The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
yogoshio
Annoying Libertarian
Trying to spot the differences, so help me out:
Both liars, that has been proven time and time again.
Both terrible in their jobs-- Clinton as SoS selling guns for indirect campaign donations, relations with Russia, England, Germany, and others in horrific decline since her pick for the role; Trump bankrupting multiple times and constantly failing at even minor ventures.
Both do what they want whenever they want--Clinton with her back office deals, email system, etc... Trump with, well, anything.
They both are crazy egotistical maniacs who can't answer any questions directly (granted this is something most politicians are freakish experts at).
They both change their political stance when it best suits them-- Clinton would NEVER sound so middle of the road had she not gone up against Sanders in the primary, she was very adamanly against gay marriage as of 2004, and even in 2008 wanted civil unions only, calling the TTP a "gold standard" then changing her mind when public opinion changed. Trump is just the same, with his stances on pro-life issues, social issues and others.
Frankly, they both suck, their both liars, and they both are failures in their respected roles.
But hey, just read my tag line
Both liars, that has been proven time and time again.
Both terrible in their jobs-- Clinton as SoS selling guns for indirect campaign donations, relations with Russia, England, Germany, and others in horrific decline since her pick for the role; Trump bankrupting multiple times and constantly failing at even minor ventures.
Both do what they want whenever they want--Clinton with her back office deals, email system, etc... Trump with, well, anything.
They both are crazy egotistical maniacs who can't answer any questions directly (granted this is something most politicians are freakish experts at).
They both change their political stance when it best suits them-- Clinton would NEVER sound so middle of the road had she not gone up against Sanders in the primary, she was very adamanly against gay marriage as of 2004, and even in 2008 wanted civil unions only, calling the TTP a "gold standard" then changing her mind when public opinion changed. Trump is just the same, with his stances on pro-life issues, social issues and others.
Frankly, they both suck, their both liars, and they both are failures in their respected roles.
But hey, just read my tag line
lwien
Well-Known Member
Trying to spot the differences, so help me out:
Both liars, that has been proven time and time again.
Both terrible in their jobs-- Clinton as SoS selling guns for indirect campaign donations, relations with Russia, England, Germany, and others in horrific decline since her pick for the role; Trump bankrupting multiple times and constantly failing at even minor ventures.
Both do what they want whenever they want--Clinton with her back office deals, email system, etc... Trump with, well, anything.
They both are crazy egotistical maniacs who can't answer any questions directly (granted this is something most politicians are freakish experts at).
They both change their political stance when it best suits them-- Clinton would NEVER sound so middle of the road had she not gone up against Sanders in the primary, she was very adamanly against gay marriage as of 2004, and even in 2008 wanted civil unions only, calling the TTP a "gold standard" then chaning her mind when public opinion changed. Trump is just the same, with his stances on pro-life issues, social issues and others.
Frankly, they both such, their both liars, and they both are failures in their respected roles.
But hey, just read my tag line
For me, racism and xenophobia trumps (pardon the play on words) all that shit.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
As it would for me if I believed "all that shit", which I don't.
It isn't even close. There is literally NOTHING Trump could do to make me vote for him.
yogoshio
Annoying Libertarian
Except she's just better at hiding it:
http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/bill-clintons-childhood-friend-hillarys-racist/#!
...she made that claim in explicitly racial terms, citing an Associated Press poll “that found how Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”
As she struggled to stop the Obama insurgency in the 2008 Democratic primary, Clinton tried to diminish Obama’s credentials as a “community organizer,” which had led some to draw connections between him and Dr. King. Clinton argued that it was really a professional politician, President Lyndon Johnson, who made the difference: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act”
Or here's from Salon:
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/19/off_the_reservation_4_times_hillary_clintons_racism_showed/
Or from HuffPo:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-rucker/can-black-people-trust-hillary_b_9312004.html
"A quick trip down memory lane reveals that Clinton has a history of employing race in a divisive, cynical manner."
I don't want anyone voting for either of them. Everyone thinks theirs is better, when they are both equally terrible, just different ways of shelling it out.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/bill-clintons-childhood-friend-hillarys-racist/#!
...she made that claim in explicitly racial terms, citing an Associated Press poll “that found how Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”
As she struggled to stop the Obama insurgency in the 2008 Democratic primary, Clinton tried to diminish Obama’s credentials as a “community organizer,” which had led some to draw connections between him and Dr. King. Clinton argued that it was really a professional politician, President Lyndon Johnson, who made the difference: “Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act”
Or here's from Salon:
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/19/off_the_reservation_4_times_hillary_clintons_racism_showed/
Or from HuffPo:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-rucker/can-black-people-trust-hillary_b_9312004.html
"A quick trip down memory lane reveals that Clinton has a history of employing race in a divisive, cynical manner."
I don't want anyone voting for either of them. Everyone thinks theirs is better, when they are both equally terrible, just different ways of shelling it out.
