Analysis: Trump 'rigged' vote claim may leave lasting damage

[thaibeachlovers]

58 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Are you refering to your Glorious Leader?

The King of Insults?

The King of meaningless babble?

The King of Crass/Trash Talk?

 

The Bloviator?

 

The Buffoon?

The Text Book Racist, Draft Dodging, alleged Tax Dodging, peodophile, nationwide fraudster/con-man/huckster?

(The latter two to be determined come the New Year). 

 

The embarrssment to America known as Donald Trump?

 

Just because the candidates are indulging in insults does not excuse posters on TV from doing so.

 

BTW, IMO, any country that gave the world the Kardashians deserves to be humiliated and embarrassed.

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

And I'd say you better delve into the raw emails, rather than relying on commentary presented on partisan websites.

Not that it resolves the question of the emails authenticity, or the moral issues of publishing them.

I've seen the e mails presented by said partisan news media on tv, or are you saying they faked them?

 

Moral issues 5555555555555. That goes both ways. No one in this campaign is clean.

Edited October 28, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Just because the candidates are indulging in insults does not excuse posters on TV from doing so.

 

BTW, IMO, any country that gave the world the Kardashians deserves to be humiliated and embarrassed.

That is something we can agree about.  As i do with your comments about personal insults. To me, it seems that the case is so strong against Trump, that invoking personal insults is not just aping one of his most revolting personal traits but completely unncecessary. Let the facts speak for themselves. We repeatedly have right wingers posting from dubious websites that are repeatedly proved to be lying.  Or just make things up with unfounded assertions.  Just refute their evidence or expose their faulty reasoning and let readers decide for themselves about the character of the people who post such tripe.

Edited October 28, 2016 by ilostmypassword

[Morch]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

I've seen the e mails presented by said partisan news media on tv, or are you saying they faked them?

 

No, I didn't say that.

 

I meant that various partisan websites present emails partially, out of context or with added biased commentary. By themselves and without some of the embellishment, they're less "sexy".

 

With regard to authenticity, they were released by Wikileaks, which more and more seems to be a partisan website in itself. Other than that, did the HRC campaign (or all people mentioned in the emails) concede they are genuine? 

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I've seen the e mails presented by said partisan news media on tv, or are you saying they faked them?

 

Moral issues 5555555555555. That goes both ways. No one in this campaign is clean.

 

Moral issues, yes.

Did the HRC campaign make use of stolen material to bash Trump? Did they call on foreign powers to reveal such material?  

[Publicus]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hmmmm. Show us a liberal media outlet that gives as much air time to the e mail leaks as to bashing Trump and I'll agree with you. No chance that that will happen though, as there is no significant liberal coverage of the e mails.

 

Read RT cause sometimes they appear there first.

 

The vast majority of Americans don't give a shit about your emails. That's cause the choice is Trump or Clinton. It's the choice the Republican Party gave us cause everyone has known for years the Democrats would give us HRC. 

 

Whining doesn't change anything about it. So be sure to be a good citizen to cast your vote. Foreign righwingers interested in the possibility of voting in this election can simply contact the Trump campaign office -- in Moscow.

[Publicus]

52 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hmmmm I'd say that information implying the FBI was in the tank for HRC is pretty significant, and would at least require an independent investigation. Of course that isn't going to happen when the head honcho of the Justice Department is having cosy chats with the suspect's husband during the ongoing FBI non independent investigation.

 

You're the guy who until several dayze ago had been posting regularly of how a Potus Hillary Clinton would face impeachment immediately on taking office January 20th. Youse guyz are obsessive compulsive about destroying the Constitution.

 

Washington Post: “If Republicans retain control of the House, something that GOP-friendly maps make possible even in the event of a Trump loss, Clinton will become the first president since George H.W. Bush to immediately face a House Oversight Committee controlled by the opposition party. (Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama lost Congress later in their presidencies.)”

 

“And other Republican leaders say they support Chaffetz’s efforts — raising the specter of more partisan acrimony between them and the White House for the next four years.”

 

 

Fortunately the Constitution and the spirit of it far surpasses anything the extremist fringe lunatic rightwing egocentrics can or could do. Youse guyz are however doing a severe damage to the viability of the system.

 

There are indeed aspects of the American right sector of politics that do need an airing out. Cue November 8th when Trump and the rightwhinge obsessives get the Bum's Rush by general electorate, across the board. By this time next week we'll be able to say confidently to the right that they're striding into a crushing defeat polling day.  

 

 

The 'L' word has indeed begun to assert itself. So has the 'W' word. That's the R party along the left there...the storm and wipeout are in fact coming at it from the right. 

