U.S. Presidential Election 2016 (Sponsored by Betty Croker's Hamburger Helper)

[John Arne]

"World class health".

[Raoul Duke]

The US has officially accused Russia of the recent DNC hacks, and trying to generally interfere with the election : https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/07/us-russia-dnc-hack-interfering-presidential-election

This is basically The Cold War 2.0 now, with them taking pot shots at each other.

[ItalAussie]

After that (pretty gross) tape leak, Trump's starting pulling the Bill Clinton card.

Someone must have told him that dragging Bill into the discourse is going to sink him, right? That's straightforward politics.

[Pepe]

Not a single ticket for the debate has been assigned to students yet. I guess those 7 million it apparently cost to put the thing together are really worth it.

[niko_cee]

That's straightforward politics.

Which part of Trump's bizarre ascent has followed conventional wisdom?

[Shindig]

I would really like Russia's youth to get it's shit together.

[Bernanke]

The timing of this new audiotape is great.

https://fat.gfycat.com/NeatEnchantedAfricanharrierhawk.gif

[Lewis]

Yeah, he's done alright. There's no way his reputation as an intellectual and political heavyweight survives him talking shit once.

[elth]

Absolutely nobody would have thought that was Trump's attitude to women before these comments. What a shock.

Makes you wonder how all of this crap stayed buried throughout the Republican primary campaign.

[phonics]

Absolutely nobody would have thought that was Trump's attitude to women before these comments. What a shock.

Makes you wonder how all of this crap stayed buried throughout the Republican primary campaign.

Jeb Bush managed to spend 150 million dollars and not find this. Republican opposition research is weak.

Meanwhile,

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuMQ-InUAAABeE6.jpg:large

[phonics]

God I love that photo. I think I might get it framed and hang it on the wall.

[Lewis]

What an absolute tit he is BOTTLING IT. He could have ridden that smug conference face to Heaven. But no. He shat the bed.

[ItalAussie]

Jeb Bush managed to spend 150 million dollars and not find this. Republican opposition research is weak.

The reason they didn't go after him early is that they didn't want to legitimise him as a serious candidate. They figured that as long as he came across as a joke candidate, they didn't have to worry too much. And then by the time they realised he was serious, they didn't have time left to scramble.

So incompetence, really.

[ItalAussie]

The Nevada thing is like something out of fiction.

And I mean that. There's an episode of Veep called Nev-AH-da. It's literally a sitcom plot.

[Byron]

So in preparation for Election Night...



http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/09/trump-will-destroy-the-republican-party-by-leading-hillary-in-the-polls/

"Trump tops Clinton by three points (47-44 percent) and Bush ties at 44 percent each."

King Trump :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CRMD2zmVAAAu7TM.png:large


You're a complete idiot who has no idea what he's talking about, Trump's ground game is as good as anyones. You are just mindlessly repeating the talking points of an increasingly desperate mainstream media / establishment.

Trump is the clear favorite, all polling numbers indicate this, and he beats Hillary head to head in the general. The People have woken up, and they are fed up with the lies of the self-interested elites. Get used to the idea of President Trump.


Remember when I said Trump would win the nomination and ultimately the general.

I'm smarter than pundits / understand America better :cool:


Good to see the same people dismissing a Trump win for the Republican nominee are dismissing a Trump presidential win; you heard it here first, Trump will win and win resoundingly.


Yes.

People agree with him, America is a fundamentally conservative country, and they absolutely hate the cowering obsequious un-American retreat from undisputed global power that they've had to swallow in the name of tolerance and so called necessity. Time to make America great again. All hail the God Emperor.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1w4IxCXIxU


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_41_clinton_39

Trump 41. Clinton 39.

He hasn't even gotten started.


Clinton +6.5 with 6 months to go until Election day and he hasn't even started campaigning for the general election. Only an idiot would claim that Clinton was safe, the sort of idiot who thought Trump wouldn't ever secure the Republican nomination ;)


Most of his appeal is with centerist / swing voters, it's the conservatives he has issues with really.


Reuters credible enough for you blue hairs?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN0Y21TN?

Behold the God Emperor, his reign will soon be upon us...

http://www.sharedwanderlust.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/god-emperor-trump-small.jpg


Lord Trump beating Clinton by 3 in new national poll:

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/733075738061111296


God Emperor trolling Elizabeth 'Pocahontas' Warren: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/279964-trump-on-warren-you-mean-pocahontas


Salon.com (Marxist Propaganda Machine) defends Trump, slams NYT and PC feminists: http://www.salon.com/2016/05/19/camille_paglia_pc_feminists_misfire_again_as_fossi lized_fearful_media_cant_touch_donald_trump/

All Knees Shall Bend.


The mainstream media outlets are center-left establishment indoctrination / propaganda centers masquerading as 'news'; I'm glad even Democrats / liberals are waking up this this this reality.


Trump leading in another poll, 46-44:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/post-primary-rally-boosts-trump-albeit-challenges-aplenty/story?id=39265102


New high energy poll has Trump within 4 against Hillary in deep blue New Jersey (Romney lost by 18):

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/poll-hillary-clinton-trump-new-jersey-223724


Lol so much for the Judge gaffe having any effect on Trump, the God Emperor leading in Florida:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282534-poll-trump-clinton-in-dead-heat-in-fla

Trump puts DEEP BLUE Connecticut into play, only down 4 (Romney lost by 18):

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Q-poll-Clinton-has-small-lead-over-Trump-7956289.php


http://i.filmot.org/BKATBwN.jpg

Fukin rect. The God Emperor remains un-stumable. Next 5 months are going to be awesome.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZWQ3YOMtJaM/UEsnJKgjdkI/AAAAAAAACo0/miO-N7XEaFA/w1200-h630-p-nu/black-kid-oh-snap.gif


I'm telling you, he's going to win. The media is very very out of touch with how actual Americans feel, I have no doubt he will vastly out perform polls.

Trump tied with Clinton in support among Latinos:

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinion/2016/06/07/opinion-big-data-reports-latino-support-for-trump-on-rise-at-37/


Tbf they are spreading blatant lies and propaganda.


God Emperor up 4 (43-39), highest polling numbers since October:

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch


No. I don't trust polls by establishment / center-left sources, the same polls that were shockingly inaccurate in predicting the Brexit results. They have their own agendas to promote and skew their data sets accordingly. See ABC News/Washington Post poll results for more information.


Is this the same fivethirtyeight that said Trump would never win the nomination? There's a reason people don't trust experts, it's because they've lost all credibility.


Trump leads in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Iowa based off Quinnipac and Monmouth polls:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/quinnipiac-poll-trump-leads-florida-pennsylvania

http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_071216/

:dust:


Supreme Leader ahead by SEVEN points:

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch


It's an uninspiring but wise choice; it'll consolidate the GOP establishment / 'True Conservatives' behind him which is the bare minimum his pick needed to do if he was going to have any chance to beat Hillary. I'm also convinced that he is doing much better, especially among Democrats, than polls pick up.

And it needs to be said, that unfathomable 'Muslim Ban gaffe' is probably quietly looking more and more sensible to Americans across the spectrum...


Speaking of post-truth, why didn't the media care about Obama and Biden's plagerism you delusional idiot:

http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/melania-trump-joe-biden-plagiarism-allegations-plagiarized-speech-barack-obama-neil-kinnock-deval-patrick/

Hint: the smug Leftist periodicals you read don't have a monopoly on the Truth


No it's not. This is a simplistic media narrative to try and undermine why people actually vote for him; this same psychological phenomenon appeals to the same extent to Hillary anyways. People vote for him because of his policies.

Please keep in mind Trump supporters are better educated and wealthier than Hillary supporters.


Pretty sure the amount of support Trump gets from Republicans is more or less equivalent to the amount Hillary gets from Democrats. So...I guess Republican leaders have more integrity and are more likely to represent their constituents honestly?


Oh lawd, Trump in the lead in new CNN and Morning Consult poles, and they haven't even properly incorporating the fallout from the DNC email leaks:

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/index.html

https://morningconsult.com/2016/07/25/trump-surges-past-clinton-post-convention-bump/


Me in November:

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS3ZY753X8e3Oz8OHcDiPO_FrHoNSEIp d9aPsQuR9UNKjErrADHmMOnOGI


Keeping drinking the koolaid buddy, RealClearPolitics has Trump leading in 5/6 last polls, many of which suffer from sampling bias against him:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

I've never before seen a man transcend all barriers thrust in front of him by what I had long ago accepted to be an untouchable and intractable political elite, this election will be in the history books as the moment when the tide was turned against the seemingly inevitable collapse of Western civilization, where the people rose up to again became Masters of their Destiny:

http://iyon.addictinginfoent.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/trump-american-constitutional-god.jpg


O lawd, Trump at 57.5% likelihood of winning the election, Clinton at 42.5% according to Nate Silver's Election Forecast:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

:happycry::happycry::happycry::happycry::happycry:


These people aren't rational, otherwise they wouldn't support Bernie in the first place.