Last edited:
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
What happened in 2008 during an election is old news. What is said in an election in a heated moment is different IMO especially 8 years ago. After that Obama was her boss and now Obama is standing and supporting Hillary.
It's your right to vote for who you want. Don't expect folks to agree with you. You can see that you are the only one jumping on the Trump bandwagon.
Folks may write in Bernie's name or vote third party but most around here won't be voting for Trump.
Edit
A lot is said in an election. I will repeat that. Hillary ended up working for Obama. Now he's supporting her for president.
@yogoshio im not sure if you are saying this for conversation or if you really want to vote Trump? I just read you are a Gary johnson guy. Sorry I missed that.
Hulk punch Donald
Edit Again. I guess I'm so afraid Trump will get into office, I'm voting for the only other candidate that can win.
It's your right to vote for who you want. Don't expect folks to agree with you. You can see that you are the only one jumping on the Trump bandwagon.
Folks may write in Bernie's name or vote third party but most around here won't be voting for Trump.
Edit
A lot is said in an election. I will repeat that. Hillary ended up working for Obama. Now he's supporting her for president.
@yogoshio im not sure if you are saying this for conversation or if you really want to vote Trump? I just read you are a Gary johnson guy. Sorry I missed that.
Hulk punch Donald
Edit Again. I guess I'm so afraid Trump will get into office, I'm voting for the only other candidate that can win.
Last edited:
grokit
well-worn member
For me, this is a choice between a narcissistic reality tv star with an off-the-charts potential body count,
and a disingenuous career politician with an actual body count that could potentially be even worse.
Write
in!
yogoshio
Annoying Libertarian
Uhhhhhh........ Not sure where you've been.....I have said at least a dozen times I hate and will never vote for Trump. I'm voting for Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party. If you thought I was voting for Trump because I openly bring out Clinton's flaws and past, then your painting with as broad a brush as Trump does.
@CarolKing Nope. Trumps an infatuated moron with nothing but his own sick sense of satisfaction driving him. I may lean more to conservatism than socialist, but there is no way in hell I am voting for that man. I have agreed with everyone on here about how terrible he would be. Only difference is I'm not whitewashing Clinton just because she's the opposing candidate.
And if what people said in the past doesn't matter then what the fuck is the point?
If scruples don't matter, then I don't want to live here anymore. To me, what people say in the heat of a campaign off the cuff is more important because it's their honest answer, without the crazy political filters. It's that kind of attitude about people's pasts that put us in this situation in the first place, giving us the choice of two shit sandwiches, one with blue special sauce, one with red, but both are food-coloring infused diarrhea.
Last edited:
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
An Opportunity for #NeverTrump Republicans to Save Face
by D.R. Tucker
July 10, 2016 3:30 PM
Let’s face it: the #NeverTrump movement is an admission of embarrassment on the part of veteran Republicans, an acknowledgement that the Southern Strategy was suicidal, a concession that as a result of fifty years of playing to ignorant fears, the GOP base is largely comprised of people who think the term “animal husbandry” refers to bestiality. You can’t blame these veteran Republicans for wanting to wash their hands of their creation–and you can’t blame them for seeking alternate political routes:
For some Massachusetts Republicans, the return of Bill Weld — the law-and-order Yankee who charmed his way into two terms as governor of a liberal state — is nothing short of face-saving.Finally, they have a reason to show up on Election Day.“I think for a lot of Republicans, especially in a state like Massachusetts, it gives us an option,” said Virginia Buckingham, a Republican who once worked as Weld’s chief of staff, and will vote for him this fall. “We were kind of in a difficult position facing voting for Donald Trump.”Weld’s reemergence as a vice presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket with former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson has been viewed largely as another curiosity in a crazy election cycle in which, it seems, anything might happen…
Although the #NeverTrump movement isn’t beating down their door, Johnson and Weld are reaching for voters disenchanted with Trump and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. In a Web ad launched last week, Johnson and Weld presented themselves as a “credible alternative to ClinTrump.”
I have previously suggested that it is not beyond possibility for the Johnson-Weld ticket to perform strongly enough in national polls to warrant inclusion in the presidential debates. If so, the symbolism will be powerful. Think about it: Clinton, Johnson and Trump–a Democrat demonized for decades by the demagogues who dote on the Donald, an ex-Republican who was regarded as a RINO by the same twits who think Trump is terrific, and the Orange Goblin himself, the single most unqualified individual to ever secure a major American party’s nomination, the single most irrational figure in modern politics, a hero to haters, a Jesus to jerks.
I give Johnson credit for defying both Republican and Libertarian taboos in his July 1 appearance on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher (relevant segment runs from 3:02-5:15):
Other than former Cato Institute fellow Jerry Taylor, I have never heard anyone associated with libertarianism acknowledge that human-caused climate change is real. That’s progress. If Clinton and Johnson appear on the debate stage next to Trump and affirm that mainstream climate science is legitimate, and Trump reiterates his belief that climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese government, climate hawks will be able to declare a moral victory, because the optics will not work in Trump’s favor.
