Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 2016 US General Election

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • bfng,

    Trump was asked a general question with zero context.
    lol, "zero context"?

    here's the debate transcript, i'll let others judge if there's "zero context".

    WALLACE: Mr. Trump, I want to ask you about one last question in this topic. You have been warning at rallies recently that this election is rigged and that Hillary Clinton is in the process of trying to steal it from you.

    Your running mate, Governor Pence, pledged on Sunday that he and you -- his words -- "will absolutely accept the result of this election." Today your daughter, Ivanka, said the same thing. I want to ask you here on the stage tonight: Do you make the same commitment that you will absolutely -- sir, that you will absolutely accept the result of this election?

    TRUMP: I will look at it at the time. I'm not looking at anything now. I'll look at it at the time.

    What I've seen -- what I've seen is so bad. First of all, the media is so dishonest and so corrupt, and the pile-on is so amazing. The New York Times actually wrote an article about it, but they don't even care. It's so dishonest. And they've poisoned the mind of the voters.

    But unfortunately for them, I think the voters are seeing through it. I think they're going to see through it. We'll find out on November 8th. But I think they're going to see through it.

    WALLACE: But, sir, there's...

    TRUMP: If you look -- excuse me, Chris -- if you look at your voter rolls, you will see millions of people that are registered to vote -- millions, this isn't coming from me -- this is coming from Pew Report and other places -- millions of people that are registered to vote that shouldn't be registered to vote.

    So let me just give you one other thing. So I talk about the corrupt media. I talk about the millions of people -- tell you one other thing. She shouldn't be allowed to run. It's crooked -- she's -- she's guilty of a very, very serious crime. She should not be allowed to run.

    And just in that respect, I say it's rigged, because she should never...


    WALLACE: But...

    TRUMP: Chris, she should never have been allowed to run for the presidency based on what she did with e-mails and so many other things.

    WALLACE: But, sir, there is a tradition in this country -- in fact, one of the prides of this country -- is the peaceful transition of power and that no matter how hard-fought a campaign is, that at the end of the campaign that the loser concedes to the winner. Not saying that you're necessarily going to be the loser or the winner, but that the loser concedes to the winner and that the country comes together in part for the good of the country. Are you saying you're not prepared now to commit to that principle?

    TRUMP: What I'm saying is that I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense. OK?
    Your inventing the scenario and the context to fit the storyline.

    You act like Gore was just an innocent bystander to the courtd or that he had a legit legal claim to do so and rha5s makes it all OK and oh so different from what Trump did.... errr... wait a sec.... Trump didn't do anything did he?
    uh what?

    dude. read up on what actually happened, yes?

    http://www.miamiherald.com/news/loca...109522422.html

    The statewide machine recount of nearly 6 million ballots was automatically triggered under Florida law when Bush emerged less than 2,000 votes — or less than one half of 1 percent of the statewide vote — ahead of Gore after the initial count. Then, some specific county canvassing boards ordered manual recounts. And when a lawsuit was finally filed by one of the candidates, it was submitted by Bush, who sought to certify his slim lead...

    Gore’s campaign didn’t file its first legal challenge until a week after the general election, when the state’s then-secretary of state, Katherine Harris, ordered county canvassing boards to end their ballot counting in order to allow the state to certify its election results. Gore contested the results of the election after Harris, who supported Bush’s campaign, named a winner on Nov. 26.


    Gore — who ultimately conceded after a split U.S. Supreme Court ordered a halt to frantic ballot-counting in early December — alleged in his suit that South Florida vote counters had engaged in misconduct, citing specifics.

    And there-in lies another key distinction between Trump and Gore.

    “The fundamental difference is that there has been no criteria set by Mr. Trump as to what he would consider as a problem that he would be concerned about,” said Stephen Zack, an attorney who represented the Gore campaign. “We know the criteria that exists under the statute. But the criteria can’t be ‘I don't like the results.’”

    Zack said it’s also important to note that Gore ordered his attorneys and campaign to never disparage the courts or the nation’s democratic process. Richard, the Bush campaign attorney, noted that Gore’s concession was also important in the context of Trump’s disparaging of the election and his threats to jail Clinton.


    “When the process was over and the U.S. Supreme Court had decided what they decided, [Gore] accepted the results,” said Richard, a Democrat. “There was never ever an issue that either candidate would accept the results when it was over. That was understood from the beginning. Gore actually conceded the night of the vote” before retracting his concession when the results narrowed.
    Trumps claim of rigged elections and junk have nothing to do with the statement.
    please review the transcript above.