DNC thought: how many of the people in that building will be on the front lines if war were to break out protection the nation's borders? Probably none, it will be those evil scum conservative white males who would be willing to sacrifice themselves to protect them.


Do I think they are corrupt? Yes. Do I think the Russians probably did this. Also yes.

The Liberal political infiltration runs deep, the issue is that Conservatives are generally more averse to intervening in neutral state institutions because of quaint beliefs in ideas like objectivity, reason, morality, etc; the Left is not constrained by any such limitations. So they win every time. In a nutshell we are so so fucked, we need Trump to clear house.


http://www.behindthename.com/name/donald

It was Ordained.


http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-usc-daybreak-poll-methodology-20160714-snap-story.html

Trump 47-40 Clinton


I would strongly encourage you not to take a tongue in cheek joking comment, made after saying that there would be serious consequences if it was proven that Russia was proven to be behind the DNC leak, seriously.

More significantly, Trump up 2 in the latest Reuters poll, he was down 11 three weeks ago:

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/27/bounce-reuters-poll-shows-trump-in-lead-for-first-time/


There's also circumstantial evidence that the Clintons ordered a bunch of murders over the years for their own political gain (including a DNC staffer last week). That's not generally how serious public discourse is supposed to happen.


759439104341897217


This is a joke pollster run by Democrats, they are so desperate for any positive news that they are promoting Pravada like 'facts/studies'


Democrats have called every single major Republican candidate racist, misognyist, etc for the last 50 years. People just don't care about the manufactured outrage anymore.


You need to realize that these things he's saying aren't outrageous to most Republicans, he is channeling our thoughts and often times what he's saying is far closer to the Truth than the politically correct version the media / Left is promoting.


They're not used to losing or having to contend with reality. November is going to be deeply satisfying.


For those still clinging onto the antiquated notion that the mainstream media operates under any pretense of objectivity:

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/30/exclusive-pat-caddell-blasts-reuters-back-rigging-polls-to-show-clinton-winning/


We gunna pretend like Desi communities aren't incredibly sexist? I had feminists 'PoC' on my newsfeed agreeing with Trump.

How about everyone collectively ignoring when Hillary Clinton called gold star Benghazi mom a liar and the media chastised her for being a political opportunist / a horrible person for 'exploiting / politicizing' her sons death?

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/benghazi-mother-pat-smith-on-khizr-khan-i-was-treated-like-dirt-by-hillary-clinton/

PEOPLE NEED TO WAKE THE FUCK UP.


It's not so much excusing as much as exposing the hypocrisy of the media. It's just so exasperating / frustrating...people are being kept deliberately blind to the Truth...Trump is a poor candidate but these people are existential threats to democracy as we know it and literally destroying the country while they personally benefit...

Anyways, I just want my SCOTUS nominees man.


Mark my words: he will win.

Most Americans no longer trust the mainstream media. This week has been a coordinated attack in response to the horror of Trump briefly dominating the polls. People are smarter than that.


If you believe any of those polls and take anything published in the NYT in 2016 seriously, then I feel sorry for you.

North Carolina was almost entirely a Democrat dominated state until like 2008, so you have no idea what you're talking about.


Polls are still close despite what the dishonest media would have you believe, taking into account the Shy Tory effect Trump would probably win an election if it was held today:

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/08/06/despite-all-the-headlines-reutersipsos-poll-has-the-race-nearly-tied/


Registered voters vs Likely voters; that's why the race is also nearly tied in the LA Times tracking poll.

How mad are you going to be when he wins?


Pretty much everything. Democrats don't believe in the Constitution as meaningfully restricting their actions, it would be the end of federalism / civil liberties as we know it.


I wonder if mert's given up on the cause.


Trump down .6 in online LA Times poll while trailing in traditional polls:

http://cesrusc.org/election/

Lol if you buy into the dishonest media at this point after they've been exposed time and time again.


http://cesrusc.org/election/

Trump now leading in the LA Times poll, African American support has increased 600% in the last week. I've said it since last August, he is going to win, anyone who feels otherwise is simply out of touch with the average American.


Yes. It will be my perception of America is skewed...but still perhaps closer to the Truth than the coastal urbanites who never saw it coming. If it wasn't for the complicity and desperate propaganda efforts of the Establishment, it wouldn't even be close.


All of them are wrong. He is probably up 5-10 points right now.


I mean it's pretty well known that there is a 4-10 'hidden' Trump vote captured when the polling is done anonymously combined with a bump that will follow as the polls shift from Registered voters to Likely voters.

To pretend otherwise is sheer irrationality, which would be about par for the course for you...

And that's assuming the polls aren't otherwise manipulated, such as through targeting known Democrat households or asking to speak to the youngest member of the household (with circumstantial evidence suggesting that this has been occurring).


If he's down 10 he's losing, if he's down 5 probably a toss up, below he's probably ahead.


768190196298887170


lol at citing Reuters:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/clinton-foundation-donors-include-dozens-of-media-organizations-individuals-207228


Our future Supreme Leader up 2 in Florida, 20% African American support / 40% Hispanic:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/292499-poll-trump-holds-narrow-lead-over-clinton-in-florida

Probably up minimum 10~ tbh but still this should shut up the delusional bitter clingers about 'battle ground state polls!!!!'


He's within the margin of error of the recent PPP poll, nobody is cutting losses. Open your eyes.


I know a lot of people who say the same thing but then 4 beers deep confess to me that they can't wait till Trump is president. This includes pretty much every single white male who gets laid.


A sad reflection of the fascist repression and marginalization of dissenting view points by the Left more than anything.

Trump up 3:

http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/


America is about 100x better to live in than anywhere else in the world. If you disagree you've never lived in America (and no DC and NY are shitholes and don't count).


Where's the part where he's an elected official engaging in corruption? His whole platform is 'I engaged in this corruption, I was a special interest, this is why I need to be put in charge because I know how to fix it.'

Surely you understanding the distinction?

CNN Poll w/Trump leading 45-43:

http://www.dailywire.com/news/8913/heres-why-new-cnn-poll-trump-45-clinton-43-most-ben-shapiro


Better than guaranteed treasonous and corrupt.


He's down 4 in New Jersey (Obama won by 18) and down 3 in Rhode Island (Obama won by 27) and is winning one of the Congressional districts in Maine (Obama won by 15; no Republican has won a delegate since the 80s).

https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/polls/2016/09/07/trump-threatens-new-jersey-rhode-island-clinton-leads-new-england-states/

Recent battleground state polls in the critical states all have Trump either winning or within the margin of error. Effective performances in the debate and Hillary is done, the media has shot itself in the foot, any halfway decent performance will be perceived as an incredible triumph by a public who has been told incessantly that Trump is a cartoon character monster.


He's 100% going to win, as I've been saying for months now. You don't know America.


Yep because holding people accountable for their actions and telling the Truth is the issue in the West :rolleyes:

Ital has been exposed many times in this thread for being absolutely ignorant on the issues and yet still persists in his delusional tone of haughty authority and faux impartiality. He deserves to be called out every time he spews his nonsensical partisan bile.


Trump +4 Ohio; +2 Nevada; +2 Colorado; +4 Florida; +5 LATimes.

Trump is winning right now. You mad liberals?

[Byron]

Ah shit, a mod know how to spoiler all of that?

Either way, just so Mert knows that he's either in for the mother of all e-victories or fails. Want some odds on the chances of that?

[ItalAussie]

Stuck it under a spoiler as requested.

[Spoonsky]

We've been wrong countless times before, but I really think the leak tonight crossed a line. The fallout has been different. I can't see how this doesn't lose him voters.

[Bernanke]

It's not even about losing voters, it's the fact that he was in desperate need of gaining some sort of momentum and this just destroys any chance of that. Suburban women are gone, and that was his demographic way to victory. There are no groups left to carry him.

[John Arne]

If Trump does win, we should really hand the keys over to Mert.

[Spikey M]

Any support that Trump had left at this stage is going to have its head so firmly lodged in the 'it's a conspiracy against Trump' sand that nothing he says or does matters.

[Lewis]

784580118207422465

:cool:

[Bernanke]

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/56dqes/megathread_donald_trump_leaked_comments_from_2005/d8ihxbt

Advent calendar of fuckery. :drool:

[Jimmy Floyd]

I've now gone back over to not wanting Trump to win, just so we can have a bit of fucking peace and quiet.

[ItalAussie]

Any support that Trump had left at this stage is going to have its head so firmly lodged in the 'it's a conspiracy against Trump' sand that nothing he says or does matters.

I don't think those numbers are likely to be enough to get him over the line. He has to win back at least one decent-sized demographic.

I agree with Bernanke's comment on momentum, but I think he'll manufacture some after Debate #2 (town halls are more his style, I think). Or at least I thought that before today, but this story is really gaining traction, so now I'm not so sure.

