40
   

How will Trump handle losing the election?

 
 
blatham
 
  4  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 11:25 am
@revelette2,
Quote:
Until the next day, then we find out some details which makes the initial headlines sensationalized.

No kiddin'. And this is so common as to drive one around the bend. I don't think this gets corrected in any substantial way because the modern world of news gathering/delivery is so immediate and the temptations to reach towards the sensational so incentivized. I think we individually have to build up the habit of taking any "breaking" story with a grain of salt and then pay attention to more careful analyses that follow.
blatham
 
  4  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 01:00 pm
There's a must-read piece by Susan Faludi up at the Times right now. Here's the first three graphs: http://nyti.ms/2dTdGfX

Quote:
It was my third day at the Republican National Convention in 1996, and my notebook overflowed with a one-note theme: “You do know that Hillary Clinton is funding the whole radical feminist agenda?” “She had Vince Foster killed.” “She’s behind many more murders than that.” “It’s well-established that Hillary Clinton belonged to a satanic cult, still does.” The consensus among Pat Buchanan’s supporters seemed ardent and universal, though the object of this obloquy wasn’t even on the opposing ticket.

One of the mysteries of 2016 is the degree to which Hillary Clinton is reviled. Not just rationally opposed but viscerally and instinctively hated. None of the stated reasons for the animus seem to satisfy. Yes, she’s careful and cagey, and her use of a private email server, which the F.B.I. flung back into the news on Friday, was a big mistake. But no, she’s not more dishonest than other politicians, and compared with her opponent, she’s George Washington. Her policies, even where bold, are hardly on the subversive fringe.

Yet she’s cast not just as a political combatant but as a demon who, in the imaginings of Republicans like Paul D. Ryan, the speaker of the House, and Representative Trent Franks, would create an America “where passion — the very stuff of life — is extinguished” (the former) and where fetuses would be destroyed “limb from limb” (the latter).
snood
 
  5  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 01:08 pm
@blatham,
That's good stuff. It's always useful to see the irrationality of the Hillary hatred articulately laid out - and this piece does it well.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 01:38 pm
@blatham,
unless it's about Trump you mean.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 01:40 pm
@reasoning logic,
Perhaps you were more at fault then your partner?
roger
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 03:32 pm
@RABEL222,
Was that really necessary? Or even vaguely helpful?
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 03:51 pm
@roger,
The way I s told, if you have an address book that includes, say 30 or 40 people (not uncommon in business or academe) and you send a message, thats 40 messages you just sent
blatham
 
  4  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 03:52 pm
Quote:
There’s a whole industry of fraudsters, such as Hans von Spakovsky and Kansas Secretary of State Kobach who whip up voter fraud frenzies to degitimize Democrats, rile up the Republican base, and fundraise. That’s why the Wake County, NC GOP just sent out a letter saying that Democrats will “stop at nothing and registering dead people or falsifying voter information is simply a ‘means to an end’ for them.”

Here’s what we know about voter fraud. One should never say voter fraud is non-existent. In fact, it happens occasionally with absentee ballots and I’ve long said we need more action to stop it. I’ve also said we need to clean up voter registration rolls to stop registration fraud. What is extremely rare and has not affected any election we know of since the 1980s is impersonation fraud, the kind of fraud state voter ID laws are meant to stop. Yet Republican laws that make it harder to register and vote generally don’t go after absentee ballot fraud but are instead targeted almost exclusively to measures making it harder for those likely to vote Democratic to register and vote.
more here http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/trump-rigged-election-republican-voter-fraud-hysteria

0 Replies
 
ossobucotemp
 
  3  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 03:53 pm
@blatham,
I got one of our bunch of times a year phone calls from my ex today. We still have fun talking, especially politics, where we long term tend to agree, and he's more into it than I am (is that possible, yes), knows more details, sort of like our Blatham. We essentially broke up back in '93, my then idea of total disaster, but time put a blanket on my dismay, and, if anything, we get along better than back then, and no, I don't mind he loves his later family.

Why do I bring this up? He's sort of a bellweather re what is going on with the election, and he's not worried. We'll see. My fear button is blinking red. I don't want my fear to come true.
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 04:30 pm
@ossobucotemp,
I think he's smack on the money, osso.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Oct, 2016 04:38 pm
@farmerman,
Oh.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  7  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 06:55 am
Quote:
It is quite telling that even at this late stage of the election, when partisan tempers are naturally running at their fiercest, former career DOJ lawyers, former high level DOJ appointees and legal experts on both sides of the aisle are lining up to say this was not only an extremely poor decision but may even have violated the law.(Note here: President George W. Bush's top ethics lawyer suggesting Comey may even have broken the law. Another example is here.) As far as I can see, no one who actually knows what Comey's legal, professional and ethical responsibilities were in this case can find a basis to defend his actions. Even Republicans who might be inclined to interpret ambiguous facts through a partisan prism don't seem able to come up with one.


