US Elections 2016 Part II: The Debates & General Election

[Urzu 7]

I love how one woman's response to the latest Trump controversy is "We are voting for a president, not for someone to be the pope". Well then! I guess all you Trump supporters can stop holding everything against Hillary; everything factual, the partial-truths, and all those zany fabrications.

[Ithekro]

Well unlike Trump, Clinton has been in a Federal position of power and what she did during her time there has some people afraid of what she might do with greater power.

Trump has not held office so one cannot be certain what he may or may not do in such a position of power, or if he will be able to do anything given how the checks and balances are laid out at the Federal level, and not having the connections that Clinton would obviously have considering her being in or near power a position of power in the Federal government for over 20 years now...closing on 25, plus being around power before that, not only in Arkansas, but also her work in the 70s as far back as I guess Watergate.

[MCAL]

Wow. Donald Trump is pretty close to losing it...

EDIT: Anyone else notice Trump constantly hovering behind Clinton whenever she speaks. It literally looks like he's some kind of predator. And he's constantly interrupted her too (Which she hasn't done once. She also sits down when he talks too).

EDIT 2: Oh Clinton is going for the kill now.

EDIT 3: Is Trump ever going to answer a question?

EDIT 4: Thank god! It's over!

[OH&S]

Watched it live from my workplace... in Australia.

Shillary landed some solid blows and one liners but made some pretty silly missteps like mentioning russia in the wikileaks question.

Drumpf was pathetic in most of his questions. That said, whenever he had ammo, he did a good job of using it against Shillary. A shame his tax plan is complete BS.

[Asuras]

Trump's "Sneak Attack" sounds like the musings of a twelve year old in the midst of some Call of Duty multiplayer.

[KiraYamatoFan]

Two things I hated about Trump:

1) He said he would appoint a special prosecutor against Hillary and raised the possibility of putting her in jail if he's elected. That is a violation of the rules of democracy where you don't ever threaten a political rival in a presidential race; it is Nixonian and bordering dictatorial. For me, that should be the next angle of attack from anyone who hates Trump.

2) When asked about health policy, he spends time ranting against Obamacare (which is a program in its infancy and in need of "growing up" through improvement) and yet proposes fuck all of a replacement program. Basically, he throws the baby with the bathwater.

For the record, he shat on Canada's healthcare system. Hey, Don, FUCK YOU!

About Hillary, I have a few gripes:

1) When the question was raised about Trump's depiction of sexual assault, she should have launched a full attack on that. It could have been coupled with the nasty stuff Trump spat on Alicia Machado. A cocktail of the 2 elements put together would have been fatal to Trump.

2) When the matter of divisiveness was brought up, Hillary didn't bring the part where Trump said that the Central Part Five are still guilty to him although they have been exonerated years ago. That comment itself was a reflection of Trump's hate-minded mentality against minorities, and should have been a killer if well exploited.

In all, it was more like a draw tonight. As someone who is a big football/soccer fan said in a different forum: It's like she won 3 - 0 in the away leg and just wanted to play it nice and safe for the home leg. The result tonight doesn't help Trump, but Trump should have been knocked out tonight knowing that he was in the ropes after the last couple of days. It's not like the GOP can replace Trump anyway; they wasted the opportunity to do so back in September.

And for the record: fact checks

[MCAL]

Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan

1) He said he would appoint a special prosecutor against Hillary and raised the possibility of putting her in jail if he's elected. That is a violation of the rules of democracy where you don't ever threaten a political rival in a presidential race; it is Nixonian and bordering dictatorial. For me, that should be the next angle of attack from anyone who hates Trump.[/URL]

And there was applause for that too. Trump supporters are truly insane.

The media is surprisingly quite about this too. So much for being biased against him.

[Reckoner]

Only in totalitarian regimes do you see a presidential candidate threaten to throw his opponent in jail on stage.

Donald's performance is a feel good for his base, but does nothing to get potential swing voters. Among swing voters he pretty much needs to win 80-20 to catch Hillary now and that just doesn't seem likely in any scenario barring epic release from wikileaks. He basically lost the election tonight. Hillary won by virtue of not being a creepy bully with an undiagnosed personality disorder.

[Ithekro]

Because there are plenty of people that want Clinton to pay for her alleged crimes while she was Secretary of State. The more extreme want both her and Obama charged with treason.

[Reckoner]

Yes. If irresponsible public figures drum up lies and channel hatred in sinister ways, it's no surprise the base is worked into a frenzy. The problem is, there is no factual evidence that she ever committed a crime like they said. These people do not deserve our respect. I think Bill Maher put it best about this.