The Johnson-Weld ticket is an option, and an opportunity, for veteran Republicans to save face. It will be interesting to see how many Republicans avail themselves of this option and this opportunity. Having said that, I hope Republicans who support this ticket at least have the decency to admit that men like Johnson and Weld were effectively forced out of the GOP because they were not blind ideologues, because they understood that some issues are not left or right, because they recognized that we’re all Americans first…because they were too nice, too civil, too human for the Trumpublican Party.
Clinton will be able to hold her own in a three-way debate with Johnson and Trump. She will also not hesitate to remind viewers that if the GOP had not gone grotesque, a man like Johnson–flawed but not foul, mistaken but not malicious, incorrect but not insane–would be the Republican nominee, and not a deacon of derangement like the Donald.
by D.R. Tucker
July 10, 2016 3:30 PM
Let’s face it: the #NeverTrump movement is an admission of embarrassment on the part of veteran Republicans, an acknowledgement that the Southern Strategy was suicidal, a concession that as a result of fifty years of playing to ignorant fears, the GOP base is largely comprised of people who think the term “animal husbandry” refers to bestiality. You can’t blame these veteran Republicans for wanting to wash their hands of their creation–and you can’t blame them for seeking alternate political routes:
For some Massachusetts Republicans, the return of Bill Weld — the law-and-order Yankee who charmed his way into two terms as governor of a liberal state — is nothing short of face-saving.Finally, they have a reason to show up on Election Day.“I think for a lot of Republicans, especially in a state like Massachusetts, it gives us an option,” said Virginia Buckingham, a Republican who once worked as Weld’s chief of staff, and will vote for him this fall. “We were kind of in a difficult position facing voting for Donald Trump.”Weld’s reemergence as a vice presidential candidate on the Libertarian ticket with former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson has been viewed largely as another curiosity in a crazy election cycle in which, it seems, anything might happen…
Although the #NeverTrump movement isn’t beating down their door, Johnson and Weld are reaching for voters disenchanted with Trump and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. In a Web ad launched last week, Johnson and Weld presented themselves as a “credible alternative to ClinTrump.”
I have previously suggested that it is not beyond possibility for the Johnson-Weld ticket to perform strongly enough in national polls to warrant inclusion in the presidential debates. If so, the symbolism will be powerful. Think about it: Clinton, Johnson and Trump–a Democrat demonized for decades by the demagogues who dote on the Donald, an ex-Republican who was regarded as a RINO by the same twits who think Trump is terrific, and the Orange Goblin himself, the single most unqualified individual to ever secure a major American party’s nomination, the single most irrational figure in modern politics, a hero to haters, a Jesus to jerks.
I give Johnson credit for defying both Republican and Libertarian taboos in his July 1 appearance on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher (relevant segment runs from 3:02-5:15):
Other than former Cato Institute fellow Jerry Taylor, I have never heard anyone associated with libertarianism acknowledge that human-caused climate change is real. That’s progress. If Clinton and Johnson appear on the debate stage next to Trump and affirm that mainstream climate science is legitimate, and Trump reiterates his belief that climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese government, climate hawks will be able to declare a moral victory, because the optics will not work in Trump’s favor.
The Johnson-Weld ticket is an option, and an opportunity, for veteran Republicans to save face. It will be interesting to see how many Republicans avail themselves of this option and this opportunity. Having said that, I hope Republicans who support this ticket at least have the decency to admit that men like Johnson and Weld were effectively forced out of the GOP because they were not blind ideologues, because they understood that some issues are not left or right, because they recognized that we’re all Americans first…because they were too nice, too civil, too human for the Trumpublican Party.
Clinton will be able to hold her own in a three-way debate with Johnson and Trump. She will also not hesitate to remind viewers that if the GOP had not gone grotesque, a man like Johnson–flawed but not foul, mistaken but not malicious, incorrect but not insane–would be the Republican nominee, and not a deacon of derangement like the Donald.
ClearBlueLou
unbearably light in the being....
I confess I highly doubt the whole "Clinton Foundation as unlimited campaign funding AND perfect end-run around campaign finance rules" notion: it's more than a little too JBC/Breitbart, and I've been evaluating stuff like this since the '64 election: if anyone has more than PrisonPlanet-style 'guilt by being mentioned in the same hair-on-fire-article as something else', I'd love to see it.
Experience tells me that notions this wild have no factual bases, just lots of flaming scalps.
@yogoshio -
You think the two parties need to be held accountable, but please, what "it" would you like to see outrage about regarding "a leftist"? You 're not pointing at anything, so it's impossible "answer" you
Experience tells me that notions this wild have no factual bases, just lots of flaming scalps.
@yogoshio -
Makes no sense
You think the two parties need to be held accountable, but please, what "it" would you like to see outrage about regarding "a leftist"? You 're not pointing at anything, so it's impossible "answer" you
yogoshio
Annoying Libertarian
I have pointed at plenty, ie her racist remarks, the FBI admitting she committed a crime, her failures as SoS and more, but you have decided you know more than HuffPo, Salon, and others so you have dismissed them. You may have been around but that doesn't make it any less irrational to ignore a fire when its burning your toes.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
The reason I will probably vote for Hillary is because I want the presidential candidate to win against Trump. I don't want to take any chances. It sounds like Bernie might be endorsing her this week. We will see?