[elth]

784580118207422465

:cool:

I mean you just have to stand back and applaud that.

[ItalAussie]

The biggest winner in this election cycle has to be Pence. Nobody's going to blame him if this all goes up in a tyre fire, and he'd never previously been considered anywhere near a top-tier Presidential candidate. He was arguably only picked as VP after all the strong options disqualified themselves. But now he'll be a near-certainty to stand next time around if Trump loses.

[John]

The biggest winner in this election cycle has to be Pence. Nobody's going to blame him if this all goes up in a tyre fire, and he'd never previously been considered anywhere near a top-tier Presidential candidate. He was arguably only picked as VP after all the strong options disqualified themselves. But now he'll be a near-certainty to stand next time around if Trump loses.

He'll lose on the name alone. 'President Pence' is definitely a brand of chocolate coins they dish out to toddlers at the White House.

[Disco]

50 Cent, President Pence, Creflo Dollar. I just can't take America seriously anymore.

[Pepe]

They were walking those big Budweiser horses on campus this morning. Cool beasts.

[Bernanke]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuN-CIJW8AAwoIT.jpg:large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuPRkU8WAAAGAiz.jpg

[Jimmy Floyd]

Are you saying Trump is a hypocrite?

[Shindig]

He was an immature 65 year-old then. Now he's a much better person.

[GS]

This does seem to have crossed the line. Clinton landslide, please.

[Byron]

On top of that this has come out in the week that Clinton's Wall Street speeches were released by Wikileaks. Trump supporters have been hoping for a while now that this would be the 'October Surprise' needed to bury Clinton (especially since she resisted releasing these when Sanders was a threat) and had this Trump tape come out a week earlier, I don't think the impact would have been as big but this has ensured Clinton keeps the momentum she needed.

Case in point, Nate Silver has organised every state by importance, judging on their likelihood of casting the winning votes. Clinton is now predicted to take the first 12 of these states, Trump has a narrow lead in the 13th state, Arizona.

[Byron]

Now there are reports that Pence is considering quitting.

[phonics]

Considering he's actually evil rather than crass when it comes to women, thats a bit of a laugh.

[Spikey M]

It must be said it's a bit rich of Clinton to be playing the 'sexist woman hater' card when she's been enabling her husband for at least 3 decades now.

[Pepe]

This does seem to have crossed the line. Clinton landslide, please.

:D

[Byron]

Even his wife has condemned him :drool:

[Shindig]

His wife the prostitute.

[GS]

:D

What?

[GS]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/rnc-halts-all-victory-project-work-for-trump-229363

Ooof. Pence has apparently told him he's on his own for the next 48 hours, whilst there has been a MASSIVE leaking of support from the party.

The Republicans could have won the White House, secured Congress and nailed the Supreme Court - instead they've managed to piss it all away with Trump, setting back the GOP cause by about ten years. Well done, everyone.

[Lewis]

Have they all just used this as an excuse to ditch him? He's insulted women! Yeah, and Mexicans. And Muslims. And... How is this worse?

[Shindig]

"I will build a wall to keep these out." is a little less severe than, "I will finger this cunt against her will."

[GS]

I suspect they wouldn't be ditching him if he was three points ahead in the polls, but given the downward spiral his campaign is in it gives them and excuse to disassociate themselves from him and try to save themselves from being associated with it.

I think this is clearly 'worse' than the previous shite because it's not just misogynistic - he's basically advocating sexual assault.

Even the Mormons want him to give up - http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865664336/In-our-opinion-Donald-Trump-should-resign-his-candidacy.html

[ItalAussie]

Have they all just used this as an excuse to ditch him? He's insulted women! Yeah, and Mexicans. And Muslims. And... How is this worse?

I agree that it's in the same ballpark as a number of other terrible things he's said, although unrepentant sexual assault is probably pushing it out slightly to a new low. But Republicans expect their candidates to say terrible things about Muslims, while taking the high road on things like "traditional morality".

[Bernanke]

Apparently there are two more oppo-research stories coming, one equal to this one and one that's worse. Wanna take bets? I'm torn between it being him on tape either using the n-word or admitting to statutory rape.

[niko_cee]

Bush Snr, Clinton 1, Bush Jnr, accidental race related hiatus (the German World Cup), Clinton 2 unopposed.

I guess that's what they fought the war of independence for.

[Pepe]

What?

How much outrage that video has caused. That people would care more about something he said twenty years ago as opposed to whether he would make a good president. If that does not deserve a :D, then I don't know what does.

[Pepe]

Have they all just used this as an excuse to ditch him? He's insulted women! Yeah, and Mexicans. And Muslims. And... How is this worse?

Christian values or something.

[GS]

How much outrage that video has caused. That people would care more about something he said twenty years ago as opposed to whether he would make a good president. If that does not deserve a :D, then I don't know what does.

I don't dispute that, but I can see why this video has provoked the outrage that he is. He's basically advocating sexual assault.

He wasn't fit for the presidency anyway, but videos like this make it very difficult for anybody on the Republican side to continue pretending that his election is a means to an end.

[Pepe]

They could easily shrug it away like they've done every other thing. As you pointed out, it is a sinking ship and this is just a pretend outrage to claim they are somehow above him.

[GS]

I don't think it's pretend outrage - it's definitely on another level.

That said, it's certainly being used 'conveniently' to give some of them an excuse to get in a life raft. Which is fine, really, you can't blame them.

[Pepe]

Even my missus thought it was not a big of a deal, and she labels herself a feminist.

[John]

If you'd already accepted he was a sexist shitbag of course it's not a big deal, but it'll be a line in the sand for plenty of people who'd previously been on his side. You could spin all the previous public sexism as him protecting a brand or playing a character for exposure, but a completely candid moment in which he essentially admits to and encourages sexual assault cannot be spun.

[Lewis]

Everybody sucked it up and got on board because they 1) allowed themselves to think that he might just win; and/or 2) hate 'Hillary' that much. Now the pressure is on, it is falling apart, and they need an out before the entire brand gets pulled down the bog with him. Do you really think John McCain has sat through him shitting on prisoners of war and immigrants (famously wanted to give illegals citizenship, and he has an adopted Bangladeshi daughter), only to suddenly remember what public service is all about when, to the surprise of absolutely nobody, it turns out that 'The Donald' lols about fannies?

[ItalAussie]

Mike Pence is 50-1 to win the Presidency, and I'm not convinced that doesn't represent good value.


EDIT: Also:
“I’d never withdraw. I’ve never withdrawn in my life,”

Ew :D

[Spoonsky]

He's not just lolled at women, he's basically admitted to sexual assault. Is it that hard to see to see the difference? The fact that it was candid and not a 'performance' just makes it worse.

[ItalAussie]

But is that truly worse than cynical moralising? The really important thing is to take a pop at anyone who thinks they have any kind of moral high ground.

[leedsrevolution]

Merts gone quiet?

[Byron]

I wonder why.....

[leedsrevolution]

Did he ever take that bet? Lol

[ItalAussie]

We know what mert will say. Locker room braggadocio. You'd have to be a cuck not to talk like that. Something something alpha something. Masculinity. Bill Clinton. Baseball baseball baseball.

What Trump said is gross, but that's not news. What Trump and his defenders don't seem to get is that it's what he did that is appalling people beyond than his standard baseline of odiousness.

[phonics]

This is going to be so Corbyn. I genuinely think if this goes how I think it will he'll make the ballot for 2020.

[Pepe]

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/10/colleges-pay-millions-to-host-a-presidential-debate/503327/

But fuck paying adjuncts more than poverty wages.


According to Steve Givens, the man in charge of debate preparations at Washington University, “it’s an addition to [students’] educational experience here that is almost priceless.”

Good that none of us was invited.

[Pepe]

This will turn into a Jerry Springer episode, won't it?

[Bernanke]

They were supposed to talk policy with voters tonight.

[Pepe]

DRAMA is more important.

Bringing the women Billy C has raped is pretty lol.

[Bernanke]

He's like a cornered animal at this point. The fact that the GOP by large is still tethered to him is amazing.

[7om]

Genuinely looking forward to this. It could be a complete car crash and I can't wait.

[Lewis]

The size of that bald lad in the audience.

[Lewis]

Is he pissed?

[7om]

The fuck is Trump on about? He's a waffling mess.

[Lewis]

How is 'Latinos' not a racist term?

[7om]

Name dropping old man Bill :drool:

[Lewis]

Here we go. Rape! *sniff* RAPE!

[7om]

Fuck me, this is descending into Jeremy Kyle territory.

[Bernanke]

He's blowing his load way too early.

[Lewis]

He has her on this, but nobody cares.

[Lewis]

http://i.imgur.com/RYgqqnr.gif

[Bernanke]

https://media.giphy.com/media/w35YpI7YyH7MY/giphy.gif

[Lewis]

He has been crushing this since ten minutes in, but those ten minutes set the NARRATIVE, so it comes across as a giant seethe rather than an aggressive performance.

