CuckFumbustion
Lo and Behold! The transformative power of Vapor.
Jon Stewart's Twitter Fight with Donald Trump at Stand Up For Heroes, 11/1/16
The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
Ha ha ha ha...
Trump makes up story about Obama ‘screaming at’ protester
11/07/16 09:10 AM
By Steve Benen
On the campaign trail on Friday night, Donald Trump told voters in Pennsylvania that President Obama “screamed at” a protester earlier in the day. And to hear the Republican candidate tell it, the presidential outburst was quite a sight.
Or maybe Donald Trump was caught once again flagrantly lying about an incident that never actually occurred.
There was a protester at an Obama event in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Friday. But while Trump insisted that the president “really screamed at him,” the truth is pretty much the exact opposite.
There’s video of what transpired, but if you can’t watch clips online, there’s also a transcript:
Obama did not, by the way, encourage his supporters to commit acts of violence or promise to pay their legal bills. Trump has already cornered the market on that style of campaigning.
The incident was a timely reminder, not only of Trump’s brazen dishonesty, but also the laziness he relies on when communicating with his own followers. Trump didn’t need to tell this lie – the brief disruption at Obama’s event wasn’t especially important – but the GOP nominee felt the need to comment anyway, deceiving voters just for the sake of doing so.
If there’s a defense for this kind of mindless mendacity, I can’t think of it.
Trump makes up story about Obama ‘screaming at’ protester
11/07/16 09:10 AM
By Steve Benen
On the campaign trail on Friday night, Donald Trump told voters in Pennsylvania that President Obama “screamed at” a protester earlier in the day. And to hear the Republican candidate tell it, the presidential outburst was quite a sight.
“You saw it today on television, right? [Obama] was talking to the protester, screaming at him, really screaming at him. By the way, if I spoke the way Obama spoke to that protester, they would say, ‘He became unhinged!’
“You have to go back and look and study and see what happened…. And [the president] spent so much time screaming at this protester, and frankly it was a disgrace.”
Well, that sounds pretty awful. Maybe the pressure of the campaign season is taking its toll on the president? Maybe Obama lost his cool at an inopportune moment?“You have to go back and look and study and see what happened…. And [the president] spent so much time screaming at this protester, and frankly it was a disgrace.”
Or maybe Donald Trump was caught once again flagrantly lying about an incident that never actually occurred.
There was a protester at an Obama event in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Friday. But while Trump insisted that the president “really screamed at him,” the truth is pretty much the exact opposite.
There’s video of what transpired, but if you can’t watch clips online, there’s also a transcript:
“Now, listen up! I’m serious, listen up. You’ve got an older gentleman who is supporting his candidate. He’s not doing nothing – you don’t have to worry about him. This is what I mean about folks not being focused.
“First of all, we – hold up! Hold up! First of all, we live in a country that respects free speech. So, second of all, it looks like maybe he might have served in our military, and we’ve got to respect that. Third of all, he was elderly, and we’ve got to respect our elders. And fourth of all, don’t boo – vote! Don’t boo – vote! Come on.
“Now, I want you to pay attention. Because if we don’t – if we lose focus, we could have problems. This is part of what’s happened here during this election season. We just get stirred up for all kinds of reasons that are unnecessary. Just relax.”
Trump claims to have seen this on television. In the Republican’s reality, Obama became unhinged, screamed at the protester, and the whole spectacle was a “disgrace.” And yet, the truth was the exact opposite: the president urged his audience to respect the protester and his right to free speech.“First of all, we – hold up! Hold up! First of all, we live in a country that respects free speech. So, second of all, it looks like maybe he might have served in our military, and we’ve got to respect that. Third of all, he was elderly, and we’ve got to respect our elders. And fourth of all, don’t boo – vote! Don’t boo – vote! Come on.
“Now, I want you to pay attention. Because if we don’t – if we lose focus, we could have problems. This is part of what’s happened here during this election season. We just get stirred up for all kinds of reasons that are unnecessary. Just relax.”