Quote:
Still more troubling is the information contained in this just released article in The Wall Street Journal by Devlin Barrett. It describes what the article describes as a feud within the FBI and between the FBI and the Department of Justice over the Clinton probe. It now seems clear that what are essentially rogue FBI agents have been looking for all sorts of different angles to pursue investigations of Hillary Clinton and her family. Indeed, they've presented their evidence to career public corruption prosecutors at DOJ and been told they don't have anything. But it hasn't stopped. They clearly were not happy with the decision in the emails probe even though Comey said not even a close call.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/deeply-disturbing

(note: links in body of text)

blatham
 
  7  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 09:51 am
Making American citizens more stupid every day. She did this, you see, because the voting system has been corrupted by voter fraud.

Quote:
Apparently, Rote, an enthusiastic Donald Trump supporter, cast one call at a local county election office, and then went to a separate satellite voting location to vote again.

The system worked and Rote was caught. The local report added that the Polk County auditor said this was the first time in 12 years his office had to report alleged voter fraud.
http://on.msnbc.com/2dViKAy
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 02:22 pm
Donald Trump is refusing to pay his campaign pollster three-quarters of a million dollars

Source: The Washington Post

Donald Trump's hiring of pollster Tony Fabrizio in May was viewed as a sign that the real estate mogul was finally bringing seasoned operatives into his insurgent operation.

But the Republican presidential nominee appears to have taken issue with some of the services provided by the veteran GOP strategist, who has advised candidates from 1996 GOP nominee Bob Dole to Florida Gov. Rick Scott. The Trump campaign's latest Federal Election Commission report shows that it is disputing nearly $767,000 that Fabrizio's firm says it is still owed for polling.

Trump campaign officials declined to provide details about the reason the campaign has declined to pay the sum to Fabrizio Lee, the pollster's Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based firm. “This is an administrative issue that we're resolving internally,” said senior communications adviser Jason Miller. Fabrizio did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Fabrizio was an ally of former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who persuaded a skeptical Trump in the spring that he needed a professional pollster. The abrupt departure of Manafort in August and Trump's hiring of pollster Kellyanne Conway to be his campaign manager raised questions about whether Fabrizio would stay on. There have also been multiple reports that Trump and his son-in-law Jared Kushner have rejected Fabrizio's advice.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/31/donald-trump-is-refusing-to-pay-his-campaign-pollster-nearly-three-quarters-of-a-million-dollars/
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  5  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 02:25 pm
If Comey is so fair, ethical and non-partisan, how can you explain this? It seems that he had come to the conclusion that the Russians are trying to undermine the election, but that's information he didn't want to reveal until after the election. So, he floats a story that suggests wrongdoing in Hillary's camp days before the election, but information about Russia trying to influence the election - that's too risky to share?

Last Friday, less than two weeks before Election Day, Comey announced the FBI was reviewing the case involving Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

New emails were reportedly uncovered during a separate investigation into Anthony Weiner, the former husband of senior Clinton adviser Huma Abedin.

The former official told CNBC that government insiders were confused as to why Comey argued against publicizing Russia’s alleged involvement in U.S. elections, but apparently did not have the same concerns about the Clinton email case.

blatham
 
  3  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 03:15 pm
@snood,
You'll probably want to look at this related piece by James Fallows http://theatln.tc/2esKQPQ
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 03:22 pm
@blatham,
Republicans need to lose their congressional seats by about 100%. It may bring back a semblance of normalcy to our government.
blatham
 
  4  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 03:31 pm
@cicerone imposter,
But that ain't gonna happen, ci. There's really no possibility of it at all. So no sense hoping for it. Whatever means citizens have of helping direct things back towards rationality needs a closer study. No silver bullet available. It is not going to be easy nor quick climbing out of this incredible crap pile.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 03:49 pm
@blatham,
I know; it's not even wishful thinking. It's simply stupid.
How republicans continue to vote as children who are only interested in playing politics rather than helping our country progress is a sham government.
Disgusting and tiresome!
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 31 Oct, 2016 04:05 pm
@cicerone imposter,
when twain said that ," history may not repeat itself , but it often rhymes"
he could have been talking about today, with the exception that noone has had to burn down the reichstag and der Donalt has still not finished his "final solution"
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Trump and the Central Park Five - Discussion by ossobuco
TRUMP's GONE---This just in - Discussion by farmerman
Trump : Why? - Question by Yalow
Project 2025 - Discussion by izzythepush
Why so many believe Trump - Discussion by vikorr
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 10:48:38