[Lewis]

Imagine if he won and this was the turning point. :drool:

[Lewis]

That Syrian no-fly zone is madder than anything 'The Donald' has proposed. It is utterly deranged.

[ItalAussie]

He has been crushing this since ten minutes in, but those ten minutes set the NARRATIVE, so it comes across as a giant seethe rather than an aggressive performance.
I truly have no idea how you read politics.

He's been taking wild swings. Some have definitely hit, some definitely haven't, but he's just not following up on the ones that connect. This will steady the ship, but it won't win him any undecideds.

And he's already ensured that the headlines are going to be about Bill Clinton, which is a deeply losing issue for him. It keeps the whole last week front and centre in everyone's mind.


EDIT: Although him repeatedly bringing up Sanders may be the smartest thing he's done all campaign. Trying to shed voters from the left isn't likely to win, but it's a decent strategy if you're losing the middle.

[7om]

I can just see the narrative that will spun after this and it don't look good for Trump. I reckon he's done.

[Lewis]

I truly have no idea how you read politics.

He's been taking wild swings. Some have definitely hit, some definitely haven't, but he's just not following up on the ones that connect. This will steady the ship, but it won't win him any undecideds.

And he's already ensured that the headlines are going to be about Bill Clinton, which is a deeply losing issue for him. It keeps the whole last week front and centre in everyone's mind.

Right, but this was meant to be a slow motion car crash of him falling apart over those tapes. With that in mind, how is this anything other than a win for him?

[Pepe]

That Syrian no-fly zone is madder than anything 'The Donald' has proposed. It is utterly deranged.

Rand got that one spot on. Rand. :cool:

I do think Donald is 'winning" so far.

[ItalAussie]

I can just see the narrative that will spun after this and it don't look good for Trump. I reckon he's done.

I'm kind of alright with him steadying the ship. If he tanked massively, there would start to be pressure on him to resign. This campaign has been incredibly grubby, and both candidates have gotten dirty. Pence could come in and be seen as above it all. He gets all the benefits of months and months of anti-Clinton campaigning, with very little dirt on his own hands.

Frankly, that would be a genius strategy if the Republicans had the chutzpah to attempt it.

[ItalAussie]

Right, but this was meant to be a slow motion car crash of him falling apart over those tapes. With that in mind, how is this anything other than a win for him?

Nobody seriously expected the debate to be an hour of Trump pontificating about women. And Clinton probably (and rightly) feels that the damage is done and she can't home in on it too much, or else she'll seem opportunistic. Double standards and all.

[7om]

That fat, bald bloke looks like he's on the verge of a heart attack.

[7om]

"Bullying is up". What the fuck does that even mean?

[elth]

Clinton has such shitty answers on all of the "shady but it's how politics works" stuff that it's ridiculous. She's actually really lucky to be up against a non-potty trained chihuahua.

Then again a more traditional Republican would have the same "balls deep in politics sausage making" flaws so maybe it evens out.

[Pepe]

"Bullying is up". What the fuck does that even mean?

:D

[ItalAussie]

Clinton has such shitty answers on all of the "shady but it's how politics works" stuff that it's ridiculous. She's actually really lucky to be up against a non-potty trained chihuahua.

Then again a more traditional Republican would have the same "balls deep in politics sausage making" flaws so maybe it evens out.
Pretty much this. It's not like McCain, Romney (especially Romney), or even Obama could have pulled those levers too hard.

This election does make me wonder what would happen if a party ran a complete outsider with no political background, but who wasn't a raging asshole.

[Lewis]

Nobody seriously expected the debate to be an hour of Trump pontificating about women. And Clinton probably (and rightly) feels that the damage is done and she can't home in on it too much, or else she'll seem opportunistic. Double standards and all.

Whatever happened over the hour, this was meant to be the end. He won't win the thing, but, as you said, he has steadied the ship. That is nothing short of a miracle.

[Pepe]

"When they go low we go high."
'Did I tell you about when the Donald...'

[elth]

Is it though? They were never going to spend an hour asking him if he's a rapist.

[ItalAussie]

Whatever happened over the hour, this was meant to be the end. He won't win the thing, but, as you said, he has steadied the ship. That is nothing short of a miracle.
He was at 4-1, now he's at 7-2: That's a move from 20% to 22%.

I know you want him to be donning proceedings, but this debate is basically the status quo. Nobody seriously expected him to go in and implode. Town Hall meetings suit him, and after the week he's had, he would have been coached to death. And he'd probably even be convinced to listen.

"Mr Trump, tell us all about grabbing her by the pussy."

[ItalAussie]

Fivethirtyeight, as usual, have the most insightful coverage from a relatively neutral stance: http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/second-presidential-debate-election-2016/

The Guardian are fact-checking aggressively, which is fun, but they're also unabashedly biased in their editorializing (although their fact-checking is pretty much on the level).

[Bernanke]

Multiple sources are confirming that Pence has asked to be removed from the ticket. :lol:

[Lewis]

Again, the status quo. Where he was fifty hours ago is a definite improvement on where he was ten hours ago.

[7om]

Lol at that last question.

[Lewis]

If he just says 'No' I'll mark out.

[ItalAussie]

The Supreme Court is a good issue for Trump, in that it'll bring back some of his leaking voters.

When it comes down to it, at least half the Republican base are single-issue abortion voters, and these are exactly the deeply moralistic voters who will have been made very uncomfortable over the last week. But in the end Trump could molest someone in the street, on camera, and they'd still vote for him if he promised them Supreme Court justices. He'll do well to remind them of that fact.

[Pepe]

Lol at that last question.

At least it's not 'what would god ask you to do first.'

[7om]

Trump is right about his daughter, though. She's incredible.

[ItalAussie]

Trump named Ohio and Pennsylvania as among the places where the EPA is putting energy companies out of business by being overly restrictive. There’s a 1-in-5 chance that one of those states will provide the decisive vote in the Electoral College, according to our polls-only forecast.
"Donald, here's a list of key swing states."

"Which state do you think would..."
"OHIO. PENNSYLVANIA. FLORIDA. COLORADO. OHIO. NEV(AH)DA. NEW HAMPSHIRE. OHIO AGAIN."
"Thank you, Mr Trump."

[Pepe]

Well that was shit ( shocker)

[mikem]

Please God let Trump have his phone so he can spend the evening attacking the GOP that deserted him.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Nigel Farage says he 'dominated her like a silverback gorilla'. Cheers, Nige.

[John Arne]

I've just listened to some of the foreign policy questions; when the moderator asked a question such as "what would you do about this...,", Trump just starting rambling about how bad Clinton was - to the point where the moderator bluntly asked him "what would you do", he just couldn't answer the question.

[Pepe]

She did a lot of that too, just so we're clear

[John Arne]

She did a lot of that too, just so we're clear

Fair enough - I switched off pretty quick - it was somewhat vomit inducing.

[Lewis]

Isn't that how it works now? I don't remember any actual policies from the last election, but I do recall that Ed Miliband is Scottish and that David Cameron wanted to close the welfare state.

[Pepe]

Fair enough - I switched off pretty quick - it was somewhat vomit inducing.

Smart choice.

[mikem]

Interesting how different men and women viewed the debate. Like Lewis and Pepe I would have said he won. In the two polls, CNN and YouGov he won men and lost the debate because he lost women in massive numbers. In the CNN poll, he won men by almost ten and lost the debate 57-34 because he lost women by over thirty. YouGov is smaller but same story. And white college educated women are his path to victory.

[Bartholomert]

He won that debate despite what the laughably stacked mainstream media polls might tell you. He improved in the betting markets by about 10%, and I think by his standards he was good. All things considered it was an impressive fight with his back against the wall. Clinton seemed particularly uninspiring last night.

[Bartholomert]

Fivethirtyeight, as usual, have the most insightful coverage from a relatively neutral stance: http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/second-presidential-debate-election-2016/

The Guardian are fact-checking aggressively, which is fun, but they're also unabashedly biased in their editorializing (although their fact-checking is pretty much on the level).

FiveThirtyEight is not neutral, Nate Silver has openly admitted his bias against Trump.

[GS]

Again, the status quo. Where he was fifty hours ago is a definite improvement on where he was ten hours ago.

That's not particularly difficult to do. The debate was never going to be 90 minutes of accusing Trump of molestation.

[GS]

785510298161741824

[Bartholomert]

BTFO:

https://mobile.twitter.com/bigop1/status/785410796490817536/video/1

[phonics]

Last night was all about Ken Bone. Even Bill recognised that.

785333147307089920

[Byron]

FiveThirtyEight is not neutral, Nate Silver has openly admitted his bias against Trump.

Source?

[7om]

BTFO:

https://mobile.twitter.com/bigop1/status/785410796490817536/video/1

I came into work lolling about Trump's line that he'll put her in prison and one lad said if he does that to Hilary then he'd also have to imprison Condoleezza Rice, George Dubya and a few others that used private emails while in office.