    If you want to flip the coin, do you really think if Hillary loses a close election to Trump that she'll just quietly go into the good night?
    -of course not-. i would expect her to ask for a re-count, or bring up specific evidence of irregularities. NOT, "the entire election is rigged because i'm losing."
    Last edited by astralis; 22 Oct 16,, 05:24.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

    Comment


    • Originally posted by astralis View Post
      bfng,



      lol, "zero context"?

      here's the debate transcript, i'll let others judge if there's "zero context".





      uh what?

      dude. read up on what actually happened, yes?

      http://www.miamiherald.com/news/loca...109522422.html





      please review the transcript above.



      -of course not-. i would expect her to ask for a re-count, or bring up specific evidence of irregularities. NOT, "the entire election is rigged because i'm losing."
      Well, to be fair, he does have somewhat of a point. She shouldn't be allowed to run. She should be under indictment.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Wooglin View Post
        ... She shouldn't be allowed to run. She should be under indictment.
        Who can stop her from running? She could even run while under indictment. And even if convicted. A jailed Congressman ran not too many years ago--got 40% of the vote.

        Rick Perry was under indictment when he entered the GOP primaries last year.
        To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
          Why from here
          Then you need to read more and let me know when you find 40% used

          Comment


          • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
            Then you need to read more and let me know when you find 40% used
            Why are you here?
            In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

            Leibniz

            Comment


            • Originally posted by astralis View Post

              dude. read up on what actually happened, yes?
              2:30 a.m. - 3:15 a.m. November 8, 2000: Gore Briefly Concedes Election
              Edit event

              Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic presidential candidate, calls Republican contender George W. Bush to concede the US presidential election, based on the news networks’ projection of Bush’s slim “victory” in Florida (see 2:15 a.m. November 8, 2000). According to Bush campaign advisor Karen Hughes, Gore tells Bush, “We gave them a cliffhanger.” Bush responds: “You’re a formidable opponent and a good man. I know it’s hard. I know it’s hard for your family. Give my best to Tipper [Gore’s wife] and your children.” Gore’s motorcade drives to the War Memorial Plaza in Nashville, where Gore plans to address his supporters. But by 3:15 a.m., Gore’s advisors tell him that Bush’s lead in Florida has dropped dramatically, leaving Bush with a lead of only 6,000 votes or less, well within the 0.5 percent margin that will trigger an automatic machine recount. Votes in three Democratic strongholds—Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade Counties—are still outstanding. And a computer error in Volusia County tallies shows Gore with a total of negative 16,000 votes. The numbers continue to drop; by the time Gore’s motorcade is approaching the Plaza, the tallies show a Bush lead of less than 1,000 votes. Gore returns to his Nashville hotel without addressing his supporters. Speechwriter Eli Attie later recalls, “I stopped him from going out onstage, and said, ‘With 99 percent of the vote counted, you’re only 600 votes behind.’” [National Journal, 11/9/2000; New York Times, 11/9/2000; Tapper, 3/2001; Vanity Fair, 10/2004; Leip, 2008] Minutes later, Gore calls Bush to retract his concession (see 3:30 a.m. November 8, 2000).

              Entity Tags: County of Miami-Dade (Florida), Albert Arnold (“Al”) Gore, Jr., County of Palm Beach (Florida), County of Broward (Florida), Karen Hughes, Eli Attie, George W. Bush

              Timeline Tags: 2000 Elections
              3:30 a.m. November 8, 2000: Gore Retracts Concession
              Edit event

              Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic presidential candidate, calls Republican contender George W. Bush to retract his concession of the presidential election (see 2:30 a.m. - 3:15 a.m. November 8, 2000). “Circumstances have changed dramatically since I first called you,” Gore says. “The state of Florida is too close to call.” Bush says: “Are you saying what I think you’re saying? Let me make sure I understand. You’re calling me back to retract your concession.” Gore responds, “You don’t have to be snippy about it.” Bush informs Gore that his brother, Governor Jeb Bush of Florida, has assured him he has already won Florida (see 2:15 a.m. November 8, 2000 and November 7-8, 2000). Gore replies, “Your younger brother is not the ultimate authority on this.” Instead of giving a concession speech as planned, Gore sends his campaign chairman, former Commerce Secretary William Daley, to speak to the gathering at Nashville’s War Memorial Plaza. “Our campaign continues,” Daley says. New polling data shows that Florida, still projected to go to Bush as the last needed electoral victory, is once again too close to be accurately predicted. Bush calls his cousin John Ellis, who is anchoring Fox News’s election night coverage (see October-November 2000), and says, “Gore unconceded.” Ellis responds, “You’re kidding.” Within the hour, the networks will, for the second time (see 9:30 p.m. November 7, 2000), retract their projection and classify Florida as “too close to call” (see 3:57 a.m. - 4:15 a.m. November 8, 2000). Bush campaign chairman Donald Evans orders aides to be on a 6 a.m. flight to Florida to begin contesting the recounts. Gore aides give similar orders to their personnel. [CNN, 12/13/2000; Tapper, 3/2001; Vanity Fair, 10/2004; Leip, 2008]
              Source
              In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

