it's all Trump has left, so he's gonna sling as much mud as he can and see if anything sticks. This is his hail mary. The election is essentially over already, but if Hillary wins tonight, that'll definitely be the knock-out.
There are 3 women who claim it occurred. Broderick, Wiley, and someone else. Whether they are credible now or out for revenge against the Clintons in general is up for debate but you do have similar evidence to say Jian Gomeshi.
@emmettrensin
A moment of silence for Republicans who were stoked for the ethno-nationalist police state so long as nobody groped their white daughters.
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
Everybody makes fun of Breitbart, but who else has the cajones to atleast interview these women so they can tell their side of the story?
Certainly not NBC, ABC, CNN or even Fox
Hilarious. You know who did a 30 minute interview with Juanita Broaddrick allowing her to tell her side of the story? NBC. She's been on Fox as well.
Lots of other media have given lots of coverage to Broaddrick, including the NYT and WaPo.
How many of the women (and 13 year old girl) that have or are accusing Trump of sexual assault has Breitbart interviewed so they can tell their side of the story? I honestly haven't looked.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
I'm glad this campaign has exposed Giuliani for what he is. Blind patriotism after 9/11 gave him more goodwill than he ever deserved and there was a time that it could have allowed him a serious run at the presidency. What a huge mistake that would have been.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
I'm glad this campaign has exposed Giuliani for what he is. Blind patriotism after 9/11 gave him more goodwill than he ever deserved and there was a time that it could have allowed him a serious run at the presidency. What a huge mistake that would have been.
That's the embarrassing thing about this for Rudy, he has been more passionate and committed to Trump's campaign then he was his own in 2008. Hating Hillary drives him more than his own ambition. Sad!
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
I wonder if the Republican Party changes their primary system to prevent this from happening again?
I suspect they at a minimum get rid of winner take all states. Trumps primary support was greatly elevated by winning 100% of the delegates with 30% support. It made never trumps job that much harder.
The Following User Says Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
I wonder if the Republican Party changes their primary system to prevent this from happening again?
I think each state sets their own rules. Not much the national party can do, at least I dont think there is...but you know they love a good gerrymandering so...
I wonder if the Republican Party changes their primary system to prevent this from happening again?
I'm sure the GOP brass would love that, but getting changes approved requires a majority vote of their rules-committee, and a 3/4 vote of their national committee, which is made up of delegates from each state, and who tend to vote in terms of state interests rather than party interests. I don't know this to be fact, but I would guess that there would be a lot of resistance to a superdelegate system that takes power out of the hands of voters.
A smaller change like banning winner-take-all contests might be do-able; there's no guarantee that it would prevent a Trump 2.0 situation. States that have winner-take-all contests like them because they make their states more important and a bigger focus in the primaries. 17 states currently go with winner-take-all so you'd need to convince at least five of those states to give them up in order to get your 3/4 approval.
There are 3 women who claim it occurred. Broderick, Wiley, and someone else. Whether they are credible now or out for revenge against the Clintons in general is up for debate but you do have similar evidence to say Jian Gomeshi.
This is something that has always baffled me. The Republicans have been out to destroy the Clinton's for decades, and have come up empty. If any of these women were credible they would have been trotted out long before now, as part of a retort to Trump's debacle.
The Following User Says Thank You to Lanny_McDonald For This Useful Post:
So, here's this election in a nutshell: There's a maniacal, physically-repulsive would-be tyrant with ridiculous blond hair, aided by gun nuts, the oil-lobby, and his own pack of fanboy supporters who worship him unquestioningly as their salvation. A mature, powerful woman who's collected her own impressive battle-scars over the years, has her own ideas of how to fight him, but first she must forge an alliance with a spirited renegade who doesn't easily compromise. Ultimately, she also needs the help of some younger women, all of whom had previously been sexually violated by the tyrant, in order to defeat him. Against a backdrop of environmental destruction, powerful storms, and wildly swinging polls, the race ends with pretty-much all of the tyrant's followers going down in flames.
So can we just get away with telling future generations that Mad Max: Fury Road is a reasonably accurate historical drama based on this election?
The Following 28 Users Say Thank You to octothorp For This Useful Post:
So, here's this election in a nutshell: There's a maniacal, physically-repulsive would-be tyrant with ridiculous blond hair, aided by gun nuts, the oil-lobby, and his own pack of fanboy supporters who worship him unquestioningly as their salvation. A mature, powerful woman who's collected her own impressive battle-scars over the years, has her own ideas of how to fight him, but first she must forge an alliance with a spirited renegade who doesn't easily compromise. Ultimately, she also needs the help of some younger women, all of whom had previously been sexually violated by the tyrant, in order to defeat him. Against a backdrop of environmental destruction, powerful storms, and wildly swinging polls, the race ends with pretty-much all of the tyrant's followers going down in flames.
So can we just get away with telling future generations that Mad Max: Fury Road is a reasonably accurate historical drama based on this election?
Mind. Blown.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
So, here's this election in a nutshell: There's a maniacal, physically-repulsive would-be tyrant with ridiculous blond hair, aided by gun nuts, the oil-lobby, and his own pack of fanboy supporters who worship him unquestioningly as their salvation. A mature, powerful woman who's collected her own impressive battle-scars over the years, has her own ideas of how to fight him, but first she must forge an alliance with a spirited renegade who doesn't easily compromise. Ultimately, she also needs the help of some younger women, all of whom had previously been sexually violated by the tyrant, in order to defeat him. Against a backdrop of environmental destruction, powerful storms, and wildly swinging polls, the race ends with pretty-much all of the tyrant's followers going down in flames.
So can we just get away with telling future generations that Mad Max: Fury Road is a reasonably accurate historical drama based on this election?
Thanked for the part in bold.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Swift For This Useful Post:
So, here's this election in a nutshell: There's a maniacal, physically-repulsive would-be tyrant with ridiculous blond hair, aided by gun nuts, the oil-lobby, and his own pack of fanboy supporters who worship him unquestioningly as their salvation. A mature, powerful woman who's collected her own impressive battle-scars over the years, has her own ideas of how to fight him, but first she must forge an alliance with a spirited renegade who doesn't easily compromise. Ultimately, she also needs the help of some younger women, all of whom had previously been sexually violated by the tyrant, in order to defeat him. Against a backdrop of environmental destruction, powerful storms, and wildly swinging polls, the race ends with pretty-much all of the tyrant's followers going down in flames.
So can we just get away with telling future generations that Mad Max: Fury Road is a reasonably accurate historical drama based on this election?