[Pimay1]

2 hours ago, iReason said:

 

Are you refering to your Glorious Leader?

The King of Insults?

The King of meaningless babble?

The King of Crass/Trash Talk?

 

The Bloviator?

 

The Buffoon?

The Text Book Racist, Draft Dodging, alleged Tax Dodging, peodophile, nationwide fraudster/con-man/huckster?

(The latter two to be determined come the New Year). 

 

The embarrssment to America known as Donald Trump?

 

I rest my case.

[Publicus]

9 minutes ago, Pimay1 said:

I rest my case.

 

Need to raise your right hand first however.

 

So back up a bit there.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, Credo said:

I doubt something like this would end up with the Supreme Court.  

If it did, remember the court is now 8 justices and likely at worst to split 4-4. That means that the lower court ruling would automatically be sustained.

[Thakkar]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

is rejected by a plurality of decent Americans?

Not much of a plurality. She has never been able to get significantly ahead of him. People just don't like her, and they certainly don't trust her, by a significant margin.

 

There's only one demographic where Trump is leading by any significant margin: less-educated white male.

 

He is significantly ahead with this demographic, and this is a large demographic. That is the main reason this election is as close as it is.

 

He also leads slightly among less-educated white females, but it's within the margin of error for most polls.

 

He is behind with every other demographic. 

 

Clinton is projected to win every demographic save the above mentioned. She is projected to win 49% of the popular vote against Trump's 43%.

 

T

[Publicus]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I rilly, rilly hope Trump wins just to know that people that make comments like that are screaming in horror.

 

 

UK last week closed the bank account there of RT given that RT as with Wikileaks is a propaganda arm of the Russian government, i.e., Vladimir Putin. With elections coming next year in Germany and France, we might expect more of the same around the EU where Putin is actively helping to fund right sector political parties and political gangs.

 

Hey Vlad, Hillary is coming no matter what you yourself try to do to prevent it...

 

 

Russia's October Surprise

Its Failed Attempt to Hack the Election

 

 

The failure of Russia’s long-planned October surprise to tip the election appears to have angered Moscow, which had planned this operation well in advance in hopes of destroying Clinton’s chance of winning the presidency

 

 

So what will Moscow try next? Given Putin’s penchant for dropping bombshells, both figuratively and literally, further escalation is a given.

 

Western officials should expect to take further countermeasures against Russian propaganda on television and social media, call out Russian efforts to influence elections in the United States (as well as in France and Germany), and send clear signals that cyberattacks on the U.S. political process will elicit a counterresponse, as Vice President Joseph Biden let slip while taping an interview with Meet the Press earlier in October.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russian-federation/2016-10-20/russias-october-surprise?cid=nlc-twofa-

 

Vlad and his sister Party in the USA, the Republican Party, have brought themselves under a definite and justified scrutiny. This is in addition to Vlad and his support of rightwing parties and forces in the EU.

[keemapoot]

12 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

 

There's only one demographic where Trump is leading by any significant margin: less-educated white male.

 

He is significantly ahead with this demographic, and this is a large demographic. That is the main reason this election is as close as it is.

 

He also leads slightly among less-educated white females, but it's within the margin of error for most polls.

 

He is behind with every other demographic. 

 

Clinton is projected to win every demographic save the above mentioned. She is projected to win 49% of the popular vote against Trump's 43%.

 

T

 

CNN, known for their flashy on-air gimmickry, was flashing this electoral vote map today, that could instantly go through all the scenarios where Trump could be President. I'm sure everyone knows by now, there is no such scenario, without an earth-shattering, once-in-a-lifetime, "Dewey Defeats Truman" moment. I have yet to see any scenario where he can pull out this election. 

 

What I have seen is lots of analysis about how he will likely destroy the careers of Republican leaders, destroy the Senate Majority, and erode the House Majority significantly. More importantly, I've seen analysis about how this Trump movement will create essentially paralysis in congress, obstructionism like never seen, and generally make Clinton's task of governance even harder that it would have been had a decent candidate run. Oh well, I guess it's good she's a tough lady and can take it, huh?

 

Clinton will have to find a way to reach out to the Billy Bobs of the GOP though. Maybe she should consider spending the remaining campaign funds on caps they all wear, like Trump did?

[Linzz]

7 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Read RT cause sometimes they appear there first.

 

The vast majority of Americans don't give a shit about your emails. That's cause the choice is Trump or Clinton. It's the choice the Republican Party gave us cause everyone has known for years the Democrats would give us HRC. 