Obama did not, by the way, encourage his supporters to commit acts of violence or promise to pay their legal bills. Trump has already cornered the market on that style of campaigning.
The incident was a timely reminder, not only of Trump’s brazen dishonesty, but also the laziness he relies on when communicating with his own followers. Trump didn’t need to tell this lie – the brief disruption at Obama’s event wasn’t especially important – but the GOP nominee felt the need to comment anyway, deceiving voters just for the sake of doing so.
If there’s a defense for this kind of mindless mendacity, I can’t think of it.
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
The stock market is trying to tell us HRC is gonna win.
GetLeft
Well-Known Member
I don't watch every speech Obama gives. But I've never seen him unhinged (a la Bush #1 whenever he received any kind of interruption). The closest I've seen Obama come to being disrespectful was during his last state of the union address when he leveled a few blows to his constant do-nothing detractors. And those blows were well deserved.
Tranquility
Well-Known Member
Or, the senate will stay Republican.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/10/investing/stocks-donald-trump-hillary-clinton-debate-senate/
The makeup of the House and Senate is also in play. And Wall Street seems to care more about that than who the next inhabitant of the White House will be.
The Republicans currently control both chambers of Congress. Investors seem to be betting that the GOP will hang on to the House and Senate...and that Clinton will defeat Trump.
"The market is rallying based on the fact that we may get rid of uncertainty," said John Traynor, chief investment officer of People's United Wealth Management.
The status quo is viewed as the most desirable outcome for the markets by many since it could mean more gridlock. (One source of mine quipped that the 2020 race would begin right after Inauguration Day, if not sooner, in the event that Clinton wins.)
The Republicans currently control both chambers of Congress. Investors seem to be betting that the GOP will hang on to the House and Senate...and that Clinton will defeat Trump.
"The market is rallying based on the fact that we may get rid of uncertainty," said John Traynor, chief investment officer of People's United Wealth Management.
The status quo is viewed as the most desirable outcome for the markets by many since it could mean more gridlock. (One source of mine quipped that the 2020 race would begin right after Inauguration Day, if not sooner, in the event that Clinton wins.)
RUDE BOY
Space is the Place
This is part of that "status quo" of which you spoke. Isn't it what happens for every presidential election?
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Exactly....Some 'financial' pundits are claiming they could see the spike in the after-hours that began as soon as it was announced there was no 'there, there' in the Weiner emails and that it carried forward from there. The considered opinion is that it means HRC is likely to win and that would favor 'divided control' ....basically.... gridlock pays off in less volatility.
Looks like Weiner was a big nothing .... same as in my house
thisperson
Ruler of all things person
Gotta say, I'm a Hispanic and I agreed with Fareed one hundred percent. That's why my entire clan voted against the Drumpfmeister.
Tranquility
Well-Known Member
I bet people are still going to jail over what was found on his machine. It just does not implicate Hillary in regards to the classified issue on her e-mail server. (I mean, you don't see Huma out and about yet.)Exactly....Some 'financial' pundits are claiming they could see the spike in the after-hours that began as soon as it was announced there was no 'there, there' in the Weiner emails and that it carried forward from there. The considered opinion is that it means HRC is likely to win and that would favor 'divided control' ....basically.... gridlock pays off in less volatility.
Looks like Weiner was a big nothing .... same as in my house
Looks like future voters really are getting the hang of things:
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
^^^^^^^ Too Funny .... proves I'm not smarter than a fifth grader.
Tranquility
Well-Known Member
Oh noes! The alt-right has found a potential weakness! (At least in Philly.)
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...upt-Election-Day-in-Philly-with-weed-40s.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...upt-Election-Day-in-Philly-with-weed-40s.html
An "alt-right" white supremacist group says it plans to hand out liquor and marijuana in Philadelphia as a way to suppress minority voting, and claims to have secretly set up surveillance cameras in some polling places in the city, according to a report.
