Trump

vimothy

vimothy

yurp
My own (uninformed and distant) impression is that the outcome is really volatile and driven by emotions. Both candidates are heavily compromised and it's easy to imagine more revelations appear that throw the whole thing up in the air again.
 
Leo

Leo

Well-known member
absolutely, the hardcore trump base (35% of voters) will never leave him, they love him and hate her with a passion...as he said earlier this year, he could shoot someone on fifth avenue and not lose that support. but he can't win a national election with 35-42% of voters, which is where he's been throughout the entire general election. hillary is approaching 50% due in the polls due to the democratic base plus gradual addition of independents, undecideds and former third-party voters.

as i said earlier, there are fewer undecideds or "persuadables" every week, and that dwindling number is just one of his many problems. i know people who were swayed to hillary (or at least away from voting for trump) by the combination of the first debate and the "pussy" video. the second debate stemmed the tide of more people bailing on trump but didn't do much to improve his numbers. and maybe the reason behind the continued media narrative is because it's supported by data: hillary up 3-4 percent before first debate/pussygate, up 9-11 points after.

anyway, this is probably the most constructive thing to come out of this whole election: http://www.epicurious.com/expert-advice/john-podesta-risotto-tips-article?mbid=social_facebook
 
Last edited:
Corpsey

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Mr. Tea said:
It was said many times during the Dem leadership race that Sanders lacks widespread support among non-white voters, but that can hardly be more of a problem for him than for Trump, right? Even if many black and Hispanic voters preferred Clinton, I expect a great majority of them would have seen Sanders as infinitely preferable to a Trump presidency.
Click to expand...

Why do non-white voters love the Clintons?
 
Corpsey

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
400x225


I was blind but now I see
 
Leo

Leo

Well-known member
poll doubters might enjoy this: How One 19-Year-Old Illinois Man Is Distorting National Polling Averages

There is a 19-year-old black man in Illinois who has no idea of the role he is playing in this election.

He is sure he is going to vote for Donald J. Trump.

And he has been held up as proof by conservatives — including outlets like Breitbart News and The New York Post — that Mr. Trump is excelling among black voters. He has even played a modest role in shifting entire polling aggregates, like the Real Clear Politics average, toward Mr. Trump.

How? He’s a panelist on the U.S.C. Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Daybreak poll, which has emerged as the biggest polling outlier of the presidential campaign. Despite falling behind by double digits in some national surveys, Mr. Trump has generally led in the U.S.C./LAT poll. He held the lead for a full month until Wednesday, when Hillary Clinton took a nominal lead.

Our Trump-supporting friend in Illinois is a surprisingly big part of the reason. In some polls, he’s weighted as much as 30 times more than the average respondent, and as much as 300 times more than the least-weighted respondent.
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/u...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Corpsey said:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/12/donald-trump-jeffrey-epstein-alleged-rape-lawsuit

Counsels to Jeffrey Epstein and (potentially President Elect) Trump to appear in court over allegation that Trump raped a 13 year old girl.
Click to expand...

The Guardian investigation found that a publicist calling himself “Al Taylor” attempted to sell the video tape of “Jane Doe” relating her allegations for $1m. It linked Taylor through a variety of means including shared email addresses and phone numbers to Norm Lubow, who used to work on Jerry Springer’s daytime talk show.

Lubow was connected to a contentious claim, raised in the 1998 documentary movie Kurt and Courtney, that Courtney Love offered a fellow musician $50,000 to murder her husband, Kurt Cobain of Nirvana. Love denied the charge.

According to the New York Post, Lubow was also behind a tabloid newspaper story that OJ Simpson bought illicit drugs on the day his estranged wife Nicole Brown was killed.

When the Guardian quizzed “Al Taylor” about his true identity, the publicist replied: “Just be warned, we’ll sue you if we don’t like what you write. We’ll sue your ass, own your ass and own your newspaper’s ass as well, punk.”
Click to expand...

Charmant!
 
Leo

Leo

Well-known member
vimothy said:
"Kurt Eichenwald: Campaign’s worst hack (so far)": http://washingtonbabylon.com/kurt-eichenwald-campaigns-worst-hack-so-far/
Click to expand...

this guy's website is a little wacky and he's a columnist for the new york observer (which is owner by trump's son-in-law jared kushner), but makes a few interesting points. the media is far from perfect, i'd say this is about 30% accurate and the rest is spin. much of it is him basically blaming the clinton campaign for doing their job: promoting story lines that support their candidate. d'uh!
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
If half of the accusations and rumours that have been flying around for the past several months have anything in them, Donald Trump has spent most of his life doing the Clinton campaign's work for them.

I mean, I doubt Jane Doe has accused Trump of raping her when she was 13 just because she really likes Hilary.
 
vimothy

vimothy

yurp
[The thousands of emails released by Wikileaks] provided a revealing glimpse into the inner workings of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign. They show a candidacy that began expecting a coronation and was thrown badly off course by a misreading of the electorate and a struggle to define what she stood for. Stretching over nine years, but drawn mainly from the past two years, the correspondence captures in detail the campaign’s extreme caution and difficulty in identifying a core rationale for her candidacy, and the noisy world of advisers, friends and family members trying to exert influence.

(...)

The private discussions among her advisers about policy — on trade, on the Black Lives Matter movement, on Wall Street regulation — often revolved around the political advantages and pitfalls of different positions, while there was little or no discussion about what Mrs. Clinton actually believed. Mrs. Clinton’s team at times seemed consumed with positioning and optics.