[KiraYamatoFan]

Originally Posted by MCAL

And there was applause for that too. Trump supporters are truly insane.

The media is surprisingly quite about this too. So much for being biased against him.

Trump's hardcore supporters truly are deplorable. Even though some of us may have wished it in the past, Democrats never went that far with the mere idea of imprisoning George W. Bush for misleading the American public on the Iraq War.

CNN barely mentioned about Trump's comments. If anything, the panel should have spent a lot more time hitting that nail; just the quote itself should make lots of people cringe when those people believe in the principles of democracy. Keith Olbermann will have a field day if he picks up on what he said last week about Trump doing something very un-American in this election:

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Yes. If irresponsible public figures drum up lies and channel hatred in sinister ways, it's no surprise the base is worked into a frenzy. The problem is, there is no factual evidence that she ever committed a crime like they said. These people do not deserve our respect.

This.

[MCAL]

Well facts and reality have always been secondary to Trump's base so this isn't surprising.

Anyway there's was plenty to disqualify Trump with on the debate. He...

1.) Basically never sat throughout the debate and spent most of it lurking behind Clinton every time she talked which many who have suffered something similar saw as predatory.
2.)Interrupted Clinton many times that he had to be reprimanded by the moderators (His base will no doubt claim they were being biased against him instead of, I don't know, getting him to behave like a human being)
3)Certainly isn't getting that minority vote as he continued to propagate the falsehood that a great deal of African Americans are living in the inner cities and in poverty (Which I'll remind everyone is racist thinking. Not the mention "THE African Americans" like they're objects or something). Oh yeah and answering the Islamophobia question with an Islamophobic answer.
4.)This in addition to the many things he's done all along like repeatedly dodging THE questions asked of him, providing zero substance to his policies and his lies (I did not say check out the sex tape. Like Holy shit Donald)

So yeah by any conceivable measure Trump lost this debate again. I expect it won't be as bad as the first debate in the polls but it hardly matters. Like you said Reckoner, its the undecided voters, not Trump's lunatic, bigoted, misogynistic base that are at stake here.

EDIT: https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/1...t-debate-poll/
Basically what I expected.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Brother Coa

Not directly, but British were not pleased to lose millions each year because of some random sanctions over some peninsula on the other end of Europe. Just like the migrant crisis, Russian sanctions were also part of indirect effect on opinion on British public who voted for "leave".

No, there was never any perception that we were losing millions each year from the sanctions (nor would it make any sense because Britain itself strongly backed those sanctions). There was no indirect effect whatsoever.

[Brother Coa]

Originally Posted by Haak

No, there was never any perception that we were losing millions each year from the sanctions (nor would it make any sense because Britain itself strongly backed those sanctions). There was no indirect effect whatsoever.

Read this and notice how many times word "billions" is used. I rest my case.

As for US elections... little less than a month before all this mess is over and then the real suffering will start.

I have been following this elections and I have been laughing about them and trying to find bright spots in them because they are depressing as hell otherwise. Why US ended up with them? Among millions of better suited and educated young people with bright ideas?

It's no matter now... because whoever wins all of us will lose... Why is it every time Mankind makes two steps forward something must happen to take it 3 or 5 steps backwards?

We already had that when Rome and China fell, and later on Arabian culture and World Wars. We don't need another step back right now.

[Key Board]

It really annoys me that one candidate is a neo liberal war hawk and the other chooses to make war on minorities and wants to threaten and extort allies

There really isn't an ideal option when it comes to national security

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan

In all, it was more like a draw tonight. As someone who is a big football/soccer fan said in a different forum: It's like she won 3 - 0 in the away leg and just wanted to play it nice and safe for the home leg.

That's a good analogy. Mind you, we has to acknowledge that Clinton, as a powerful female politician, is playing a much harder game than Trump. She has to balance her attacks on Trump ("weak" vs "bitch"), her policy substance ("says nothing" vs. "boring know-it-all"), empathy with the town hall questioners ("robot" vs. "hysterical") in a way that a male politician with Trump's persona and low expectations gets away with. It's a tightrope; subconscious sexism is still a reality, especially at that level. There's a reason most of the first and second generations of successful and powerful female world leaders have to be, at some level, more "manly" (ugh) than the men. Golda Meir, Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi, Margaret Thatcher, and now Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel, and Theresa May: how many times have they been described as "Iron Ladies?"

