US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[skyguy918]

Not at all. It's 2 separate comments. 1 is Trump will be president not based on any polling info and a separate comment about the polling in this election cycle.

It's a stira, or it's nonsense. What is he basing his first comment on, other than his boich?

[Dan]

In Ohio they only count the write in votes of those who are registered as write-in candidates. So if you vote for Kasich, your vote will not be counted or reported.

Great point.
Evan McMullin it is.

[good sam]

Great point.
Evan McMullin it is.

So ridiculous. You're voting for the candidate that nobody took time to dig up dirt on. Why don't you do some research and discover that he's a menuval just like the rest of them. Maybe.

[Dan]

So ridiculous. You're voting for the candidate that nobody took time to dig up dirt on. Why don't you do some research and discover that he's a menuval just like the rest of them. Maybe.

B'chavod, let me know what you find.
There was dirt on Romney and Bush too ya' know. Just not the kind of dirt that would cause me to lose sleep at night for supporting like exist on Clinton and Trump.

And it's not just the dirt, it's also the policies. On Israel, trade, and more I don't care for Trump's policies.

[ilherman]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/youll-likely-be-reading-one-of-these-5-articles-the-day-after-the-election/

[aygart]

The latest from Scott Adams:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152293480726/the-bully-party

Today I put Trump’s odds of winning in a landslide back to 98%. Remember, I told you a few weeks ago that Trump couldn’t win unless “something changed.”
Something just changed.

What changed? That he "just now" endorsed Trump.

Why?

Yes, yes, I realize Trump supporters say bad things about Clinton supporters too. I don’t defend the bad apples on either side. I’ll just point out that Trump’s message is about uniting all Americans under one flag. The Clinton message is that some Americans are good people and the other 40% are some form of deplorables, deserving of shame, vandalism, punishing taxation, and violence. She has literally turned Americans on each other. It is hard for me to imagine a worse thing for a presidential candidate to do.
I’ll say that again.
As far as I can tell, the worst thing a presidential candidate can do is turn Americans against each other. Clinton is doing that, intentionally.
Intentionally.
As I often say, I don’t know who has the best policies. I don’t know the best way to fight ISIS and I don’t know how to fix healthcare or trade deals. I don’t know which tax policies are best to lift the economy. I don’t know the best way to handle any of that stuff. (And neither do you.) But I do have a bad reaction to bullies. And I’ve reached my limit.

I hope you have too. Therefore…
I endorse Donald Trump for President of the United States because I oppose bullying in all its forms.
I don’t defend Trump’s personal life. Neither Trump nor Clinton are role models for our children. Let’s call that a tie, at worst.
The bullies are welcome to drown in their own bile while those of us who want a better world do what we’ve been doing for hundreds of years: Work to make it better while others complain about how we’re doing it.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152337049156/watch-the-persuasion-battle

The takeaway here is that my message about Clinton supporters being bullies is effective persuasion. Otherwise I would be ignored. This reframing is a kill shot because the bullies themselves are philosophically opposed to bullies. Once they realize they have been persuaded by Clinton’s campaign to become the thing they hate, the spell will be broken. And they won’t show up to vote.

[cholent]

The latest from Scott Adams:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152293480726/the-bully-party

What changed? That he "just now" endorsed Trump.

Why?

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152337049156/watch-the-persuasion-battle

That's hilarious. He's opposing Clinton for intentionally turning Americans against each other and for being a bully? Those are the defining pillars of Trump's campaign

[aygart]

Those are the defining pillars of Trump's campaign

How so?

[Toasted]

How so?

Because that's how the Clinton campaign defined it for him/her.

[cholent]

How so?

Trump has from the start based his campaign on being anti-Latino, aligning himself with people like David Duke, and his whole campaign has been winking and dog whistling the far right anti-minority crowd. Why this doesn't bother more people here is beyond me.

As for him being a bully... seriously? His constant litigation even when he has no chance of actually winning. His current statement that he will sue every woman who has accused him (and then his campaign says the fact that they haven't accused him in the past proves they're lying...). His name-calling and put downs. His behavior on the debate stage in both the primaries and the more recent debates.

Because that's how the Clinton campaign defined it for him/her.

Thanks for the insinuation that if anyone doesn't support your preferred candidate it must be because they are incapable of thinking for themselves.

[aygart]

Trump has from the start based his campaign on being anti-Latino

How so? By being anti illegal immigration? How has he been anti Latino citizens?

aligning himself with people like David Duke, and his whole campaign has been winking and dog whistling the far right anti-minority crowd.