              Leibniz

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                But among them I wouldn't call any but Grant, McKinley, and Ike military men. They reached general officer rank and had major administrative responsibility, and BTW didn't do so bad as president. So, I'm not sure I agree that military men are in the same class as businessmen when it comes to holding high public office.
                I’d beg to differ. Grant had the Panic of 1873, native American eradication, and one of the worst records for corruption of any presidency . McKinley was a strict protectionist gold bug, launched the Spanish-American War. Eisenhower was a bit too fond of CIA coups

                = = = = =

                Originally posted by bfng3569 View Post
                According to Democrats our voting system is corrupt.

                I forget the name of the group that recently formed (I could have sworn Obama is going to be a part of it as well), but essentially it's a dem organization that's going to be trying to get voting districts re-districted with the claim the Republicans have been manipulating the districts over the years in their favor to maintain control over local government.

                If they are correct, Republicans have been manipulating the system, if they are incorrect dems are trying to manipulate the system.

                Either way, it kind of stinks of some level of corruption.
                The group you’re thinking of is called ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council. It’s essentially a Koch Brothers gerrymandering off-shoot. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americ...change_Council
                see also: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016...racy-betrayed/

                = = = = =

                Originally posted by drhuy View Post
                aint demcrats still whinning about how gore lost in florida?
                Democrats, Syrians, Iraqis, … lots of people “whinning” about that stolen election.
                Trust me?
                I'm an economist!

                Comment


                • I am sure Syrians hold a particular grudge.
                  Those who know don't speak
                  He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                    I'm inclined to agree with you, although his insistence on repeating some falsehoods after they'd been debunked diminished his credibility. That is, if you know the facts, which I suspect many don't.

                    Case in point, Trump once again sought to excuse his enormous tax deductions by charging that fellow billionaire Warren Buffett also takes "hundreds of millions" in loss carry forward deductions on his tax returns. Buffett handily refuted that claim over a week ago by released his tax info for 2015 showing that he paid about $1.5 million in taxes and had less than $6 million in deductions, of which half were for charitable donations.

                    Another example, last night Trump again accused HRC of mishandling $6 billion in State Dept funds, although last week State's inspector general clarified the situation. It wasn't that the money was missing, but that the paperwork for the projects in question had not been completed properly.




                    Yes. Especially when the end result is headlines like, Trump refuses to say he'll accept outcome of election; Trump Eastwood moment--bad "hombres"; Trump calls HRC a "nasty woman".
                    Is this one of those "facts" that Trump got wrong? If so, you need to chuck your fact-checking website: it's confusing knowledge for wisdom.

                    Buffet gets all sorts of preferential tax treatment due to the way he structures his income. He does make ungodly amounts of money and does pay some income taxes, but that's besides the point. It's also probably true, on its face, that Buffet never claimed a carry-forward NOL as a tax deduction, but that's also confusing knowledge for wisdom and besides the point.

                    1. Buffet does get preferential tax treatment.
                    2. He IS extremely well-connected and tries to rig laws in his favor: go check the history of Dodd-Frank.
                    3. More broadly, the biggest problem with the US economy is over-financialization, not "business-men" in general. Buffet is much more an example of what's wrong with the US economy than Donald Trump. George Soros is also a better example than the Koch brothers. Trump and Koch are both people who actually build crap (though Trump is mostly branding at this point), Buffet and Soros are old-school rentiers straight out of a Dickens novel.

                    Originally posted by drhuy View Post
                    aint demcrats still whinning about how gore lost in florida?
                    They whined about it for years, academics even posted studies about how Gore "really won," and 4 years later they promised that Diebold was going to steal the election for Bush. Per WikiLeaks, John Kerry still thinks the election was rigged against him.

                    This is an utterly stupid line of conversation and a great example why debates are pretty pointless from a policy perspective.

                    Even Hillary doesn't come across as a policy wonk in these things:
                    -Mosul is next to Syria?
                    -You actually want the Kurds to take over Syria, and then say you want to make ALLIES at the same time?
                    -You think a hemispheric policy grid is a GOOD idea? (Dumber than Trump's Wall)
                    -You want to eliminate tax deductions for NOL?
                    -You think Mosul is a "sunni" city? (It's more multi-ethnic these days)
                    -You want to take the rich people's tax increases and spend all of it instead of reducing the deficit?
                    -You actually think Obama-care is a success? (About 1 bad year away from death-spiral)
                    -You think DC vs. Heller is about child safety?
                    -You think Roe V Wade says "health of the mother" is a requirement? (Both these Supreme Court interpretations are 99% wrong)
                    -"Middle out" economic growth? WTF is that?