I also made a bet with one guy at work that Hilary will win by 5%, 46-41.

[GS]

I did lol at "because you'd be in jail", to be fair.

[Jimmy Floyd]

Nate Silver may be anti-Trump himself but anyone can see that it would be against his interests to fuck his numbers about based on who he wants to win.

Conspiracy theory nutters (UKIP, Corbynistas, Scottish nationalists) always fail to realise this about pollsters/statisticians and it's the reason they are fucking morons.

[Pepe]

I did lol at "because you'd be in jail", to be fair.

Me too. It was a proper donning. Of course boring dickheads analyzing it later don't get it.

[Bartholomert]

I came into work lolling about Trump's line that he'll put her in prison and one lad said if he does that to Hilary then he'd also have to imprison Condoleezza Rice, George Dubya and a few others that used private emails while in office.

I also made a bet with one guy at work that Hilary will win by 5%, 46-41.

You are allowed to use private emails. You aren't allowed to send classified information over that private server and then delete said server containing all of your emails when asked to provide them by an FBI investigation (which you are required to do by law).

Your friend is an idiot.

[Bartholomert]

Nate Silver may be anti-Trump himself but anyone can see that it would be against his interests to fuck his numbers about based on who he wants to win.

Conspiracy theory nutters (UKIP, Corbynistas, Scottish nationalists) always fail to realise this about pollsters/statisticians and it's the reason they are fucking morons.

They used to say the same thing about journalistic integrity and yet that doesn't stop the mainstream media from unapologetically promoting a particular center-left narrative in the face of declining credibility and ratings.


Source?

Here he admits he was biased against Trump:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/

[Shindig]

I came into work lolling about Trump's line that he'll put her in prison and one lad said if he does that to Hilary then he'd also have to imprison Condoleezza Rice, George Dubya and a few others that used private emails while in office.

I also made a bet with one guy at work that Hilary will win by 5%, 46-41.

Yep. He can't sling her in over the things she's pulled as a lawyer because .... that was her job. Holding that against her would effectively set a mandate to all lawyers that you can't win cases if your client proper, almost certainly done it. Hell, a former Secretary of State with that in her arsenal is kinda good.

But I guess if Donald calls her Sexsextary of Rape then he might win a couple of points back. And Bill Clinton is not a rapist, Donald. He's a sexual harrasser like you. I'm interested to see the turnout, mind. I'd expect a low one if Americans weren't so pissy about non-voters.

[Bartholomert]

You can refuse to try the case. Or, you can just not laugh and brag about getting a pedophile off, you knew to be guilty, on a technicality. It's monstrous.

[niko_cee]

Cab-rank rule baby.

[Shindig]

You can refuse to try the case. Or, you can just not laugh and brag about getting a pedophile off, you knew to be guilty, on a technicality. It's monstrous.

Can we not just greenlight an inconsequential Netflix series?

[ItalAussie]

=
Here he admits he was biased against Trump:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump/
The debate coverage is a number of commentators. Not just Silver.

Even if you don't trust him (despite his accurate record - his numbers are his life, so it doesn't make sense for him to chop his career off at the knees), his talking heads are a decent slice of the spectrum and give very measured analysis.

EDIT: At any rate, the live debate coverage is over now. Kind of an odd point to drill down on, given its temporal nature.

[ItalAussie]

You can refuse to try the case. Or, you can just not laugh and brag about getting a pedophile off, you knew to be guilty, on a technicality. It's monstrous.

Every person, no matter how heinous, has the right to competent counsel. That's a cornerstone of the legal system. :cab:

Someone has to defend every monster, and only an idiot would hold the lawyers accountable for doing so to the best of their abilities. If they didn't, the system would break at its most fundamental level. The whole argument is desperate emotive bullshit.

[Bartholomert]

Every person, no matter how heinous, has the right to competent counsel. That's a cornerstone of the legal system. :cab:

Someone has to defend every monster, and only an idiot would hold the lawyers accountable for doing so to the best of their abilities. If they didn't, the system would break at its most fundamental level. The whole argument is desperate emotive bullshit.

She was not a court appointed lawyer. She took the case pro-bono, voluntarily and could have EASILY refused to represent the man. She chose to do it. She then laughed about it.

She is a monster and you are an immoral apologist.

[elth]

Mert's having a 'mare :henn0rz:

[Lewis]

I liked her 'thirty years of public service' line. Is it still 'service' once you make more money from your association with a particular position than you do in the actual position?

[7om]

You are allowed to use private emails. You aren't allowed to send classified information over that private server and then delete said server containing all of your emails when asked to provide them by an FBI investigation (which you are required to do by law).

Your friend is an idiot.

When he said all the others need to be indicted I asked him if they had all sent classified or top secret emails using their personal account and he said they had. I then said that whether they did or not it's irrelevant as Hilary definitely has and then had the audacity to delete them as well.

All this was going on while we were doing a fire drill and it just so happened that after my last line we were allowed back in so I didn't get a response.

[ItalAussie]

She was not a court appointed lawyer. She took the case pro-bono, voluntarily and could have EASILY refused to represent the man. She chose to do it. She then laughed about it.

She is a monster and you are an immoral apologist.

That's stupid, and I know that you know it's stupid. I don't believe for a minute that you believe what you just typed.

People accused of horrible crimes should only ever get public defenders, who are often working dozens of cases at once? And I know you know the role of criminal lawyers, the necessity that even those who are accused of heinous crimes should get a fair trial with a competent defence, and their lack of complicity by those who defend them in court.

It's a sign of how desperate you've gotten that you're willing to push what you absolutely know to one side and dive into cognitive dissonance, just to try and right the ship.

EDIT: It is worth mentioning how broken the US public defender situation is. Public defenders are desperately overworked, and in many districts are unable to put more than an hour per case in preparation. It winds up casting the whole fairness of the criminal justice system into doubt, as it becomes impossible for poor criminals to get a well-prepared counsel. It's really a problem that needs to be addressed, but there's never any resources or funding forthcoming, because politicians have to look "tough on crime".

[Bartholomert]

So people accused of horrible crimes should only ever get public defenders, who are often working dozens of cases at once? Ten points for mert's criminal justice system.

The crazy thing is, I know you know the role of criminal lawyers, the necessity that even those who are accused of heinous crimes should get a fair trial with a competent defence, and their lack of complicity by those who defend them in court. It's a sign of how desperate you've gotten that you're willing to push what you absolutely know to one side and dive into cognitive dissonance, just to try and right the ship.

Criminal lawyers are often scumbags with no moral compass. Clinton made a choice.

[ItalAussie]

Criminal lawyers are often scumbags with no moral compass. Clinton made a choice.

:D Amazing.

Is this being judged as opposed to the paragons of altruistic selflessness that are corporate lawyers? What's the baseline here?

[Bartholomert]

:D Amazing.

Is this being judged as opposed to the paragons of altruistic selflessness that are corporate lawyers? What's the baseline here?

If the roles were reversed you would be excoriating the act as a reflection of Trump's sociopath morally defective nature. At least corporate lawyers don't defend pedophiles.

And yes the public defender's system is pretty broken.

[elth]

I wish we could forward these posts to whichever state Bar Mert ends up applying to.

[Bartholomert]

Believe it or voicing support for the nominee of one of the two major parties in a liberal democracy isn't an offense worthy of disbarring.

You freedom hating fascist.

[elth]

No, but failing to understand the duty of a public defender to the court is.

[ItalAussie]

If the roles were reversed you would be excoriating the act as a reflection of Trump's sociopath morally defective nature. At least corporate lawyers don't defend pedophiles.

I truly would not, and you can save that quote for as long as you want to. I believe that lawyers defending criminals (even criminals accused of utterly reprehensible crimes) is a key element of the criminal justice system, and I support lawyers in playing their role in this system.

Without competent criminal defenders doing their best work for all of their clients, effectiveness of the system as a test of guilt erodes. That is a dangerous path to go down.

[John Arne]

Melania: Why haven't you done the washing up, Donald?
Donald: Bill Clinton did bad stuff too.
Melania: No but
Donald: Bill
Melania: I'll do it

[Shindig]

I'm saving these quotes for when mert ventures into criminal law. "Guys, my client O.J. definitely didn't do this. He alpha. ALPHA. Ron's just a cuck."

[Spikey M]

Surely he didn't do it because he's a cuck?

[Byron]

Believe it or voicing support for the nominee of one of the two major parties in a liberal democracy isn't an offense worthy of disbarring.

You freedom hating fascist.

I love this :D

If you're going down, go down swinging.

[ItalAussie]

Melania: Why haven't you done the washing up, Donald?
Donald: Bill Clinton did bad stuff too.
Melania: No but
Donald: Bill
Melania: I'll do it

I want to see Trump utter a sentence which contains the word "locker room", but does not contain the word "ISIS".