How has he aligned himself with David Duke? He disavowed him numerous times both before and after the supposed non-disavowal.

As far as dog whistles, they are only heard by dogs. In most cases the only ones hearing them are the ones complaining about the dog whistles. Those are purely questions of your perception and may have more to do with your biases than anything else. If you have fallen for the MSM narrative that would explain it.

As for him being a bully... seriously?

Cognitive dissonance alert.

His constant litigation even when he has no chance of actually winning.

Source? Either way nothing close to inciting violence.

His current statement that he will sue every woman who has accused him (and then his campaign says the fact that they haven't accused him in the past proves they're lying...).

Let us assume for argument's sake that these women are all making up stories as he is claiming. In such a scenario would he be wrong for suing them?

What his campaign says is purely PR for campaign purposes to convince the public and shows nothing about what may be brought up in court.

His name-calling and put downs.

You mean like calling people Nazis and comparing them to Hitler?

His behavior on the debate stage in both the primaries and the more recent debates.

You will need to be more specific about how his debate tactics are bullying and how they come close to inciting violence. Also, these are all tactics against people who have attacked him. That differs significantly from bullying half the country.

[Toasted]

Trump has from the start based his campaign on being anti-Latino, aligning himself with people like David Duke, and his whole campaign has been winking and dog whistling the far right anti-minority crowd. Why this doesn't bother more people here is beyond me.

As for him being a bully... seriously? His constant litigation even when he has no chance of actually winning. His current statement that he will sue every woman who has accused him (and then his campaign says the fact that they haven't accused him in the past proves they're lying...). His name-calling and put downs. His behavior on the debate stage in both the primaries and the more recent debates.

Thanks for the insinuation that if anyone doesn't support your preferred candidate it must be because they are incapable of thinking for themselves.

I apologize for the insinuation. The potential problem with Trump is that he is a egoistic nutjob who won't get anything done other than invent ways to get more attention. This 'pitting americans against each other' argument is trademarked clinton campaign language which is classic democrat blackmail against anyone who will tackle the immigration and/or muslim issue.

[good sam]

How so? By being anti illegal immigration? How has he been anti Latino citizens?How has he aligned himself with David Duke? He disavowed him numerous times both before and after the supposed non-disavowal.

As far as dog whistles, they are only heard by dogs. In most cases the only ones hearing them are the ones complaining about the dog whistles. Those are purely questions of your perception and may have more to do with your biases than anything else. If you have fallen for the MSM narrative that would explain it.
Cognitive dissonance alert.
Source? Either way nothing close to inciting violence.
Let us assume for argument's sake that these women are all making up stories as he is claiming. In such a scenario would he be wrong for suing them?

What his campaign says is purely PR for campaign purposes to convince the public and shows nothing about what may be brought up in court.
You mean like calling people Nazis and comparing them to Hitler?
You will need to be more specific about how his debate tactics are bullying and how they come close to inciting violence. Also, these are all tactics against people who have attacked him. That differs significantly from bullying half the country.

Well done.

Surprised he didn't mention that Trump called all Mexicans rapists (false), and more recently, bad hombres (false). Or that he attacked a gold star family (false).

If you don't pay attention to what's actually said, you are at serious risk of being wrongly educated by the media.

[aygart]

I apologize for the insinuation. The potential problem with Trump is that he is a egoistic nutjob who won't get anything done other than invent ways to get more attention.

You are making it as ifyou want someone to get things done. I would much rather the government just not mak things worse.

[Toasted]

You are making it as ifyou want someone to get things done. I would much rather the government just not mak things worse.

For things not to get worse, some serious things need to get done.

[aygart]

http://amgreatness.com/2016/10/24/orthodox-rabbi-supports-trump/

[Boruch999]

http://amgreatness.com/2016/10/24/orthodox-rabbi-supports-trump/

Wow

[tov hashem]

http://amgreatness.com/2016/10/24/orthodox-rabbi-supports-trump/

great point.     So I have decided that on November 8 I am not going to vote for Clinton or Trump. Instead, I am going to vote for the federal judiciary.

[CS1]

http://amgreatness.com/2016/10/24/orthodox-rabbi-supports-trump/

looks about right. Include the higher risk of extremist terrorism in 2016 - 2020, and we'll need the entire team that the Republican party, and the stronger judicial bench, and the confident international-leadership-power that the Republican party, as a whole can offer, and stamp out terrorism with.

It's not these flawed individuals. It's seeing the potential results of the future impact that they bring along once elected.

[good sam]

Again with the stairs and the mysterious handler.

https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet/status/791404620333678592