Countdown to the election

**lpg** · October-10-16, 08:09 AM

The further along this coming train wreck of an election goes, the more I know I did the right thing by not voting for either one. We lose either way. Voting for the least worst is really not a choice.

**Bong-Man** · October-10-16, 01:21 PM

Please remember that Bill Clinton still left office with an almost 60% approval rating, even after being impeached. At the time, attacks on Bill resulted in the opposite results for Hillary's popularity. She claimed early on in his tenure that she wasn't a Tammy Wynette 'stand by your man' kind of woman....and then did just that. Women relate to that on a personal level. Certainly much more than a twice divorced man trying to make that an issue. I only mention this because the Repugnants haven't captured a majority of the female vote since 1988...6 elections. "Vulger-gate" just guaranteed number #7. You can't logistically win a Presidential race today by alienating both women and minorities. It means you lose.

**canuck** · October-10-16, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by Bong-Man

Please remember that Bill Clinton still left office with an almost 60% approval rating, even after being impeached. At the time, attacks on Bill resulted in the opposite results for Hillary's popularity. She claimed early on in his tenure that she wasn't a Tammy Wynette 'stand by your man' kind of woman....and then did just that. Women relate to that on a personal level. Certainly much more than a twice divorced man trying to make that an issue. I only mention this because the Repugnants haven't captured a majority of the female vote since 1988...6 elections. "Vulger-gate" just guaranteed number #7. You can't logistically win a Presidential race today by alienating both women and minorities. It means you lose.

100% right.

The weirdness becomes weirder when you witness the Republicans cowering and supporting Trump, and then disowning him when his concussions become too much of a liability for the team. The Washington Post is dropping bombs late in the game and I suspect there is plenty more ordinance stashed and ready to go.

**jiminnm** · October-12-16, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by canuck

The Washington Post is dropping bombs late in the game and I suspect there is plenty more ordinance stashed and ready to go.

The Washington Post has been in the tank for Hillary since Trump was nominated. That's why he was so critical of them. So, I wouldn't be surprised if they have lined up stories to release over the last couple of weeks of campaign, whenever they determine the most harm they can inflict.

**canuck** · October-13-16, 05:56 AM

Originally Posted by jiminnm

The Washington Post has been in the tank for Hillary since Trump was nominated. That's why he was so critical of them. So, I wouldn't be surprised if they have lined up stories to release over the last couple of weeks of campaign, whenever they determine the most harm they can inflict.

Every bit of small "l" liberal media is s scrambling to take Mr T down. The New Yorker has published op-ed and other pieces on him weekly from the very start. Nobody in their right or left mind can vote for this guy and not feel cheated down the line. He stands for everything he says he is against. He is the reincarnation of a Mussolini, at best a Berlusconi.

**Bigb23** · October-13-16, 11:04 AM

Maybe Donald Trump as a narcissist got in way over head [[if possible), and never expected it to go this far?

Now we are stuck with it.

**Zacha341** · October-14-16, 11:27 AM

Stuck wid the both of 'em! Hah!

He needed to know you usually have to be a politician FIRST before you can get away with what he's done. You cannot become a politician with that much baggage!

Originally Posted by Bigb23

Maybe Donald Trump as a narcissist got in way over head [[if possible), and never expected it to go this far?

Now we are stuck with it.

**Pam** · October-11-16, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by Bong-Man

Please remember that Bill Clinton still left office with an almost 60% approval rating, even after being impeached. At the time, attacks on Bill resulted in the opposite results for Hillary's popularity. She claimed early on in his tenure that she wasn't a Tammy Wynette 'stand by your man' kind of woman....and then did just that. Women relate to that on a personal level. Certainly much more than a twice divorced man trying to make that an issue. I only mention this because the Repugnants haven't captured a majority of the female vote since 1988...6 elections. "Vulger-gate" just guaranteed number #7. You can't logistically win a Presidential race today by alienating both women and minorities. It means you lose.

People offended by Trump aren't automatically flocking to Hillary though. Many people are turned off by her bigger and worse list of scandals. The number of people not voting or voting 3rd party will be up this year.

**oladub** · October-11-16, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Bong-Man

Repugnants haven't captured a majority of the female vote since 1988...6 elections. "Vulger-gate" just guaranteed number #7. You can't logistically win a Presidential race today by alienating both women and minorities. It means you lose.