Hillary is far from a perfect candidate. I wish the Dem had somebody different. It is what it is. Sometimes I need to make the best of a bad situation. I can't risk Trump becoming president, it's as simple as that. I won't make any excuses for it either.
Edit
The FBI didn't say Hillary committed a crime.
Hillary is far from a perfect candidate. I wish the Dem had somebody different. It is what it is. Sometimes I need to make the best of a bad situation. I can't risk Trump becoming president, it's as simple as that. I won't make any excuses for it either.
Edit
The FBI didn't say Hillary committed a crime.
Last edited:
ClearBlueLou
unbearably light in the being....
first, the idea that HRC is a LEFTIST of any sort is ridiculously funny, and really makes it impossible not to laugh; second, you're so busy jumping to conclusions that there's no way to show you that you're being incoherent. Not an attack - just, your communication skills need some MAJOR upgrades...but, "chump don't want the help, chump don' get the help".
I'm trying to stay with you and respond intelligently, but I SWEAR you are not helping.
Carry on, I won't annoy you further.
I'm trying to stay with you and respond intelligently, but I SWEAR you are not helping.
Carry on, I won't annoy you further.
Silat
When the Facts Change, I Change My Mind.
1/ Hillary broke no laws...
2/ foreign funds are paying for Hillary's campaign? Evidence please.
And any worldwide corporation that gives money to a candidate is potentially giving money from foreign profits. But in the real world those moneys are kept separate (bookkeeping) and do not mix so that no laws are broken.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
Right. It's not like she is directly soliciting foreigners to donate to her campaign. Nobody would be stupid enough to do that...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/29/trump-illegally-solicit-foreign-nationals-watchdog/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/29/trump-illegally-solicit-foreign-nationals-watchdog/
lwien
Well-Known Member
Ya know, I thought the same thing about the Secretary of State keeping a private email server to conduct government business on. It still boggles my mind.......
grokit
well-worn member
Right, that's what their foundation is for. Semantics are key
Dead on.
For a long time the "Im Not a bigot!" bigots have been using "having the conversation" as a fall back to prevent ever actually doing anything about the systemic problems in that regard. That and "the need to look at both sides". We have been "having the conversation" for years now and looking dark skinned is still an unofficial crime in many cities.
Another weird dodge is currently being used by "Im Not a bigot!" religious biggots and their apologists. "We need to address their very real fears". WTF?!?! Talk about consulting a lawyer to justify your bigotry.
Lets say that I base my life, values, and actions on what my phone psychic tells me. Lets say she tells me that Gingers are secretly conspiring to drug me, put their freaky Celtic tattoos all over me, and rape my house pets! Now to me, those are "very real fears!"
That does NOT mean I get to frak people over based on them.
The Jews control all the banks and keep WASPS poor. All whites conspire to keep blacks down and any time a white guy gets a promotion over me that is why. The gays are attempting to indoctrinate my kids into the gayness via Disney movies. The mexicans are sending all of their criminals up here to destroy America. Amazon and Dominoes pizza drones will boost the signal to the chip in my head!
This will certainly be the most "lesser of 2 evils" election in my lifetime. Any American history buffs with a longer term perspective an this kind of thing?
I am very much NOT a Clinton fan. As much as I disliked some of the other R contenders I don't know how I would have voted with them as a candidate. But Trump? I get the argument that Clinton is a "business as usual, corrupt, lying, politician." I don't get the "Anything is better than that." as a follow up. It isn't; it really isn't.
Gunky
Well-Known Member
All this lesser of two evils rap is basically wrong. Two evils makes it sound like the candidates of the two main parties are equally bad or one is only marginally less rotten than the other.
Clinton wants to raise the minimum wage, Donald says no.
Clinton wants to work to counteract global warming. Donald says global warming is a myth propagated by the Chinese.
Clinton wants to strengthen unions; Donald is all for busting them.
Clinton wants to increase taxes on the wealthy and improve social safety net programs. Donald proposes a massive tax cut for the rich, savage cuts in aid to the poor and deficits as far as the eye can see.
Clinton wants to keep abortion legal and help women obtain reproductive health care; Donald says fuckya.
Clinton wants to lower the costs of higher education; Donald wants to clip you with his education con job.
Clinton believes it's important to put out real policy positions with reasonable numbers and expectations; Donald says he'll figure that all out later, trust him.
Clinton wants to build on Obamacare; Donald wants to build an expensive, ecologically dubious and practically pointless border wall.
I could go on and on. I can't see how there is any difficulty deciding here. It's not a close thing.
Clinton wants to raise the minimum wage, Donald says no.
Clinton wants to work to counteract global warming. Donald says global warming is a myth propagated by the Chinese.
