Nothing shameful at all. I'd go all day on those tits.
Nothing shameful at all. I'd go all day on those tits.
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/2016/08/0...e-nearly-tied/
No, he wouldn't.
No-one does pointing quite like that.Originally Posted by GS
Picking the one poll you like the most in a pool of contradictory ones is not sound statistical methodology. That said, the polls are going to narrow massively before the election, and it looks like the party has brought him to heel slightly, managing to get endorsements out of him.
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?
I don't live there. It's kind of not my problem. My only real investment is the actual risk of an honest-to-god nuclear war, but as long as they hide the nuclear codes from him, it won't really affect me all that much.
How mad are you going to be if he loses? Walk through the fallout with us.
Hillary is a closet moderate, it wouldn't be that bad tbh, if it wasn't for the SCOTUS nominees and if she would commit fully to free trade I would give it serious consideration.
What's your concern with her likely SCOTUS nominations? Second amendment and Roe v Wade?
I don't know if I asked this or not, but I meant to either way - is Barry's supreme court nomination still on the table or has that been fully dismissed? Wasn't he fairly mainstream? The grand old wankers might want to think about him for fear of losing all arms of the government in the next 4 years and ending up with multiple young lesbian ethnics ruining their judicial dreams for the forever..
The Senate have so far refused to hold confirmation hearings. He was quite middle of the road too, so if Clinton wins and Trump takes half the down ticket races with him they could end up completely shafting themselves.
It's probably personal where it's Obama, mind you. The Republicans in Congress are complete wankers.
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.
Hahahahaha
This seems like bollocks. Expand.
Oh God why would you encourage him
It's fine when he's keeping it to one thread, plus it's genuinely interesting to see a real-life Trump voter. It's like visiting a zoo.
Is he a Trump voter or is he just never going to vote Democrat?
Both. There's a third party conservative candidate now, alongside 50 Republican security officials who've released an open letter which effectively calls him dangerous and not fit for office.
He's metastasized to other threads recently
r/thedonald is a good laugh though.
Donald Trump wants to expand libel laws to encourage public officials to sue the media. He wants to use religion as a restricting measure for immigration (a far greater threat to religious liberty than any wedding cake). He has come out explicitly in favour of methods known to be cruel and unusual punishment. You can absolutely agree with those stances, but all three of them clearly contravene the US constitution as it stands.
Trump clearly has no understanding of, nor regard for, the US constitution.
http://www.politico.eu/article/donal...s-us-politics/
http://time.com/4320105/donald-trump-u-s-constitution/
darice fisher @daricefisher 1h1 hour ago
#ManyPeopleAreSaying he's just standing, nothing to say. maybe wasn't allowed to have anything to say. You tell me.
This is one sentence
If this guy becomes President, language is dead.
Doesn't that very much depend on how you choose to punctuate what is presumably a spoken answer?
It is just rambling nonsense, mind.
Hence the en-dashes? It's still not a sentence.
You could probably punctuate that differently and throw some full stops in. It's his inability to keep his mind on one topic for more than ten seconds that's far more worrying than his sentence structure.
This is pretty fucking horrible, even for him.
Don't worry about it, dude. Ignore the fact that he implied that someone would/could/should assassinate her for appointing people she is both mandated and obligated to. It's the DISHONEST MEDIA.
By the way '2nd amendment people' is the dumbest thing I've heard in a while.
He'd be great value if he wasn't terrifying, like the harbinger of the end of days.
But that campaign statement is factually wrong since he talked about it after the fact that she's won. It's an actual comment on assassinating either Hillary or the SC nominees.
That's what the 2nd amendment is all about though.
I would agree, until you consider that his advisors are trying to spin an implication that second amendment advocates may wish to assassinate his opponent.
I think we can cut them a little slack here. There's not much they can do.
Living in Arizona and watching the Olympics it is wall to wall Hillary commercials like:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U8qUhXzr43o
And
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mrX3Ql31URA
I don't even know what Trump's ads look like. He is not even really pretending to run a proper campaign. It is such an odd election.
The second ad would be much better if it didn't have Hillary speaking at the end of it, but it's still quite effective I would imagine.
@jefftiedrich
Republicans should be forced to carry their candidates to term. Even when the life of the party is in danger.
You'd probably see his ads if you watched the nascar.
Very good. The Republican position on abortion is nuts, really.@jefftiedrich
Republicans should be forced to carry their candidates to term. Even when the life of the party is in danger.
I assume a clear majority of Americans are in favour of Roe v Wade.
You are right. There is a shortened version of that which fits in the 45 second spot that is much more effective. Our campaign rules are so utterly insane that some require the candidate to speak to differentiate them from dark money ads.