It's clear that someone on his team said that he should try and divert any discussions about the video to a different topic - specifically ISIS - and he has decided to do it in the most immediate, abrupt and unsubtle way possible. And I can't even imagine that it plays that well for him, since it seemed from his references to Assad that the entirety of his knowledge on the topic is "ISIS = BAD".

[Lewis]

All of those athletes Twiterring that they have never spoken like that in the 'locker room' was embarrassing. Presumably next time one of their colleagues is up for sexual assault or wife beating they will make him get changed on the concourse.

[ItalAussie]

We get it. You hate anyone who takes any kind of moralistic stance.

Nobody's spotless if you draw that bow long enough. Doesn't mean you can't call a spade an asshole.

[Lewis]

It's not about being whiter-than-white. But people just make themselves look stupid falling over themselves to signal how virtuous they are, seemingly without taking a breath to consider what they are saying. So you've never heard another athlete talk about a woman like she was shit? Really, mate? Never? I would love to hear how footballers rate the prostitutes they recommend to each other without doing so.

'Wayne, was her degree in Women's Studies or Gender Studies?'

[ItalAussie]

Then nobody gets to say that what Trump said makes him an asshole? Except it does, and it should be said, no matter what (assumed) history is in play.

You denounce any moralistic stance in any situation as virtue-signalling. It's like tiresome clockwork.

[Pepe]

Then nobody gets to say that what Trump said makes him an asshole?

They can say it all they want. To claim they've never heard such speech before is just pathetic and a downright lie.

[phonics]

This man has just endorsed Hilary Clinton, I don't even know what's going on anymore

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/countyfair/beckfinalchalkboard.jpg

[John]

The angle of that photo makes it look like someone on the bottom right has the most impressive longbald ever.

[7om]

They can say it all they want. To claim they've never heard such speech before is just pathetic and a downright lie.

These days it doesn't matter if it's a lie or not, as long as you look moral.

[Lewis]

They can say it all they want. To claim they've never heard such speech before is just pathetic and a downright lie.

Yeah. That.

[mikem]

It's not about being whiter-than-white. But people just make themselves look stupid falling over themselves to signal how virtuous they are, seemingly without taking a breath to consider what they are saying. So you've never heard another athlete talk about a woman like she was shit? Really, mate? Never? I would love to hear how footballers rate the prostitutes they recommend to each other without doing so.

'Wayne, was her degree in Women's Studies or Gender Studies?'

Boogles my mind you can't see the difference between men being generally misogynistic and saying "I grab them by the pussy and they like it."

[Lewis]

I'm sure every professional locker room draws the line at mocking women drivers.

[Disco]

I can't say I've ever heard anyone advocate sexual assualt as a pickup technique, perhaps I'm in the wrong 'locker rooms'. Either that or I must be lying.

[GS]

This man has just endorsed Hilary Clinton, I don't even know what's going on anymore

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/countyfair/beckfinalchalkboard.jpg

No, he didn't. He's voting for the Constiution Party.

[GS]

Then nobody gets to say that what Trump said makes him an asshole? Except it does, and it should be said, no matter what (assumed) history is in play.

You denounce any moralistic stance in any situation as virtue-signalling. It's like tiresome clockwork.

To be fair, there is a particularly unnecessary slant of people coming out to virtue signal.

It's just the way it is these days.

[Lewis]

It should really just be enough to call him a dickhead (which he is) without having to maintain this narrative that he represents the end of civilisation (something which has partly emerged because it is easier than actually selling 'Hillary' on her own merits), because people only end up falling over themselves doing so.

[7om]

I can't say I've ever heard anyone advocate sexual assualt as a pickup technique, perhaps I'm in the wrong 'locker rooms'. Either that or I must be lying.

I reckon you're lying. Liar.

[phonics]

He's going HAM on twitter. Kellyanne has given him the phone back. He's quoting online polls and telling Paul Ryan that he will grab him by the pussy. These next six weeks are going to be some top, top stuff.

http://img.pandawhale.com/mp6dJz-key-and-peele-dis-gon-b-gud-gi-sqbo.gif

[Disco]

I reckon you're lying. Liar.

I've been well and truly caught out here chaps.

Of course I could still be lying...

[Jimmy Floyd]

I can't say I've ever heard anyone advocate sexual assualt as a pickup technique, perhaps I'm in the wrong 'locker rooms'. Either that or I must be lying.

You play rugby don't you? Sexual assault is basically the day job.

I've never heard anything about grabbing pussy in a 'locker room', but I've heard a lot of absolutely horrendous references to women from otherwise quite reasonable people.

[Dquincy]

Has anyone on here grabbed a woman by the pussy? (when not fornicating)

[John]

I once heard a man in his sixties say of a woman who'd walked past 'I'd use her shit as toothpaste and her pish for a gargle.' Not quite a threat of sexual assault, but it's comfortably the most disgusting thing I've ever heard.

[Disco]

You play rugby don't you? Sexual assault is basically the day job.

Only on the pitch.

[GS]

You have to say, fair play to Trump on his scorched earth policy. He's clearly decided that if he's going to lose, it's everybody else's fault and he'll take down as many of them as he can.

It's like last days of the Reich.

[Bernanke]

The next tape has leaked.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/GBPr9wvLfTM8U/giphy.gif

[elth]

The boys and girls at the LA Times tracking poll are either going to be incredibly smug or very, very embarrassed in a month.

[ItalAussie]

Trump is unloading at the GOP.

We'll never see another election quite like this, however it pans out from here.

[John Arne]

Current odds have Hilary 2/5 with Trumpo at 7/4.

Ted Cruz at 500/1....



Latest odds have changed a wee bit since the last debate.

Clinton in to 4/11, Trump out to 11/4.

Interestingly Paul Ryan in to about 100/1 with some bookies.

Ouch. Trump is tumbling (or should it be the opposite) in the odds.

Out from 11/4 to a hefty 4/1.

Clinton in from 4/11 to 1/5.

Mike Pense in at 60/1

[ItalAussie]

I saw the 1/5 figure, and this is the first time in the election cycle that I'm starting to believe the numbers. I think Trump needs an October-surprise style story to break in order for him to get over the line. Every day that doesn't happen is a problem for him. This is why even a drawn debate (and I don't think the last one was even that - I think he was shaded in the final wash) doesn't really help him.

He needs something big to happen, and while it's not impossible that it might, he needs it soon.

[Davgooner]

He's helped by the fact the media has largely ignored the Wikileaks stuff thus far.

[ItalAussie]

That's because the truth is there's nothing actually incriminating in there. :sorry:

Maybe if Trump gave them a couple of empty news cycles, they'd pick through the "not incriminating but unwise" stuff, but there's never time because that's a more subtle story, and then Trump just hands them a headline by saying he wants to throw kittens at hurricanes or something.

[Byron]

Yeah we heard you the first time mate.

[Bernanke]

I really liked the WaPo-article about the Podesta-leaks.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/10/11/what-the-latest-hacked-emails-really-tell-us-about-american-politics/?utm_term=.8af5c38781b9


Though the words “Clinton emails” are sure to cause quickening pulses, the latest emails to come to light — these ones hacked from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s account — contain nothing scandalous, no doubt to the chagrin of most Republicans.

They do, however, provide a valuable reminder of something important about Washington. It’s this: conspiracies are seldom true, and even the savviest operatives often aren’t sure what they’re doing....

Some of the interest in these emails will be just gossipy — Chelsea Clinton and a guy from the Clinton Foundation were backstabbing each other! — but what do they actually reveal? Well, there’s a lot of back-and-forth between Clinton’s political advisers on how different issues should be handled. For instance, when she decided to come out against the Keystone XL pipeline, how should it be done? Should she write an op-ed? Just leak it to one reporter? Something else? Everyone has an opinion but nobody knows for sure.

It takes a mighty effort to turn this into something sinister. But some are trying, though....

What’s most revealing is how their indecision and uncertainty about matters like these shows that when it comes to politics, even supposedly shrewd professionals are often just casting about in the dark. These are some of the most experienced operatives in American politics, and they don’t seem to know more than anybody else....

But most of the time, everybody’s improvising, and even the smartest and most experienced operatives screw up. The best email in this batch is one from an experienced admaker, who goes on a stream-of-consciousness riff suggesting themes for Clinton’s upcoming campaign (all typos in original):


Neither change nor continuity.but The different way. The new way. HRC declares the old way of building partisanships flying the special interest flags. Is the root cause of America becoming the Status Quo. Nation where we as a nation are weak and a victim of change. No when we are our best. We are a nation of doers and dreamers. Builders and architects of the future we do not predict or fall victim of the future. We create the future. She champions with clear vision and grit. We will build not the partisans ships. But rather the Ship of State flying the American Dream flag

Have you ever looked at your hand — I mean really looked at your hand?