Clinton wants to strengthen unions; Donald is all for busting them.
Clinton wants to increase taxes on the wealthy and improve social safety net programs. Donald proposes a massive tax cut for the rich, savage cuts in aid to the poor and deficits as far as the eye can see.
Clinton wants to keep abortion legal and help women obtain reproductive health care; Donald says fuckya.
Clinton wants to lower the costs of higher education; Donald wants to clip you with his education con job.
Clinton believes it's important to put out real policy positions with reasonable numbers and expectations; Donald says he'll figure that all out later, trust him.
Clinton wants to build on Obamacare; Donald wants to build an expensive, ecologically dubious and practically pointless border wall.
I could go on and on. I can't see how there is any difficulty deciding here. It's not a close thing.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
Trump backer says he’s running ‘as a racial healer’
07/11/16 08:00 AM—Updated 07/11/16 08:49 AM
By Steve Benen
Donald Trump has been called all sorts of things over the course of his controversial presidential campaign, but yesterday was probably the first time anyone, anywhere, said he’s positioned to play the role of “racial healer.”
CNN’s Jake Tapper interviewed Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R), a vice presidential contender, and the host noted that he’s heard from “a number of Latino-Americans, Muslim-Americans, Native-Americans, Jewish-Americans, African-Americans, all expressing concerns about some of the things Donald Trump has said.” The Republican governor insisted most Americans have the same security concerns, regardless of who wins the election.
It led to this amazing exchange.
TAPPER: Respectfully, governor, you didn’t answer my question. Do you think Donald Trump has campaigned as a racial healer?
FALLIN: I think he is trying to campaign as a racial healer. I think that has been part of his message….
In case you’re curious, the governor said this with a straight face.
This comes on the heels of the Trump campaign issuing a statement on Friday morning, responding to the mass-shooting in Dallas, which read in part, “Our nation has become too divided. Too many Americans feel like they’ve lost hope. Crime is harming too many citizens. Racial tensions have gotten worse, not better.”
Questions about racial tensions are inherently difficult and multi-faceted, and Trump has done little to help answer them. But if the presumptive Republican nominee is correct, and tensions have intensified, is Trump prepared to acknowledge his role in the problem?
Slate’s Catherine Piner put together a lengthy collection of incidents involving Trump’s racially divisive campaign tactics, adding, “His observation about racial tensions is especially curious given the many racially and ethnically divisive statements he has made.”
I’m also reminded of this column in June from the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank.
The things Trump is doing now – disparaging the “Mexican” judge, disqualifying Muslim judges, calling somebody claiming Native American blood “Pocahontas” and singling out “my African American” – is very much in line with what he has been doing for the past year, and before.
More than six months ago, I began a column by proposing, “Let’s not mince words: Donald Trump is a bigot and a racist.” His bigotry went back decades, to the Central Park jogger case, and came to include: his leadership of the “birther” movement suggesting President Obama was a foreign-born Muslim, his vulgar expressions for women, his talk of Mexico sending rapists into America, his call for mass deportation, his spats with Latino news outlets, his mocking Asian accent, his tacit acceptance of the claim that Muslims are a “problem” in America, his agreement that American Muslims should be forced to register themselves, his call to ban Muslim immigration, his false claim about American Muslims celebrating 9/11, his tweeting of statistics from white supremacists, his condoning of violence against black demonstrators and his mocking of a journalist with a physical disability.
This assessment – a sampling, really, of Trump’s record on matters of diversity and respect – was published a month ago, and things have gotten even worse since.
All of which brings us back to the truly breathtaking assertion that Trump is “trying to campaign as a racial healer.” The next question for the GOP candidate’s allies is, if the last year is what it looks like when Trump is trying to bring people together, what would it look like if he were trying to tear us apart?
07/11/16 08:00 AM—Updated 07/11/16 08:49 AM
By Steve Benen
Donald Trump has been called all sorts of things over the course of his controversial presidential campaign, but yesterday was probably the first time anyone, anywhere, said he’s positioned to play the role of “racial healer.”
CNN’s Jake Tapper interviewed Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R), a vice presidential contender, and the host noted that he’s heard from “a number of Latino-Americans, Muslim-Americans, Native-Americans, Jewish-Americans, African-Americans, all expressing concerns about some of the things Donald Trump has said.” The Republican governor insisted most Americans have the same security concerns, regardless of who wins the election.
It led to this amazing exchange.
TAPPER: Respectfully, governor, you didn’t answer my question. Do you think Donald Trump has campaigned as a racial healer?
FALLIN: I think he is trying to campaign as a racial healer. I think that has been part of his message….
In case you’re curious, the governor said this with a straight face.
This comes on the heels of the Trump campaign issuing a statement on Friday morning, responding to the mass-shooting in Dallas, which read in part, “Our nation has become too divided. Too many Americans feel like they’ve lost hope. Crime is harming too many citizens. Racial tensions have gotten worse, not better.”