Politico’s Ben Schreckinger wrote that neo-Nazi leader Andrew Anglin claims to have partnered with the alt-right site TheRightStuff.biz to monitor polling places and intimidate voters in Philadelphia and elsewhere on Election Day. The group says it plans to accomplish its goal Tuesday through handing out “40s and weed” in “the ghettos in Philly,” according to an email sent to Politico.
“We also have some teams going in to the ghettos in Philly with 40s and weed to give out to the local residents, which we think will lead to more of them staying home,” read the email sent by an unnamed TheRightStuff.biz team member. “We have had success with this in the past.” The term 40s refers to 40-ounce bottles of malt liquor.
Politico’s Ben Schreckinger wrote that neo-Nazi leader Andrew Anglin claims to have partnered with the alt-right site TheRightStuff.biz to monitor polling places and intimidate voters in Philadelphia and elsewhere on Election Day. The group says it plans to accomplish its goal Tuesday through handing out “40s and weed” in “the ghettos in Philly,” according to an email sent to Politico.
“We also have some teams going in to the ghettos in Philly with 40s and weed to give out to the local residents, which we think will lead to more of them staying home,” read the email sent by an unnamed TheRightStuff.biz team member. “We have had success with this in the past.” The term 40s refers to 40-ounce bottles of malt liquor.
Baron23
Well-Known Member
I do have a view on what is often dismissively and contemptuously called "gridlock".Exactly....Some 'financial' pundits are claiming they could see the spike in the after-hours that began as soon as it was announced there was no 'there, there' in the Weiner emails and that it carried forward from there. The considered opinion is that it means HRC is likely to win and that would favor 'divided control' ....basically.... gridlock pays off in less volatility.
Looks like Weiner was a big nothing .... same as in my house
As you look at our current two very polar opposite candidates and their supporters, they are nothing but a reflection of the almost perfectly even split of the electorate in our country. This is also true in Congress but a lot of that status quo is due to gerrymandering by both parties.
Then look at the blue/red maps....the densely populated coasts are mostly true blue...while truly vast amounts of the country are dyed in the wool red.
NOBODY has mandate. The voting population of our country has not coalesce, with a a significant majority, around either of these two opposing political parties and their expressed goals and platform.
Therefore, gridlock...that is, the almost equal tug between the two parties which results in little to no new business being enacted, is EXACTLY the right thing as most it reflects the state of the electorate.
Quite frankly, I want a split government. I don't think either party represents anything close to the center anymore and I don't think that either party has sufficient support to move the country in one direction or the other.
My view, well considered, and I'm sticking to it.
lwien
Well-Known Member
.......
Tranquility
Well-Known Member
The polls are coming out saying it is essentially like flipping a coin.
Well, except that Hillary brought the coin, she will flip it herself and let us know the result.
Well, except that Hillary brought the coin, she will flip it herself and let us know the result.
GetLeft
Well-Known Member
Yeah, i don't think it would seem that way if it weren't for the Dems deciding to run up an unpopular candidate (along with the Republicans' cowardly gerrymandering).
The Trumpsters are so noticeable this election because short of an anarchy-style uprising by the ever fading far right minority (and believe me I don't count out that possibility), they are on the way out. It's their almost-last hurrah. Their America soon will be no more. Fewer and fewer Americans abide by or are tolerant of racist, sexist underpinnings (which use christianity as a cover to dupe people). It's nauseating really what they have been able to do for far too long. And thankfully, it's slowly but surely coming to an end. Because America is made up of an ever increasingly diverse people. Many of whom have been shat upon by white male privilege. And they know how to vote for what is in their best interest. Two more election cycles and the grid lock won't be what it is now. If it weren't for the rigged districts (you should see the one I live in) it wouldn't exist now. I think America's best is before us. I'm looking forward to it. The Trumpsters dread it.
That said, I'm all for seeing Republicans double down and come up with a progressive platform. Somebody somewhere has to be working hard on that, wouldn't you think?
lwien
Well-Known Member
Clinton has lead this race pretty consistently by 4 to 5 points.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Going to Philly!!! Back Wednesday!!! Keep the lights on for me.