In 2012, Romney won married women by 7 points but Obama won unmarried women by 36 points. Perhaps those groups have different needs. Hillary's treatment of Bill's rape accusers should logically more than balance the corporate media's present diversion. Trump smashed Hillary in the last debate. Of course, the Christian right might be more offended by Trump's comments than Democrats are of Hillary dissing rape victims. I would prefer that Trump, or even the press, would focus on the rekindled cold war Hillary and Obama brought us. Administration and Russian officials are threatening acts of war against each other. This is more serious than Trump's comments and Hillary's treatment of Bill's rape victims. Hillary has even backed the draft registration of women if things get out of hand; something that parents of daughters should be thinking more about even more than what Trump said 11 years ago or what Bill and Hillary did 20 years ago.

**Bong-Man** · October-12-16, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by oladub

In 2012, Romney won married women by 7 points but Obama won unmarried women by 36 points. Perhaps those groups have different needs. Hillary's treatment of Bill's rape accusers should logically more than balance the corporate media's present diversion. Trump smashed Hillary in the last debate. Of course, the Christian right might be more offended by Trump's comments than Democrats are of Hillary dissing rape victims. I would prefer that Trump, or even the press, would focus on the rekindled cold war Hillary and Obama brought us. Administration and Russian officials are threatening acts of war against each other. This is more serious than Trump's comments and Hillary's treatment of Bill's rape victims. Hillary has even backed the draft registration of women if things get out of hand; something that parents of daughters should be thinking more about even more than what Trump said 11 years ago or what Bill and Hillary did 20 years ago.

It would be much more logical to examine what happened the last two times GWB won the Presidency. He still lost the female vote, but he captured a larger percentage than most Republican candidates. He also captured a larger percentage of the Latino vote. That allowed him to win Florida...barely. Trump will have no such luck. As for comparing the two candidates, I'm surprised any American can get passed the birther movement and what it represented. As a Democrat, I would have voted for either of the last two Republican candidates if Donald was the Democratic nominee. Stupidity, blatant ignorance, and treason go beyond politics. His handling of his own tax issue demonstrates that. He should have released them in the primaries and took the hit. It would be a non-issue by now.

**oladub** · October-12-16, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by Bong-Man

It would be much more logical to examine what happened the last two times GWB won the Presidency. He still lost the female vote, but he captured a larger percentage than most Republican candidates. He also captured a larger percentage of the Latino vote. That allowed him to win Florida...barely. Trump will have no such luck. As for comparing the two candidates, I'm surprised any American can get passed the birther movement and what it represented. As a Democrat, I would have voted for either of the last two Republican candidates if Donald was the Democratic nominee. Stupidity, blatant ignorance, and treason go beyond politics. His handling of his own tax issue demonstrates that. He should have released them in the primaries and took the hit. It would be a non-issue by now.

I pointed out that married women voted for Bush in 2012 in response to your comment that "Repugnants [[cute) haven't captured a majority of the female vote since 1988...6 elections." My point was a parsing rather than a contradiction. Wasn't it Sidney Blumenthal who put forward the birther movement to help Hillary in 2008? Blatant ignorance is a desirable thing according to a 5/13/2016 email sent to Hillary by a DNC operative. "She doesn't want people knowing about her relationship on Wall Street. She wants to achieve consistency and the best way to do it is to keep people ignorant". Unless anyone wants to believe that the high percentage of contributors to the Clinton Foundation who received profitable rulings from the State Department was coincidence, those big donations by Saudis begin to look like treason especially since Hillary was aware of large donations by Saudis to Islamic terrorists also according to WikiLeaks.

I must have missed which laws Trump violated regarding his taxes. He used the same legal tax loopholes that the Clintons' used the last I heard, the ones Congress, including Democrats, wrote into law. I can understand the requests that Trump hand over his taxes before the election. Like with the birther movement, we are to 'believe' his paperwork is out of order. If he did release his taxes before the his audit was completed, the media could eat up a lot of time speculating how his taxes might come out; sort of like arguing about how a recipe will taste before it comes out of the oven.

**vetalalumni** · November-03-16, 02:23 PM

In what specific way does this resonate ?

**Zacha341** · November-05-16, 06:34 PM

That everyone [[group, race and affiliation) are not aligning as they were expected. More deplorable's, I suppose. Even Louis Farrakan doesn't trust Clinton! Who knew?

Originally Posted by vetalalumni

In what specific way does this resonate?

**vetalalumni** · October-12-16, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by oladub

In 2012, Romney won married women by 7 points but Obama won unmarried women by 36 points. Perhaps those groups have different needs. Hillary's treatment of Bill's rape accusers should logically more than balance the corporate media's present diversion. Trump smashed Hillary in the last debate. Of course, the Christian right might be more offended by Trump's comments than Democrats are of Hillary dissing rape victims. I would prefer that Trump, or even the press, would focus on the rekindled cold war Hillary and Obama brought us. Administration and Russian officials are threatening acts of war against each other. This is more serious than Trump's comments and Hillary's treatment of Bill's rape victims. Hillary has even backed the draft registration of women if things get out of hand; something that parents of daughters should be thinking more about even more than what Trump said 11 years ago or what Bill and Hillary did 20 years ago.

Speaking of diversions, how far can the case for DT go without mentioning HC? In order to not provide DT a free pass, why not prefer DT focus on what DT would do? We have not heard much of that from him or his supporters.

The continual handling of DT with kid gloves is not helpful to DT. It does little to elevate DT and generates complacency regarding what he would be held accountable for as POTUS.

We have yet to learn critical details about what, when, where, why and how DT would successfully accomplish anything were he elected. We already know that if elected DT would succeed in keeping HC out.

**oladub** · October-12-16, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by vetalalumni

Speaking of diversions, how far can the case for DT go without mentioning HC? In order to not provide DT a free pass, why not prefer DT focus on what DT would do? We have not heard much of that from him or his supporters.

The continual handling of DT with kid gloves is not helpful to DT. It does little to elevate DT and generates complacency regarding what he would be held accountable for as POTUS.

We have yet to learn critical details about what, when, where, why and how DT would successfully accomplish anything were he elected. We already know that if elected DT would succeed in keeping HC out.

Trump may not be a good choice but Hillary is a known poison. Trump's willingness to promote detente with Russia is an easy choice compared with Hillary's neocon positions and history of rekindling the cold war. Why would anyone in their right mind want to vote for Hillary after her catastrophic policies in Ukraine, Libya, and Syria and her cheerleading support and vote for the Iraq war? Hillary's desire to overthrow Assad is not worth risking WWIII.

Trump has also been explicit in supporting the reigning in free trade treaties, enforcing border security, and naturalization law; all of which would help US workers whose wages have been in decline. Hillary, in contrast, supports the Soros agenda of open borders, groups fighting each other, cheap labor, and 1%er control. Trump wants to temporarily restrict Muslim immigration. Hillary wants the Syrian refugees her policies created to flood into the US even after what happened in Europe and incidents like 9/11 here.

**Pam** · October-14-16, 05:06 AM

Originally Posted by oladub

Trump may not be a good choice but Hillary is a known poison. Trump's willingness to promote detente with Russia is an easy choice compared with Hillary's neocon positions and history of rekindling the cold war. Why would anyone in their right mind want to vote for Hillary after her catastrophic policies in Ukraine, Libya, and Syria and her cheerleading support and vote for the Iraq war? Hillary's desire to overthrow Assad is not worth risking WWIII.

Trump has also been explicit in supporting the reigning in free trade treaties, enforcing border security, and naturalization law; all of which would help US workers whose wages have been in decline. Hillary, in contrast, supports the Soros agenda of open borders, groups fighting each other, cheap labor, and 1%er control. Trump wants to temporarily restrict Muslim immigration. Hillary wants the Syrian refugees her policies created to flood into the US even after what happened in Europe and incidents like 9/11 here.

Yes, the war and trade issues are getting him votes from some of the former Bernie people.

**coracle** · October-14-16, 07:31 AM

I'm getting all sorts of "agro" from my wife over this Election. Evidently I groped her about 50 years ago and I haven't done it again in the last 45 years and she wants to know why! [[my memory is completely blank on the subject).

She says she rejected me the first time round but she's not pleased that I've stopped trying. Just goes to show how dangerous groping is; you try it out when you suffer from an excess of virility and you can end up with the same gropee forever, and you're never allowed to forget how you got there.

**oladub** · October-14-16, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by Pam

Yes, the war and trade issues are getting him votes from some of the former Bernie people.

"I sure won't sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won't sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. We have another choice other than these two candidates who are both promoting lethal policies.

On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary's policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia.

He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia." -Jill Stein

Jill Stein: Trump Is Less Dangerous Than Clinton; She Will Start Nuclear War With Russia