 

Whining doesn't change anything about it. So be sure to be a good citizen to cast your vote. Foreign righwingers interested in the possibility of voting in this election can simply contact the Trump campaign office -- in Moscow.

 

Agreed. The emails do appear first on RT, but not before Wikileaks has released them if that is what you mean. That suggestion  seems to be a LW conspiracy theory unless you can supply evidence of such with time lines.

[Linzz]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Moral issues, yes.

Did the HRC campaign make use of stolen material to bash Trump? Did they call on foreign powers to reveal such material?  

 

You're right it is a moral dilemma to use stolen emails as evidence.  HRC campaign would if they could. Politics is a blood sport. They have not denied nor refuted any of the revelations and again they would if they could, they just quickly pivot to Putin and Russia as a diversion which still remains unproven but those with a mission without question swallow it like goldfish. Why would Putin prefer Trump when he's so unpredictable? Surely he would prefer the devil he knows

[Jingthing]

The trump campaign.

Bigly bad. (Good luck for democrats!)

Only one person to blame for that -- trump.

Rigged? It's more like it's self rigged.

Yes, he could have won, maybe even easily, but he won't, and that's on HIM. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-has-won-the-worst-campaign-in-modern-history/2016/10/27/5c870118-9c7e-11e6-b3c9-f662adaa0048_story.html?utm_term=.58f85fec9a96

Quote

Donald Trump has run the worst campaign in modern history

 

One important test for the White House is the ability to run a modern presidential campaign, a 50-state start-up that requires hundreds of millions of dollars, a clear strategy, great talent and consistent, high-quality execution — all while being scrutinized daily by hundreds of reporters. By now it is indisputable that Trump has run the most poorly resourced, undisciplined, chaotic campaign in modern political history. He has embodied the quality that he regards as the worst failing for a leader: all talk and no action.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 28, 2016 by Jingthing

[Linzz]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

The trump campaign.

Bigly bad. (Good luck for democrats!)

Only one person to blame for that -- trump.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-has-won-the-worst-campaign-in-modern-history/2016/10/27/5c870118-9c7e-11e6-b3c9-f662adaa0048_story.html?utm_term=.58f85fec9a96

 

 

Then why am I not 50 points ahead? - HRC

[Jingthing]

One electoral vote ahead is all it takes.

[gemini81]

It has for a long time, been more of a selection and less of an election.

[Srikcir]

21 minutes ago, Linzz said:

Why would Putin prefer Trump when he's so unpredictable?

Because he is predictable.

"Donald Trump has long shown admiration and respect for Vladimir Putin, saying that the authoritarian Russian president is “doing a great job” https://newrepublic.com/article/136635/donald-trump-cant-stop-praising-vladimir-putin

" Mr. Putin is worthy of admiration because he “has very strong control over a country” and “says great things about me.” http://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-obsession-with-putin-should-be-a-red-flag-1473808491

Combined with an ego maniac narcissistic personality, Trump would be a predictable surrogate for KGB manipulator Putin. With regards to Putin and Hillary, Trump has said, "They have a great dislike for each other." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/18/clinton-campaign-no-need-for-trump-to-see-putin-postelection-theyre-already-tight/

 

[Morch]

35 minutes ago, Linzz said:

 

You're right it is a moral dilemma to use stolen emails as evidence.  HRC campaign would if they could. Politics is a blood sport. They have not denied nor refuted any of the revelations and again they would if they could, they just quickly pivot to Putin and Russia as a diversion which still remains unproven but those with a mission without question swallow it like goldfish. Why would Putin prefer Trump when he's so unpredictable? Surely he would prefer the devil he knows

 

Maybe HRC's campaign would have, but they haven't. If someone believes HRC and the DNC can rig elections, getting a hold of Trump's emails shouldn't have been much of a problem. As for denying/refuting - sometimes, the best strategy is to ignore things and let them pass. Can't imagine any hardcore Trump supporter being convinced anyway.

 

With regard to Putin's preferences - I do not believe he is interested in Trump's victory, as much as he is interested in having a weakened POTUS, and a divided USA. Trump helps both goals. IMO, he'd actually rather deal with constant HRC over the unpredictable Trump.

 

You do notice that Wikileaks does not publish anything on Trump, or for that matter, on Putin, right?

[MiKT]

Would one of our resident US experts please answer a stupid question. Are the postal (advance) votes counted as received (obviously yes) but are the results displayed as received so an idea of the way the voting is going can be seen in advance? or are they all summed together by a certain time on the 8th Nov and displayed ?? how? what time? by state? or what?

taeverso.

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Because he is predictable.