Questions about racial tensions are inherently difficult and multi-faceted, and Trump has done little to help answer them. But if the presumptive Republican nominee is correct, and tensions have intensified, is Trump prepared to acknowledge his role in the problem?
Slate’s Catherine Piner put together a lengthy collection of incidents involving Trump’s racially divisive campaign tactics, adding, “His observation about racial tensions is especially curious given the many racially and ethnically divisive statements he has made.”
I’m also reminded of this column in June from the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank.
The things Trump is doing now – disparaging the “Mexican” judge, disqualifying Muslim judges, calling somebody claiming Native American blood “Pocahontas” and singling out “my African American” – is very much in line with what he has been doing for the past year, and before.
More than six months ago, I began a column by proposing, “Let’s not mince words: Donald Trump is a bigot and a racist.” His bigotry went back decades, to the Central Park jogger case, and came to include: his leadership of the “birther” movement suggesting President Obama was a foreign-born Muslim, his vulgar expressions for women, his talk of Mexico sending rapists into America, his call for mass deportation, his spats with Latino news outlets, his mocking Asian accent, his tacit acceptance of the claim that Muslims are a “problem” in America, his agreement that American Muslims should be forced to register themselves, his call to ban Muslim immigration, his false claim about American Muslims celebrating 9/11, his tweeting of statistics from white supremacists, his condoning of violence against black demonstrators and his mocking of a journalist with a physical disability.
This assessment – a sampling, really, of Trump’s record on matters of diversity and respect – was published a month ago, and things have gotten even worse since.
All of which brings us back to the truly breathtaking assertion that Trump is “trying to campaign as a racial healer.” The next question for the GOP candidate’s allies is, if the last year is what it looks like when Trump is trying to bring people together, what would it look like if he were trying to tear us apart?
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
Some of Trump supporters are sounding like the surrogates (trumpets) seen on CNN like Jeffry Lord or Scotty Nell Hughes. Several of them that keep saying the same things. Governors are suppose to be smart people . I guess I would be questioning Mary Fallin's mental stability if she's saying that Trump is a healer. It's just the party talking. Some republicans would stand behind anybody if the were republican, doesn't matter who the person is.
Edit
George W. Bush also said he was a uniter not a divider. That was a major lie or maybe delusional.
Edit
George W. Bush also said he was a uniter not a divider. That was a major lie or maybe delusional.
Last edited:
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Just heard on the news that tomorrow Bernie may endorse Clinton at an event both are attending.
Clinton and her campaign aides have made a number of important policy concessions to Sanders in an effort to heal sharp divisions within the party. Those have ranged from supporting a $15 an hour minimum wage and expanded Social Security benefits to providing free in-state tuition at public colleges and universities to students from families earning up to $125,000 a year.
Clinton on Saturday affirmed her support for allowing people 55 and older to buy into Medicare coverage, the national health insurance program currently available only to seniors 65 and older.
Clinton also said she would allow states to offer government-operated health plans under the Affordable Care Act – so-called “public options” which she pushed for during her first, unsuccessful campaign for president in 2008. And she said she would seek to expand federal funding by $40 billion over the coming decade for community-based centers that provide primary health care services.
Under that proposal, funding would be doubled for “federally qualified “ health centers, which serve about 25 million low income people in the U.S., many of whom are minorities and reside in hard to reach rural areas, according to Clinton campaign. Sanders made community health care centers a key priority during his primary challenge to Clinton this year and has long championed increased funding for the program.
As the notable British philosopher, Mick Jagger once said......well, you know what he said.
Clinton and her campaign aides have made a number of important policy concessions to Sanders in an effort to heal sharp divisions within the party. Those have ranged from supporting a $15 an hour minimum wage and expanded Social Security benefits to providing free in-state tuition at public colleges and universities to students from families earning up to $125,000 a year.
Clinton on Saturday affirmed her support for allowing people 55 and older to buy into Medicare coverage, the national health insurance program currently available only to seniors 65 and older.
Clinton also said she would allow states to offer government-operated health plans under the Affordable Care Act – so-called “public options” which she pushed for during her first, unsuccessful campaign for president in 2008. And she said she would seek to expand federal funding by $40 billion over the coming decade for community-based centers that provide primary health care services.
Under that proposal, funding would be doubled for “federally qualified “ health centers, which serve about 25 million low income people in the U.S., many of whom are minorities and reside in hard to reach rural areas, according to Clinton campaign. Sanders made community health care centers a key priority during his primary challenge to Clinton this year and has long championed increased funding for the program.
As the notable British philosopher, Mick Jagger once said......well, you know what he said.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
Hillary Clinton Listens in Order to Build Coalitions
by Nancy LeTourneau
July 11, 2016 11:56 AM
To follow politics over the last 20+ years is to have been presented with an unflattering image of Hillary Clinton. Like any human being, she has her strengths and weaknesses. But the narrative that has developed about her as cold, distant and too ambitious permeates almost everything. It is no wonder that so many people find her to be unlikeable and untrustworthy.