The irony is that if there’s anything that sort of resembles a conspiracy at work at the moment — and we don’t know if there is or not — it’s not from Clinton’s side, and it’s a bumbling one. Russia (possibly) hacks the emails, passes them on to Wikileaks, who publishes them to Republicans’ glee, but when nothing really damaging is there, Donald Trump is left to spend time at rallies quoting from altered versions of one email, falsely attributing lines from a Newsweek article to the sinister Sidney Blumenthal — a misconception he apparently got from either a Russian propaganda site called Sputnik News, or perhaps some alt-right chatroom denizen. Very few Americans know or care who Sidney Blumenthal is, but Trump’s ardent supporters do, and know to boo and hiss at the mention of his name as though he were Haman in the Purim story. This will not, I can boldly predict, transform the presidential race. And again, we don’t know whether this is happening, and even if it is, it seems more haphazard than conspiratorial.

Just to be clear, I’m not arguing that Podesta’s emails aren’t newsworthy. It’s always interesting to know what people are saying behind the scenes. The same is true of what we learned from Podesta’s emails about Clinton’s speeches to Wall Street firms — which, again, were somewhat interesting though not nearly as scandalous as Republicans, and even some on the left, had hoped. But whenever someone tells you that there’s a complex and wide-reaching conspiracy at work, one with multiple moving parts synchronizing to manipulate events while keeping itself hidden from public view, you should be very skeptical.

tl;dr THERE'S NOTHING THERE, VEEP IS A DOCUMENTARY

[elth]

The only thing the Clinton emails reveal is that she's boringly competent and thoroughly managed. If either of those things are news to you...

[ItalAussie]

Yeah we heard you the first time mate.

Fixed it.

[Bartholomert]

That's because the truth is there's nothing actually incriminating in there. :sorry:



Buddy. You are delusional.

Do you have enough self-awareness to get that? When Clinton says that she has two policy positions, one public one private, that is damaging. When Clinton says that Wall Street only needs to be held accountable for political reasons, that is damaging. When Clinton says she is in favor of open markets and open borders (after claiming she was against TPP), that is damaging. When Clinton is said to hate the average American, that is damaging. When there is shown to be wide-spread collusion between Clinton and the mainstream media, that is damaging.

Should I continue?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Nope.

[John]

Buddy. You are delusional.

Do you have enough self-awareness to get that? When Clinton says that she has two policy positions, one public one private, that is damaging. When Clinton says that Wall Street only needs to be held accountable for political reasons, that is damaging. When Clinton says she is in favor of open markets and open borders (after claiming she was against TPP), that is damaging. When Clinton is said to hate the average American, that is damaging. When there is shown to be wide-spread collusion between Clinton and the mainstream media, that is damaging.

Should I continue?

A lawyer should probably know what 'incriminating' means.

[mugbull]

I'm 20 with one summer's work experience and Republicans could dredge up far more damaging emails on me already. Facebook too. That shit's dangerous.

[phonics]

Buddy. You are delusional.

Do you have enough self-awareness to get that? When Clinton says that she has two policy positions, one public one private, that is damaging. When Clinton says that Wall Street only needs to be held accountable for political reasons, that is damaging. When Clinton says she is in favor of open markets and open borders (after claiming she was against TPP), that is damaging. When Clinton is said to hate the average American, that is damaging. When there is shown to be wide-spread collusion between Clinton and the mainstream media, that is damaging.

Should I continue?

Saying that someone hates the phrase 'everyday American' = saying she hates everyday Americans.

These are the straws you feel the need to clutch at. As a liberal, Clintons a bad choice for multiple reasons, y'all just made an even dumber one on your side and so she'll win. Tough titties. Where is your God Emperor now?

[Bartholomert]

The fact that these revelations, which in the past would have evoked wide spread outrage, condemnation and resulted in significant damage to a candidates reputation, are just brushed off as irrelevant or meaningless just underlines the open hypocrisy, irrationality and tribalism of the Left.

Oh a candidate says she lies to the public about her preferred policies in private to special interest groups (who are funding her campaign) and then follows up this statement by openly providing examples of those lies? No big deal she has a D next to her name so who cares.

[Disco]

Learn to read dickhead.

[John Arne]

This is going to be fantastic to watch. Sebo on speed.

[GS]

The fact that these revelations, which in the past would have evoked wide spread outrage, condemnation and resulted in significant damage to a candidates reputation, are just brushed off as irrelevant or meaningless just underlines the open hypocrisy, irrationality and tribalism of the Left.

Oh a candidate says she lies to the public about her preferred policies in private to special interest groups (who are funding her campaign) and then follows up this statement by openly providing examples of those lies? No big deal she has a D next to her name so who cares.

I'm on the right and would be a natural 'old school Republican' voter. This isn't 'open hypocrisy etc. etc.' from the left - it's just a bit of a non-story. Perhaps if she was running against someone like Eisenhower or Reagan, it would be a story - largely because the opposition candidate is competent, well-respected and has a strong track record - this would make it 'damaging' for her chances of overcoming them, but only in the context of a race where she was probably going to lose anyway.

But in the context of 'the Donald' having a public meltdown, it's really quite irrelevant.

[phonics]

The fact that these revelations, which in the past would have evoked wide spread outrage, condemnation and resulted in significant damage to a candidates reputation, are just brushed off as irrelevant or meaningless just underlines the open hypocrisy, irrationality and tribalism of the Left.

Oh a candidate says she lies to the public about her preferred policies in private to special interest groups (who are funding her campaign) and then follows up this statement by openly providing examples of those lies? No big deal she has a D next to her name so who cares.

Next time choose a half-decent candidate and it'll matter. Even little Marco would probably have managed to beat her on the back of this stuff or at least made it a fight. Instead you chose a tax dodging, racist, misogynist who's never held public office and has absolutely zero idea how to run a campaign, only hiring absolute yes men/women and a guy who runs a racist conspiracy news network. Tough. Titties.

[GS]

As I mentioned before, the Republicans had an open goal here. Clinton is the worst Democratic candidate since Mondale in 1984. If the Republicans had run a competent conservative against her, they'd be about six points ahead simply because of Clinton's unfavorables. They'd have secured the Supreme Court (and thus the potential to overturn Roe v Wade) and helped significantly in the downward races with a united party machine and gerrymandered boundaries in house races.

Instead the base have pissed it all away with this self-indulgent vanity exercise, and they're only going to have themselves to blame. The ideal scenario now is a Clinton win, the Democrats taking the Senate and the lol-worthy blocking exercise by the Republican leadership bursting into flames as Clinton nominates and the Democratic senate majority confirms someone infinitely more liberal than Garland - some pro-choice, anti-second amendment, pro-equality, atheist, pro-immigration, pro-gay rights, anti-business, pro-tax lesbian with Mexican heritage.

[phonics]

I was going to say Mondale but then I remembered John Kerry. What a boring, boring man.

edit: I couldn't remember who Kerry ran against and christ was it a poor field.


In the 2004 Democratic presidential primaries (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary), John Kerry defeated several Democratic rivals, including Sen. John Edwards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards) (D-North Carolina.), former Vermont Governor Howard Dean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Dean) and retired Army (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army) General Wesley Clark (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Clark).

I'll never forget that story of John Edwards getting lost on a hill only to be secretly banging his mistress.

[Byron]

They could have picked anyone other than Cruz and Trump and they would have won. Kasich and Rubio would have probably been double digit wins (Hell I'd have voted for Kasich)

[John]

Kasich would have wiped the floor with Hillary, but I reckon she'll do him when he inevitably gets the nomination in 2020, because she'll have four years of presumably fairly steady leadership behind her. It's looking increasingly like nominating Trump might end up being the worst thing that's ever happened to that party.

It might be the worst thing ever to happen to Mert as well, actually. If Trump loses, Mert either tops himself or can never speak with authority on this board ever again. If Trump wins, Mert is put on several watchlists and ends up in Gitmo when The Donald finds out about that Muslim Society he was in charge of at Duke.

[Jimmy Floyd]

She'll have died of serious ill health by then and (checks who her running mate is) Kasey Keller will be President.

[phonics]

Kasich would have wiped the floor with Hillary, but I reckon she'll do him when he inevitably gets the nomination in 2020, because she'll have four years of presumably fairly steady leadership behind her. It's looking increasingly like nominating Trump might end up being the worst thing that's ever happened to that party.

As I said on the previous page, it feels very Corbyn with how the party has split from the base. They'll be electing nutters or having a strong third party opposition splitting the vote for years.

[Lewis]

They will just choose a protectionist, wall-building sort who isn't a complete gobshite.

[Pepe]

Kasich was dogshit, only made to look slightly better by the buffoons around him. I reckon Hillary, shit as she is, would have defeated any of them with ease.

[phonics]

This was the sum of his attack on Hilary's climate change plan that she did a thing for yesterday (day before?)

http://imgur.com/VHNsvXa.png

He then goes on to talk about Nuclear weapons, his microphone (still) and some other nonsense about how everything is rigged. That's the entire thing. He literally hasn't said anything. The mans a moron. Just really now.

[Raoul Duke]

It just reads like the rambling nutter on the bus who you don't want to sit next to you. He's a gigantic spastic.