Maybe someone like Cristina Kirchner, the ex-Argentine leader, is different; I don't know much about her except that Argentina did not do well under her lead, at all + there's the Evita legacy inherent in the Peronist tradition over there.

It doesn't help that Clinton is not really a good frontrunner. Put her back against the wall and she'll annihilate you (witness: Benghazi commission hearings), let her have a safe lead and she's as dull as Mourinho defending a 1 goal lead. No offense to Manchester United.

Having said that, because the debate didn't have a clear direction, the "victory" will be won in the press rooms. It is up to which team can spin the debate to fit the prevailing narrative the most. If it remains "what an ugly debate," then Trump did slow down the bleeding. If it becomes "Clinton Wall Street Wikileaks," then Trump won. If the narrative focuses on Trump's sexual assault non-apology, or his jail comment, or his break with Pence, then Clinton won.

Still, I found this debate really disheartening. Ugh.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Brother Coa

Read this and notice how many times word "billions" is used. I rest my case.

Good because it's a complete Non-sequitur. It makes no reference to British perceptions whatsoever.

It also disproves your notion that the sactions were extremely damaging because those "billions" are clearly illustrated at small change in the grander scheme of things and all if not most of those references to "billions" refers to the EU as a whole, not the UK.

Once again your reading comprehension is circumspect.

[Eisdrache]

Originally Posted by Brother Coa

As for US elections... little less than a month before all this mess is over and then the real suffering will start.

I have been following this elections and I have been laughing about them and trying to find bright spots in them because they are depressing as hell otherwise. Why US ended up with them? Among millions of better suited and educated young people with bright ideas?

It's no matter now... because whoever wins all of us will lose... Why is it every time Mankind makes two steps forward something must happen to take it 3 or 5 steps backwards?

We already had that when Rome and China fell, and later on Arabian culture and World Wars. We don't need another step back right now.

1) Name ten people that are better than either candidate. Since there are 'millions' surely this shouldn't be hard. It's just funny when you say 'there are so many better' but when asked 'who?' they struggle to come up with an answer.

2) If we really would go back more for every time we go forward then we would still be in the stone age which is not the case. It is highly amusing that this presidential election gets put on the same level as WORLD WARS. Even if Trump were to get elected some people clearly lost touch with reality.

[Brother Coa]

Good because it's a complete Non-sequitur. It makes no reference to British perceptions whatsoever.

Actually it does as Britain is still part of the EU and this hurts her as well. Also these are not small changes - these are all losses. Unrecoverable losses, and they are in the billions. Add migrant crisis and economic crisis and you have perfect recipe for disaster.

Once again, you are not looking at the bigger picture. As such, I am done for good now.

[QUOTE=Eisdrache;5962004]1) Name ten people that are beteer than either candidate. Since there are 'millions' surely this shouldn't be hard. It's just funny when you say 'there are so many better' but when asked 'who?' they struggle to come up with an answer.[/quotes]

1. Bernie Sanders
2. Bill Gates
3. Sheldon Adelson
4. Ginni Rometty
5. Elon Musk
6. Rick Perry
7. Bill de Blasio
8. Eric Garcetti
9. Ed Lee
10. Michael Hancock

Hell, even Arnold can be much better president than either of those two. Even if he is not born in the US.

2) If we really would go back more for every time we go forward then we would still be in the stone age which is not the case. It is highly amusing that this presidential election gets put on the same level as WORLD WARS. Even if Trump were to get elected some people clearly lost touch with reality.

No, but if none of the after-mentioned backtracking never occurred we would colonize half of Milky Way galaxy by now. It is widely accepted that if Ancient world knowledge was not lost and Dark Ages never happened we would travel between stars by now. And giving how many older sites they are discovering that predates even the most early cultures one must ask himself how many was lost before the rise of Greeks and Romans.

And we can return to the stone age very easily and start over again, we woudl reach current state again in some 3 to 4.000 years. Even if we lost all knowledge we posses today we can stat over again.

And this election is on the same level of world wars in catastrophic sense. If it was any other 3'rd world country nobody would give a damn. But this is US, world only left superpower that holds some 80% of world economy standing. These two can only downgrade it, Hilary with her 'status quo' policy that is slowly cracking at the edges and Trump at his unrealistic plans for recovery.

So as I said, whoever wins - we lose.

[ganbaru]

John Oliver - Republican Reactions to Trump's Lewd Remarks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RNBJFLU7Oc