                    Eisenhower was a bit too fond of defending America
                    Fixed for you.
                    He took office in the midst of a Cold War in danger of turning hot.

                    Grant was a shit President, but McKinley wasn't terribly bad given the times.

                    JFK had the Bay of Pigs (also a military man).

                    If you're looking at Post-War Presidents, your insiders are LBJ and Nixon. And, yes, both were WAY more effective than any of the others. They were also legitimately terrifying.

                    If you want principled leader, you want Dubya and Carter. Both were pretty ineffective, disliked, and had certain principles entirely at odds with reality.

                    If you want idealistic change agents, you want JFK, Obama, and Reagan (all of whom I think are terribly overrated).

                    If you want the President most in touch with the common man, you want Truman.

                    Your gifted politician was Slick Willie.

                    My favorites are the ones who are just there, Ford and HW, but neither could win an election on their own for the life of them: Ford was appointed and HW rode Reagan's coat-tails.

                    There's no single arch-type that's going to be a good President, it all depends on the conditions of the time. If you are a modern-day Progressive, you want LBJ for this environment, of which Hillary is the closest approximate. If you are a Republican, you probably would want an Eisenhower (triangulating mega-personality) and not Reagan, which means Republicans probably should've gone with Chris Christie out of the major candidates (except the his Jersey corruption would've killed him), or drafted in Colin Powell.
                    Yeah, he wasn't running, but you just change the rules of the convention and give him the nomination anyways. A Cincinnatus would have set a good precedent for the Republic, too, the opposite of DJT.
                    Last edited by GVChamp; 22 Oct 16,, 14:06.
                    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                    Comment


                    • Where did you get that 40% were deplorable enough to be dismissed as racist, sexist,...
                      Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                      Why from here

                      Originally Posted by Hillary Clinton
                      You know, just to be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people, now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now some of those folks, they are irredeemable. But thankfully they are not America.
                      to which I replied


                      Trump, with all his lies and poison and failings still gets more than 40% support.
                      Do you truly believe that forty percent of the people who co-inhabit your land-mass can and should continue to be dismissed as "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it." Simply because with all his faults, they still regard him as a better person than Hillary Clinton?
                      It's certainly how you view me but then we live in very different cultures with nothing comparable but a commonly shared inherited language.
                      How are you going to coexist with the people who serve you, work with you, provide your food etc when 2 out of 5 are people you despise?
                      It's really not difficult.
                      It would be 20% of our cohabitants 50% of 40=20

                      Comment


                      • when about 40% of Republicans think that Obama was not born in the US/is a Muslim, yeah, I'd say that her statement is fair. especially when their nominee was a birther for about half a decade.
                        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ambidex View Post
                          How many such Dinners coincided with elections few weeks away ?
                          Its an annual event held on the 3rd Thursday of October. Down ballot candidates speak in non presidential years.
                          “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                          Mark Twain

                          Comment


                          • JAD, McKinley made it to Brevet major. Perhaps you are thinking Rutherford Hayes who made it to Brevet major general? Good combat men both. Interestingly McKinley enlisted as a private in the regiment for which Hayes was the major...23rd Ohio.
                            “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                            Mark Twain

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                              It would be 20% of our cohabitants 50% of 40=20
                              Thanks...I was told there would be no math on the WAB.

                              And Iain, based on some of the folks I see around here...yeah...I can believe 20% of those polled fall into this arena. I live this daily in my county. Don't like it but I just move along because I have faith in the remaining 60%. The missing 20%? They are the equivalents on the left. They are don't think like me but that's okay. They at least least are willing to operate in open discourse.
                              “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                              Mark Twain

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                                Is this one of those "facts" that Trump got wrong? If so, you need to chuck your fact-checking website: it's confusing knowledge for wisdom.
                                Don't underrate knowledge; there's no wisdom without it. And BTW I didn't use a fact checking site.

                                Buffet gets all sorts of preferential tax treatment due to the way he structures his income. He does make ungodly amounts of money and does pay some income taxes, but that's besides the point. It's also probably true, on its face, that Buffet never claimed a carry-forward NOL as a tax deduction, but that's also confusing knowledge for wisdom and besides the point.
                                The fact remains that Trump, facing questions about his large loss carry-forward, accused Buffett by implication of doing the same. He did it before and after Buffett gave evidence to the contrary. People who noticed it could very well question his honesty. Whether people did or did not pick up on it, or whether it influenced them, is beside the point. The potential was there and, therefore, Trump would have been wise to have left Buffett's name out of the last debate.

                                My comment was debate specific. So, I see no need to get into the finer details of Buffett's tax strategies, of which I know little about.
                                To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X