[Shindig]

She'll have died of serious ill health by then and (checks who her running mate is) Kasey Keller will be President.

"I also announce Brad Friedel as my Secretary of Immense."

[ItalAussie]

Buddy. You are delusional.

Do you have enough self-awareness to get that? When Clinton says that she has two policy positions, one public one private, that is damaging. When Clinton says that Wall Street only needs to be held accountable for political reasons, that is damaging. When Clinton says she is in favor of open markets and open borders (after claiming she was against TPP), that is damaging. When Clinton is said to hate the average American, that is damaging. When there is shown to be wide-spread collusion between Clinton and the mainstream media, that is damaging.

Should I continue?

You didn't read the post that carefully before replying.

[GS]

This was the sum of his attack on Hilary's climate change plan that she did a thing for yesterday (day before?)

http://imgur.com/VHNsvXa.png

He then goes on to talk about Nuclear weapons, his microphone (still) and some other nonsense about how everything is rigged. That's the entire thing. He literally hasn't said anything. The mans a moron. Just really now.

There's a vast body of evidence at this point to demonstrate that he is ill-informed and doesn't care that that's the case. You could presumably manage this if he was prepared to be 'handled' or had an attention span exceeding about five minutes, but no.

[Henry]

Well, the last few pages or so were certainly entertaining. :D

You just know mert's going to adopt the "rigged" narrative after the election that Trump already has. Trump's supporters are as I type circulating the slogan "repeal the 19th" - I wonder about his stance on that!

Clinton is such an establishment peon, but I'd vote for her in a coma before I'd vote for Trump. As usual, the calculation has got to be that you vote Democrat in a swing state, and for someone better in other states.

[Bartholomert]

Strong delusion in this thread thinking that the rigged polls right now won't significantly tighten as we get closer to November 8th.

[ItalAussie]

You don't get to claim any kind of prescience by saying the polls will tighten, given plenty of other people (including me) have been posting that for months.


The polls will definitely narrow as the election gets nearer. That's basically a given.


Presumably the real story is that Trump isn't having any success putting his vast dealmaking ability to work in unrigging the polls. I mean, sure, it's a cabal of colluding (apparent) competitors engaging in behaviour that will inevitably destroy the credibility of their entire business model in a month or so, but Trump is meant to be some sort of uber-negotiator. Get it done, man.

[Bartholomert]

You don't get to claim any kind of prescience by saying the polls will tighten, given plenty of other people (including me) have been posting that for months.

Presumably the real story is that Trump isn't having any success putting his vast dealmaking ability to work in unrigging the polls. I mean, sure, it's a cabal of colluding (apparent) competitors engaging in behaviour that will inevitably destroy the credibility of their entire business model in a month or so, but Trump is meant to be some sort of uber-negotiator. Get it done, man.

Mainstream media is gleefully destroying what's remaining of their credibility to shill for Hillary. That argument doesn't work anymore.

[Bernanke]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cum9ayBWgAMrn9m.jpg

Last 24 hours.

[Bartholomert]

So "Trump tried to hook up with some girls in the last 40 years and they rejected him?" Lol. I guess trying to hook up with girls now is automatic sexual assault?

Meanwhile Bill Clinton was regularly fucking 12-13 year olds with Bill Epstein and raping married women while Hillary covered for him.

[John Arne]

Oh god, he's trolling us and we all fell for it. To be fair, well played Mert.

[elth]

Does Mert think it's 1996?

[ItalAussie]

Do you reckon that Hilary Clinton smells of sulphur, mert?

[Jimmy Floyd]

My new first rule of politics is that anyone who uses the phrase 'Mainstream media' can safely be dismissed as wrong.

[ItalAussie]

My new first rule of politics is that anyone who uses the phrase 'Mainstream media' can safely be dismissed as wrong.

That is a good rule.

[Pepe]

Oh god, he's trolling us and we all fell for it. To be fair, well played Mert.

Not all of us.

[Disco]

Mert has been a parody for years, compare this bollocks with the stuff he posted during the coup in Turkey, worlds apart.

[phonics]

TIME have updated their cover from a couple weeks back

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CupefhaXEAAqVZi.jpg

[Lewis]

What sort of shit in-house style guide doesn't correct that to 'MELTDOWN'? No wonder the mainstream media is running scared.

[Lewis]

That said, if somebody like 'Hillary' was running for Prime Minister our papers would hound them into suicide in a matter of days.

[Bartholomert]

Not over yet cucks, Trump up 2 in new national poll:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch_oct13

[Henry]

Still on Rasmussen, are you?. Might as well just post some of those internet polls that Trump does.

[Bartholomert]

Still on Rasmussen, are you?. Might as well just post some of those internet polls that Trump does.

It's a 9 point swing in 4 days. Cope harder.

Donald Trump's sexual assault victim plagiarized another sexual assault story lol:

https://twitter.com/laissez_claire/status/786495428325801985?s=09

[John]

Right, it's impossible for two people to independently come up with the octopus analogy for a handsy twat. They must both have plagiarised The Thick Of It.

[Bernanke]

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-apologises-serbia-yugoslavia-bombing-509417?rx=us

A literal ethnic cleansing apologist.

[Lewis]

Christopher Hitchens basically blamed her for prolonging the Bosnian War (and then obviously lying about her record). God(!), could you imagine the money he (and Johnnie Walker) would have made over the past year hammering both of the candidates?

[Bartholomert]

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-apologises-serbia-yugoslavia-bombing-509417?rx=us

A literal ethnic cleansing apologist.

"We could have taken action other than bombing and killing hundreds of innocent civilians" apparently means Trump is an ethnic cleansing apologist now?

The absurd hypocrisy of the Left knows no bounds.

[mugbull]

A Mormon named Evan McMullin is in a statistical tie with the Big Two in Utah. Wouldn't that be neat.

[ItalAussie]

Right, it's impossible for two people to independently come up with the octopus analogy for a handsy twat. They must both have plagiarised The Thick Of It.

From Veep: "Was your mom plagiarizing the Bible when she said, 'Oh God, oh God'?" :D

[GS]

The letter that the NY Times have sent to Trump's lawyers is a bit good.

[Queenslander]

England born Tony Abbott has had go on Uncle Rupert's news channel defending the deplorable.

Lol

[ItalAussie]

538 again:


Proposition No. 5: This probably won’t cost him the election — because Trump was already losing. It’s important to remember that Trump has been running behind Clinton for almost the whole campaign, and he had fallen into roughly a 5-percentage-point deficit after his poor performance in the first presidential debate — and before the latest round of scandals. That deficit is fairly hard to come back from even under the best of circumstances. To make it to the Oval Office now, Trump would have to make one of the greatest comebacks in political history while navigating a minefield of scandals and leaks, making his task even harder. But as far as FiveThirtyEight’s forecasts are concerned, the first debate still looks like the turning point in the race.

[Spoonsky]

A Mormon named Evan McMullin is in a statistical tie with the Big Two in Utah. Wouldn't that be neat.

Yup, absolutely mental. Time to volunteer I guess.

[elth]

A Mormon named Evan McMullin is in a statistical tie with the Big Two in Utah. Wouldn't that be neat.

Could technically be the next President, too, if he can win Utah. Would need a tied electoral college and a House Republican split, but it's possible.

[ItalAussie]

Could technically be the next President, too, if he can win Utah. Would need a tied electoral college and a House Republican split, but it's possible.

I was playing around with the numbers the other day, and it's actually not that hard to produce an electoral college tie. I think I posted on here.

http://www.270towin.com/presidential_map_new/maps/by4Pz.png

http://www.270towin.com/maps/by4Pz

Not totally implausible. Requires a big swing towards Trump, but a relatively uniform one geographically.

[Henry]

What would happen then? The House makes the call?

[ItalAussie]

What would happen then? The House makes the call?

Yeah, I believe it goes to a vote in Congress, meaning that the Republicans would have an edge.

But it'd be fascinating to see how that panned out, given we might have seen the start of Trump's one-man war against his own party.

[Shindig]

The House voting him in and then down-voting him at every opportunity would be interesting. I'm still waiting for his daughters to come forward as abuse victims, too.

[GS]

Trump has been having another meltdown on Twitter today over E-MAILS, alongside having a cracking go at both the media and Paul Ryan.

It's fascinating to watch.

[Raoul Duke]

He's gone full retard, hasn't he.

[Disco]

Many many years ago.

[Bernanke]

His attacks on Paul Ryan seem so random. Like, why now?

Wounded animals do a lot of crazy things I guess.

[ItalAussie]

He's started taking cracks at SNL.

That said, a candidate claiming that the actual democratic process is rigged is a very dangerous precedent to set. That doesn't lead anywhere positive.

EDIT: Pence is looking increasingly like a hostage every day. If Trump just lost because he was an idiot, Pence would come out looking fine. But with Trump lashing out at everyone, as well as stomping all over Pence regularly, Pence might find himself in a tough position with his own party.