I was enthusiastically rooting for Bernie and those hopes were dashed very quickly, I even tried to listen to Trump and see if there was any silver lining there. Clinton repeatedly disappointed me time and time again with her slimy lies and crusty old character; but she is my only option to reach the stage of grief known as "acceptance".
This election made my ballot much easier to craft. The choices became few and my legitimate options became fewer. I can't help but feel a sense of conspiracy that the system has intentionally led me to this lack of choice.
My plan is simple now:
1. Vote for Hillary in attempts to stop Trump from becoming president.
2. Vote Democratic in Congress as my way of giving the middle finger to all of the Republican congressman who are already threatening gridlock instead of compromise.
3. Try to sleep off this election like a Baaaaaaaaaaaad hangover.
God Bless America.
(Recent polls are showing a surprising trend that 100% of Americans are still Americans nonetheless)
This election made my ballot much easier to craft. The choices became few and my legitimate options became fewer. I can't help but feel a sense of conspiracy that the system has intentionally led me to this lack of choice.
My plan is simple now:
1. Vote for Hillary in attempts to stop Trump from becoming president.
2. Vote Democratic in Congress as my way of giving the middle finger to all of the Republican congressman who are already threatening gridlock instead of compromise.
3. Try to sleep off this election like a Baaaaaaaaaaaad hangover.
God Bless America.
(Recent polls are showing a surprising trend that 100% of Americans are still Americans nonetheless)
gangababa
Well-Known Member
The vast red colored square mileage of the USA that is red, not blue is not representative of mandates or not.
The total number of votes cast for our only national offices (President and Vice President) more accurately describe a mandate (should there be one, YES).
More votes total are cast for Democratic Party candidates for Congress than for Republicans, but the Republicans maintain Congress due to gerrymandering.
The argument that we in the USA want divided government and stalemate is belied by the constant critiques of no-nothing legislators.
The total number of votes cast for our only national offices (President and Vice President) more accurately describe a mandate (should there be one, YES).
More votes total are cast for Democratic Party candidates for Congress than for Republicans, but the Republicans maintain Congress due to gerrymandering.
The argument that we in the USA want divided government and stalemate is belied by the constant critiques of no-nothing legislators.
TeeJay1952
Well-Known Member
Without link (double post)
Baron23
Well-Known Member
Baron23 said: ↑
NOBODY has mandate.
I don't agree.
WRT to Republican gerrymandering....I live in Maryland. Please look at the congressional districts there....look at District 8 (hint, its the one that looks like the Rorschach test image that looks like a squished pterodactyl). I also remember the wording of the extraordinarily misleading, to the point of fraud, of the referendum item that cemented this gerrymandering. You needed a Phd in Logic and be able to diagram sentences to understand its true meaning.
The REAL reason that there is such stability in the distribution of congressional seats by party affiliation is gerrymandering across this country by both parties. Anything else is pure horseshit IMO.
So, I often think about partisans of one party or another who think all of the evil and guilt in the world conveys to their opponents...to them, I personally say YOU ARE WRONG...THEY ARE ALL SCUMBAGS.
Gosh, I feel much better now
NOBODY has mandate.
I don't agree.
WRT to Republican gerrymandering....I live in Maryland. Please look at the congressional districts there....look at District 8 (hint, its the one that looks like the Rorschach test image that looks like a squished pterodactyl). I also remember the wording of the extraordinarily misleading, to the point of fraud, of the referendum item that cemented this gerrymandering. You needed a Phd in Logic and be able to diagram sentences to understand its true meaning.
The REAL reason that there is such stability in the distribution of congressional seats by party affiliation is gerrymandering across this country by both parties. Anything else is pure horseshit IMO.
So, I often think about partisans of one party or another who think all of the evil and guilt in the world conveys to their opponents...to them, I personally say YOU ARE WRONG...THEY ARE ALL SCUMBAGS.
Gosh, I feel much better now