In August 2015, her aides debated how Mrs. Clinton should reveal her long-awaited position on an issue of major concern to the Democratic electorate: the Keystone XL oil pipeline. She had chosen to oppose it, potentially undermining President Obama. Dan Schwerin, Mrs. Clinton’s speechwriter, wrote to her longtime adviser Cheryl D. Mills, “We are trying to find a good way to leak her opposition to the pipeline without her having to actually say it.” A month later, Brian Fallon, a press aide, suggested leaking her position to the news media by mentioning it during a meeting with labor leaders, rather than with an op-ed article.

“Do we worry that publishing an op-ed that leans this aggressively into our newfound position on Keystone will be greeted cynically and perhaps as part of some manufactured attempt to project sincerity?” Mr. Fallon wrote. The best way to appear consistent, he concluded, was “if her position merely leaked out of the labor meeting.”
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/u...prod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share
 
Leo

Leo

Well-known member
vimothy said:
I thought it was basically him blaming the media for doing the Clinton campaign's job.
Click to expand...

maybe elections in the UK are more gentlemanly, but over here they've always involved each campaign apparatus going 100 miles per hour to work every angle and spin their particular narrative to the media. so far this year, the clinton campaign has certainly had problems but overall done a better job at pushing out their narrative. this columnist seems to feel the media is unfairly "on hillary's side", whereas it's more likely that the media coverage is a result of the clinton operation just doing a better of running a campaign.

we heard the same crybaby complaints of the mccain and romney campaigns: nothing is ever their fault, it's them against the world, media bias, etc. romney's campaign disregarded the polling and was genuinely shocked when obama kicked his ass 332-206 electoral votes.

more often than not, a candidate gets more bad press and loses because they were outplayed.
 
Last edited:
Leo

Leo

Well-known member
Mr. Tea said:
Haha, oh but of course! And we all take tea at 4 pm sharp every day under a framed of photo of Her Maj. :cool:
Click to expand...

hehe...yeah, apologies for being a bit mansplain-y there. elections are dirty fights between corruptocrats pretty much everywhere, far worse in some parts than in the US but we have our fair share of spinmeisters and scumbags.
 
firefinga

firefinga

Well-known member
Corpsey said:
Why do non-white voters love the Clintons?
Click to expand...

I'd say a lot Hispanics, Blacks will still vote for Hillary. Either out of tradition or simply bc she means less trouble for them than Trump. It will be hardly out of enthusiasm for her.
 
Corpsey

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Of course, I forgot that the Clintons are Democrats!

https://www.quora.com/Has-the-situa...s-If-not-why-do-blacks-keep-voting-Democratic

There are two reasons why African Americans overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic Party:

First, the National Democratic Party has improved conditions for African Americans.

Second, starting with Richard Nixon in the 1960s, the Republican Party used the issue of race to attract Southern voters.

Whether it was integrating the military (http://www.trumanlibrary.org/ann...), the Supreme Court holding in Brown v Board of Education (8 of the 9 Justices in that unanimous holding were appointed by Democratic Presidents; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bro... , List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States),
the enactment of John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson's 1964 Civil Rights Act (recall that the GOP nominated one of the few Senators who voted against it for President that same year, Barry Goldwater),


the enactment of the Voting Rights Act (every Supreme Court Justice who voted to eviscerate this law was appointed by a Republican; http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/2..., down to the Affordable Care Act (which made it illegal for insurance companies to discriminate against persons with sickle cell anemia as a preexisting condition; http://sicklecell-ourvoice.blogs...), the national Democratic Party has assiduously pursued and protected the interests of the African American community.

Today most Republicans argue that the best government is one that is both small and local. But history has shown it was the large central government which protected the rights of African Americans when local communities refused to register Black voters, integrate schools, or prosecute police for brutal practices against members of the African American community. True, many of those local politicians were Democrats, but it was the national government under Democrats AND Republicans which pursued justice. And now while Democrats continue to support the national government's role, Republicans prefer local control.

On issues such as raising the minimum wage, maintaining stem cell research funding, creating tuition-free community colleges, and repealing voter ID laws, the Democratic Party has taken stands that resonate in the African American community.

Most of the significant firsts for African Americans came under Presidents who were Democrats. The first Black General in the US Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben....), the first Black Cabinet member (http://www.history.com/this-day-...), the first Black Supreme Court Justice (http://www.biography.com/people/...), the first Black female on the federal bench (http://www.biography.com/people/...), the first Black Attorney General (http://www.biography.com/people/...) -- all of these occurred under Democratic Administrations.

The first President to speak before the NAACP was a Democrat (https://books.google.com/books?i...).

Consider the first Black congresswoman (http://www.biography.com/people/...),
the first Black female senator (http://www.biography.com/people/...),
and all three African Americans Governors who served since Reconstruction. They were all Democrats.

http://www.biography.com/people/...
http://www.biography.com/people/...
http://www.biography.com/people/...

And then there's Barack Obama.

But there's something else that shouldn't be forgotten. Starting with Richard Nixon in the 1960s, Republican leaders used race to attract Southern white votes. This is not my claim. Nor is it the claim of some Democratic partisan. Two former national chairmen of the Republican Party acknowledge that their party used a "Southern Strategy" to attract racist white votes, and it worked.

RNC Chief to Say It Was 'Wrong' to Exploit Racial Conflict for Votes
Michael Steele: For Decades GOP Pursued 'Southern Strategy' That Alienated Minorities

African Americans have seen their rights preserved and expanded under Democratic Presidencies. And so in every Presidential election since Kennedy-Nixon, African Americans have preferred the Democratic Presidential candidate over the Republican opponent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top