Recently a couple of journalists have written articles that break through that caricature of Clinton. First was one by Ruby Cramer that explored her rhetorical and practical commitment to “love and kindness” going back to her days at Wellesley. Another one came from Rebecca Traister.
It comes as no surprise that both of these accounts come from female journalists. As we watch a woman become the first presumptive nominee of a major political party, it is important to keep an eye on the kinds of stereotypes that we have developed about presidential campaigns over the years from watching how male candidates operate. All of that is why Ezra Klein deserves major kudos for a piece he published today. Not only is he viewing the subject through male eyes, his reputation as a journalist has been built on being a true wonk. Klein breaks out of his own image to provide an insightful look at Hillary Clinton.
At the beginning, Klein tells us that he embarked on a search to answer a question about Clinton.
As he interviewed friends and associates of hers going back to her time in Arkansas, the answer he got was surprisingly consistent.
Klein goes on to point out that over the years campaigns have been designed to work well for men – who tend to be better at talking than listening. The recent Democratic primary pitted the ultimate male talker who excelled at big rallies against the ultimate female listener who performed much better in small groups. That is what the media noticed. But away from the spotlight, here’s how it went down:
Listening is a big part of how Clinton will govern – where it is much better suited to the task at hand than it is in campaigns. Here is how she described that to Klein and his summary:
In other words, this is part of Clinton’s theory of change. Whether or not it is successful in breaking through the partisan obstruction that President Obama has faced remains to be seen. Skepticism would definitely be in order.
Of course, like any imperfect human being, Clinton’s greatest strength is also the source of her biggest challenge. Not only does it hamper her ability to give inspirational stump speeches, her laundry list of wonky proposals that are designed to address the issues raised by her coalition make it difficult to zero in on the big picture and provide an overwhelming vision for her candidacy. That has been a historical issue for Democrats – who have always had a more diverse coalition than Republicans. But as Klein puts it, “consensus is the enemy of inspiration.” When/if Clinton is elected president, we’ll be hearing a lot of criticism about that.
by Nancy LeTourneau
July 11, 2016 11:56 AM
To follow politics over the last 20+ years is to have been presented with an unflattering image of Hillary Clinton. Like any human being, she has her strengths and weaknesses. But the narrative that has developed about her as cold, distant and too ambitious permeates almost everything. It is no wonder that so many people find her to be unlikeable and untrustworthy.
Recently a couple of journalists have written articles that break through that caricature of Clinton. First was one by Ruby Cramer that explored her rhetorical and practical commitment to “love and kindness” going back to her days at Wellesley. Another one came from Rebecca Traister.
I spent several days with Hillary Clinton near the end of primary season — which, in campaign time, feels like a month, so much is packed into every hour — and I began to see why her campaign is so baffled by the disconnect. Far from feeling like I was with an awkward campaigner, I watched her do the work of retail politics — the handshaking and small-talking and remembering of names and details of local sites and issues — like an Olympic athlete. Far from seeing a remote or robotic figure, I observed a woman who had direct, thoughtful, often moving exchanges: with the Wheelers, with home health-care workers and union representatives and young parents.
It comes as no surprise that both of these accounts come from female journalists. As we watch a woman become the first presumptive nominee of a major political party, it is important to keep an eye on the kinds of stereotypes that we have developed about presidential campaigns over the years from watching how male candidates operate. All of that is why Ezra Klein deserves major kudos for a piece he published today. Not only is he viewing the subject through male eyes, his reputation as a journalist has been built on being a true wonk. Klein breaks out of his own image to provide an insightful look at Hillary Clinton.
At the beginning, Klein tells us that he embarked on a search to answer a question about Clinton.
This is an effort to answer a question I’ve been struggling with since at least 2008: Why is the Hillary Clinton described to me by her staff, her colleagues, and even her foes so different from the one I see on the campaign trail?
As he interviewed friends and associates of hers going back to her time in Arkansas, the answer he got was surprisingly consistent.
Every single person brought up, in some way or another, the exact same quality they feel leads Clinton to excel in governance and struggle in campaigns…
Hillary Clinton, they said over and over again, listens.
Klein goes on to point out that over the years campaigns have been designed to work well for men – who tend to be better at talking than listening. The recent Democratic primary pitted the ultimate male talker who excelled at big rallies against the ultimate female listener who performed much better in small groups. That is what the media noticed. But away from the spotlight, here’s how it went down:
Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination by forming a coalition. And part of how she forms coalitions is by listening to her potential partners — both to figure out what they need and to build her relationships with them. This is not a skill all politicians possess.
Listening is a big part of how Clinton will govern – where it is much better suited to the task at hand than it is in campaigns. Here is how she described that to Klein and his summary:
“A lot of governing is the slow, hard boring of hard boards,” she says. “I don’t think there’s anything sexy, exciting, or headline-grabbing about it. I think it is getting up every day, building the relationships, finding whatever sliver of common ground you can occupy, never, ever giving up in continuing to reach out even to people who are sworn political partisan adversaries.”…
Colleagues say Clinton uses the tension between her and Republicans to her advantage. Former adversaries feel awkward when they first meet her — they expect bad blood, bitter feelings, sniping. Instead, she’s friendly, charming, interested in them. She treats them like an old friend. She — here it is again — listens intently to what they say and tries to find common ground.