"Donald Trump has long shown admiration and respect for Vladimir Putin, saying that the authoritarian Russian president is “doing a great job” https://newrepublic.com/article/136635/donald-trump-cant-stop-praising-vladimir-putin

" Mr. Putin is worthy of admiration because he “has very strong control over a country” and “says great things about me.” http://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-obsession-with-putin-should-be-a-red-flag-1473808491

Combined with an ego maniac narcissistic personality, Trump would be a predictable surrogate for KGB manipulator Putin. With regards to Putin and Hillary, Trump has said, "They have a great dislike for each other." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/18/clinton-campaign-no-need-for-trump-to-see-putin-postelection-theyre-already-tight/

 

 

I beg to differ. If Trump treats international diplomacy the way he treats his business dealings, it would be very hard to trust his word. The same goes for issuing controversial statements - not very conductive to a stable global environment.

[Opl]

Let's imagine Duterte is POTUS to have an idea.  

[ilostmypassword]

9 minutes ago, MiKT said:

Would one of our resident US experts please answer a stupid question. Are the postal (advance) votes counted as received (obviously yes) but are the results displayed as received so an idea of the way the voting is going can be seen in advance? or are they all summed together by a certain time on the 8th Nov and displayed ?? how? what time? by state? or what?

taeverso.

The tally is not done until after the polls are closed.

[Linzz]

16 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Maybe HRC's campaign would have, but they haven't. If someone believes HRC and the DNC can rig elections, getting a hold of Trump's emails shouldn't have been much of a problem. As for denying/refuting - sometimes, the best strategy is to ignore things and let them pass. Can't imagine any hardcore Trump supporter being convinced anyway.

 

With regard to Putin's preferences - I do not believe he is interested in Trump's victory, as much as he is interested in having a weakened POTUS, and a divided USA. Trump helps both goals. IMO, he'd actually rather deal with constant HRC over the unpredictable Trump.

 

You do notice that Wikileaks does not publish anything on Trump, or for that matter, on Putin, right?

 

Dunno. Trump doesn't email. Only Tweets!

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

That is something we can agree about.  As i do with your comments about personal insults. To me, it seems that the case is so strong against Trump, that invoking personal insults is not just aping one of his most revolting personal traits but completely unncecessary. Let the facts speak for themselves. We repeatedly have right wingers posting from dubious websites that are repeatedly proved to be lying.  Or just make things up with unfounded assertions.  Just refute their evidence or expose their faulty reasoning and let readers decide for themselves about the character of the people who post such tripe.

Agreed. If posters just stuck to opinions without the insults the threads about the election would be way more civil.

Regardless of personal opinions one of the candidates is going to lose, and going by some of the comments, certain posters will be having large amounts of humble pie to eat.

Of course that doesn't apply to comments about the candidates- if they choose to speak like that, they are both fair game.

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agreed. If posters just stuck to opinions without the insults the threads about the election would be way more civil.

Regardless of personal opinions one of the candidates is going to lose, and going by some of the comments, certain posters will be having large amounts of humble pie to eat.

Of course that doesn't apply to comments about the candidates- if they choose to speak like that, they are both fair game.

Except that, if Trump loses, lots (most?) of his supporters will claim that the elections were fraudulent and that he really won.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, Morch said:

 

No, I didn't say that.

 

I meant that various partisan websites present emails partially, out of context or with added biased commentary. By themselves and without some of the embellishment, they're less "sexy".

 

With regard to authenticity, they were released by Wikileaks, which more and more seems to be a partisan website in itself. Other than that, did the HRC campaign (or all people mentioned in the emails) concede they are genuine? 

The Clinton campaign has not said they are fakes, which is significant. Their only defence seems to be to try and imply Russia is behind them when they have zero proof that that is true.

However, they do seem to be having success in diverting people from talking about what the e mails say to who might be behind them.

I'd say whoever is behind them, if not the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans, or a nerd in his mother's basement ( because he can ) hates HRC, so there's only millions and millions of suspects to check.

There would be nothing strange about WikiLeaks being partisan when they are obviously anti establishment, and she is the embodiment of the establishment.

Edited October 28, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[MiKT]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Except that, if Trump loses, lots (most?) of his supporters will claim that the elections were fraudulent and that he really won.

 

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Except that, if Trump loses, lots (most?) of his supporters will claim that the elections were fraudulent and that he really won.

 

All Trump supporters must know that if Trump wins the vote must have been rigged, because Trump has most clearly stated the vote is rigged. Although you might think its a bit of a catch 22 claiming the vote is rigged BEFORE the election (also a tad or two defeatist in outlook). But then all those Trump hatted, good ol boys must know what's, what. What!