I don't know, abortion to me is a lot more ambiguous than most issues. If it's legal to get an abortion after a certain amount of time and illegal after that, an arbitrary line has been drawn (I don't think that science has really figured out exactly when the foetus becomes 'human') and I don't like arbitrary lines being drawn. At the same time, people are going to get abortions anyways so you might as well have it out in the open where it's safer.
Well, you need an arbitrary line in this case. There's a point at which, medically, the foetus can't survive outside the womb even with the best medical care. I assume science can pin this down within a fortnight or so (22-24 weeks, presumably). Just take the lower part, cut a month off and say that after, say, 18 weeks you're down to your standard caveats like rape, incest, risk to life of the mother.
The above strikes me as a sensible way of compromising on the issue, but of course any suggestion that the cut off point should be looked at would be anathema to the women's rights groups.
I believe life begins at conception, by the way - but far be it from me to impose my view of that on everybody else.
I thought it was a good joke. Still, the OUTRAGE gets that Orlando bloke off the news cycle.
Ital, mate, we've seen the video. We're briefed.
Yep. I'd hung around on the page too long and hadn't seen the update. Deleted.
Seriously though, it was a suggestion at assassination. It's beyond the pale. I want to hear his supporters (mert?) justify the statement. Preferably with something less obviously desperate than the official release.
@Lewis That was clearly a joke but he is not running for Jon Stewart's old job. I think I would be equally offended with Boris if he were running here. It is not really a policy issue. I don't want some silly spoiled brat who feels like playing at government 2 days a month. Being a liberal Southerner and hearing someone sound like George Wallace pre-conversion doesn't help either.
@GS I'm not sure about Roe v. Wade in the US. It is nearly impossible to untangle because the pro-life camp is very loud and a significant portion of pro-choice people find abortion deeply troubling.
@nico I'm from Louisiana; there is no the in NASCAR. Unlike DC exburg wannabe's I know proper political debate covers whether you dunk or crumble your cornbread into your potlikker, whether crowder peas or zipper beans make the best field peas, and that if you go to either a crawfish boil in St Charles or an oyster bake in Charleston the proper beverage is beer, in a can. Joking aside, the NeverTrumpers on Twitter have a massive Republican campaign consultant base who delight in bashing not just what he says but how the campaign is run. According to them his campaign is disastrously run. No clue how accurate they are but they are hilarious.
It's a disgraceful comment, but his numbers are going to bottom out soon in the sense that there's a core of voters who will vote for him regardless. Maybe it's Lewis' 30% rule, but he's starting to tank across the board.Yep. I'd hung around on the page too long and hadn't seen the update. Deleted.
Seriously though, it was a suggestion at assassination. It's beyond the pale. I want to hear his supporters (mert?) justify the statement. Preferably with something less obviously desperate than the official release.
Barring some sort of outside event, he doesn't have a hope of winning.
I find it deeply troubling and deeply uncomfortable, but I'm still pro-choice in the context of the legal framework for it.
I can't imagine there is much appetite for actually over-turning it, outside the evangelical vote.
The polls will almost certainly narrow before the election, mind. They always do.
Although this election has defied political wisdom so far, so who knows?
EDIT: The smartest thing Trump could have done would have been to shut his mouth during the Olympics and let his bad last week be eaten by the new cycle. Saying stupid stuff in the Olympic buffer zone is a bad plan.
This isn't a conventional election. He can't get through a week without doing something that would ruin any other candidate. In the absence of a wide field to bury his stupidity in, he's just going to be continually exposed as not up to it. The media will be relentless, and he'll continue lashing out.
There's some discussion he may not turn up to the debates. It might be for the best, given the disaster that could unfold if he did turn up.
I'm were you are but I think at the polls it would be close because our side would have a depressed turnout and they would have an enthusiastic one.
Democrats will surely have solid turnout - not only for the presidency (stopping Trump at a minimum) but also given the congressional elections are on the same day.
Capitalising on Trump's negatives downticket might see them make a serious indent in the Republican majorities in the Senate / House, although you suspect they'd struggle to overturn them. Still, it's their best opportunity since 2008 to do so, and you'd expect their ground game to be quite good if they're ripping off the Obama model that worked so well in 2008 and 2012.
If anything, I'd expect Republicans (of the sane variety) to be less enthused about going to the polls as they'll want to vote for neither Trump nor Clinton.
My comment was a response to you on abortion. Same metric you are applying to the race but I think magnified on a single issue basis.
Personally, I think there won't be that much movement in Congress unless Trump continues to commit suicide and Republicans don't disavow him. They need to do it sooner rather than later.
Reply With Quote