Colleagues say Clinton uses the tension between her and Republicans to her advantage. Former adversaries feel awkward when they first meet her — they expect bad blood, bitter feelings, sniping. Instead, she’s friendly, charming, interested in them. She treats them like an old friend. She — here it is again — listens intently to what they say and tries to find common ground.
In other words, this is part of Clinton’s theory of change. Whether or not it is successful in breaking through the partisan obstruction that President Obama has faced remains to be seen. Skepticism would definitely be in order.
Of course, like any imperfect human being, Clinton’s greatest strength is also the source of her biggest challenge. Not only does it hamper her ability to give inspirational stump speeches, her laundry list of wonky proposals that are designed to address the issues raised by her coalition make it difficult to zero in on the big picture and provide an overwhelming vision for her candidacy. That has been a historical issue for Democrats – who have always had a more diverse coalition than Republicans. But as Klein puts it, “consensus is the enemy of inspiration.” When/if Clinton is elected president, we’ll be hearing a lot of criticism about that.
grokit
well-worn member
I give hillary credit for building her coalition, it is strong. But she has made her own political enemies while building this power, and has obviously inherited her husband's as well. And while they have succeeded in their quest to define her negatives, she has at times added to this problem with her decision making.
I also give her credit for listening to bernie, and for appearing to adopt many of his platform planks into her own. But by not adopting his opposition to the tpp, as it's written today, she is selling out many of the other planks she is adopting, like environmental and worker's rights, which can be easily challenged by business interests under the provisions of that trade agreement, if these rights might affect potential profits.
I also give her credit for listening to bernie, and for appearing to adopt many of his platform planks into her own. But by not adopting his opposition to the tpp, as it's written today, she is selling out many of the other planks she is adopting, like environmental and worker's rights, which can be easily challenged by business interests under the provisions of that trade agreement, if these rights might affect potential profits.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
Trump was invited to speak at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's annual meeting but has not responded, the group told NBC News on Monday.
The NAACP issued a press release detailing their invitations to both major parties' candidates two months ago, on May 10. If Trump does not appear at the event, he'll be the first presidential candidate to skip the event in more than a decade.
The four-day event kicks off in Cincinnati on July 16, and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton will speak on July 18, the first day of the Republican National Convention, which takes place in Ohio's other major city, Cleveland. The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Related: Trump's RNC Still a Mystery Despite Boasts
The NAACP's annual event comes after racially charged shootings rocked the nation and sent tensions surging; Trump has struggled to respond to the events, releasing a statement last week that inaccurately called the two black men killed by police "motorists," when only Philando Castile was in a car; Alton Sterling was selling CDs on the street when he was killed in an altercation with police.
Trump ally and Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin said on CNN over the weekend that Trump is "trying to campaign as a racial healer," and Trump himself has repeatedly said that he has a great relationship with minorities (and has gone as far as to say he'll win a majority of their votes in November). In reality, however, Trump has extremely low approval ratings among minorities and general election voters alike.
Before running for president, Trump spent years promoting the theory that the first black president was born in Kenya, not America. As a candidate, Trump has repeatedly spread racially charged fiction (like false crime statistics suggesting black-on-white crime is far worse than it is), re-tweeted white supremacist Twitter accounts from his own when they praised him and spent days dancing around whether or not he'd disavow former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke's support.
The NAACP issued a press release detailing their invitations to both major parties' candidates two months ago, on May 10. If Trump does not appear at the event, he'll be the first presidential candidate to skip the event in more than a decade.
The four-day event kicks off in Cincinnati on July 16, and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton will speak on July 18, the first day of the Republican National Convention, which takes place in Ohio's other major city, Cleveland. The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Related: Trump's RNC Still a Mystery Despite Boasts
The NAACP's annual event comes after racially charged shootings rocked the nation and sent tensions surging; Trump has struggled to respond to the events, releasing a statement last week that inaccurately called the two black men killed by police "motorists," when only Philando Castile was in a car; Alton Sterling was selling CDs on the street when he was killed in an altercation with police.
Trump ally and Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin said on CNN over the weekend that Trump is "trying to campaign as a racial healer," and Trump himself has repeatedly said that he has a great relationship with minorities (and has gone as far as to say he'll win a majority of their votes in November). In reality, however, Trump has extremely low approval ratings among minorities and general election voters alike.
Before running for president, Trump spent years promoting the theory that the first black president was born in Kenya, not America. As a candidate, Trump has repeatedly spread racially charged fiction (like false crime statistics suggesting black-on-white crime is far worse than it is), re-tweeted white supremacist Twitter accounts from his own when they praised him and spent days dancing around whether or not he'd disavow former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke's support.
Last edited: