The Shrine

This is a continuation of the US Presidential Primaries thread. Now that the primaries are essentially over I'm starting a new one for the general.

Pretty crazy situation, two very disliked candidates won the primaries. Trump has the highest unfavorable rating of any presidential candidate. Ever. Hillary is the 2nd most disliked! Is this just due to polarization? It seems that partisans believe now that the other party is literally out to destroy the country. Meanwhile, many don't even support their own party's nominee. I suspect that 3rd party candidates (Greens & Libertarians) will do better in this election than they have in decades.

Some interesting articles I've come across:

• Clinton up by 12 points
• Trump gets savaged by Clinton, you'd think Republicans would rush to his defense. Instead? Crickets
• One of the best election models predicts a Trump victory. Its creator doesn't believe it.

Here's another good one: Hillary Clinton rolled out the anti-Trump argument that could deliver a landslide

At the end of the day, Clinton has an unprecedented amount (in terms of recent presidential candidates) of political experience. Yeah she's done some pretty sketchy shit but that's kind of par for the course for a career politician. It isn't an excuse for her past shit, but having never held any meaningful office is not a perk I want a president to have. One of the complaints about Clinton is that people don't want to vote for someone because the threat of the other person winning is so horrible.. But grow the fuck up.

Shrinweck wrote:But grow the fuck up.

Grow up and do what?

Juanita Broaddrick wrote:I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Arkansas Attorney General, raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73...it never goes away.

Grow up and overlook allegations that Bill raped this woman?

It is not very kind or mature to believe that everyone who is opposed to the Clinton candidacy in some way just needs to "grow the fuck up", Shrinweck.

There are people out there with some very good reasons not to support her.

Maybe a valid point if I were at any time addressing "everyone who is opposed to the Clinton candidacy" in that part of my post.

Why wasnt the planned assassnation attempt on Trump bigger news?

kali o. wrote:Why wasnt the planned assassnation attempt on Trump bigger news?

Say what now? I hadn't heard about this until you just brought it up.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... gger-news/

Looks like the guy was a Brit who was in the country illegally. Had been planning the attempt for a year. He was going to steal a cop's gun and shoot Trump. Apparently he wasn't able to even get the gun before he was tackled & arrested. Trump wasn't even aware of it at the time and hasn't mentioned it since. I'm sure he would have if the guy was Mexican or a Muslim!

Washington Post wrote:From Trump's perspective, Sandford doesn't fit neatly into his campaign narrative. The billionaire has positioned himself as a staunch defender of the Second Amendment, so he certainly won't use the failed assassination attempt to push for gun control. Sandford is an illegal immigrant — and Trump is all about deporting illegal aliens — but the candidate's focus is on building a wall to keep out Mexicans and barring foreign Muslims from entering the United States. A Briton who overstayed his visa isn't a very good poster boy for the cause.

Not even right-wing Drudge Report has anything on the front page about this.

You would think it would still have some value for Trump to demonize some of the left and frame his opposition as lunatics...but I guess his campaign knows best.

Nate Silver predicts an 80+% chance of Hillary winning
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... -forecast/

Trump chooses Indiana Governor Mike Pence as his running mate. He likes to point at him.








Also, their logo has "TP" on it. It looks like a sort of preppy, high-end clothing logo. Also, notice how Trump's "T" is penetrating Pence's "P".

TP for my bunghole!

(Souce: http://www.joeydevilla.com/.../the-firs ... -i-thought.../)

David Horsey, political cartoonist for the L.A. Times, has been killing it lately on electoral commentary.

Bill Clinton fuckin’ LOVES balloons.

Yeah Clinton with the balloons was great. He found a giant red one at some point and looked even more delighted.


I just clicked the link but not pictured is after he caught it in the air/picked it up :D

Holy Crap. Hillary was FUCKING AMAZED about the balloons.

It was kind of really great to watch all these politicians and their families playing with balloons at the end.

What was John Oliver's line last week about the RNC's balloons? An almost ironic amount of ballons? The DNC definitely wasn't outdone... especially if you count their reactions.

This was the Clinton moment that I was remembering a little wrong
http://i.imgur.com/sXSnFZ5.gifv This is probably too big for me to imbed in the thread.

And this is a great little moment on reddit's front page right now. I remembering laughing at this last night too haha

The religious leader who concluded things after the balloons dropped having to ask the crowd to stop popping balloons was pretty great too

*shrug*

With the failure to endorse any kind of Middle Eastern peace process, Hillary Clinton has lost my vote.

Donald Trump has literally made more neutral and peace-positive comments on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict than she has - which is sad, because I don't think anyone thinks the rest of Donald's policy platform is a recipe for Middle Eastern peace.

Either way, what we have is a recipe for greater escalation of the terrible "quiet war" in the Middle East whereby U.S. and Israeli espionage continue to seek the overthrow of any country not "aligned" with U.S. policy, and continue to delegitimate the value of any Arab/Muslim lives not happening to be wearing a U.S. military uniform or named Humayat Khan - which has already caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and a refugee crisis breaking the seven-figure mark.

Netanyahu is probably thrilled.

But hey, guys. Balloons. Balloons!

Yeah god forbid we find joy in something as ridiculous as adults playing with balloons, right?

So we should always be completely serious about politics? What a weird high horse to get on.

Shrinweck, for now I will spare the board the sight once again of civilian children abroad killed by the wars that will be perpetuated by either of two intensely hawkish and militarist Presidential candidates, both of whom have already repudiated the peace process in every way that matters.

But whether I post them or not - those children will never get to play with a balloon.

Some were killed in the Iraq War that Hillary assiduously and wholeheartedly voted for. She has not shown remorse or apology over that decision to date; indeed her foreign policy is more or less a doubling down on the current hawkishness.

I am sorry, but to me it feels like the sight of Hillary playing with balloons is giving you and others an excuse not to discuss these things.

Even Fox news polls are showing Donald Trump has fallen off a cliff, he went from nearly tied to Clinton to 9% behind in the Fox news polls. Could be a result of the conventions they just had where the Democrats came off as much more professional, or that Donald Trump was recently reported by Joe Scarborough on MSNBC that Donald Trump kept asking why they can't use nuclear weapons to attack their enemies.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sca ... 3164c347d0

Attacking the family of the muslim american soldier that was KIA was also a blow up, he's had a terrible week.

Trump's refusing to endorse top Republicans who were slow to endorse him or who have criticized him including Speaker Paul Ryan and Senator John McCain.

There's talk of top GOP leaders withdrawing their endorsements en masse.

You'll really know the campaign's imploded when Mike Pence drops off the ticket.

The polls are meaningless - as is the constant barrage of leftist negative news stories and drama. Trump has the same chance of winning he has always had based on the reasons I stated before - will the supporters looking to lulz the system come out and vote...?

The Khan thing is interesting. They attacked Trump with cheesy emotional appeal - why should they be sacrosanct? More progressive nonsense...just happens to be a thing even non-progressives buy into out of misplaced patriotism.

Trump shouldn't have responded negatively. That was politically stupid.

Julius Seeker wrote:Trump shouldn't have responded negatively. That was politically stupid.

I've heard rumors that he's just trying to distract the media from the story about him being in league with Russia/Putin on business dealings & hacking of DNC.

Trump and Clinton's worst enemy is really themselves. If either of them aren't careful their campaigns will just implode and they'll alienate and promote too much voter apathy to win. Both of them have the base that this day and age is too afraid of the other side to ever cross party lines. Trump is really engaging the vote for uneducated white males, especially the young - these people however do not typically vote in elections. Clinton on the other hand is engaging with multiple growing populations of people that do vote (women, minorities).

Trump has already alienated more of the minority vote then any other modern presidential candidate. In order to balance this out he's going to have to pull in an unreasonably high amount of white voters. I do not see this happening unless Clinton missteps... and hard. The Republican party hasn't won a presidential election since Bush won 44% of the Hispanic vote. This is a growing segment of the voting population that they have routinely done worse and worse with (maybe Romney did slightly better than McCain, but it was still sub 40% in both cases) - and they certainly aren't wining and dining them with Trump.

Ill tempered jokes at a babies expense, blaming an Obama 2009 policy on a 2004 war death, going after a Gold Star family, not endorsing people in his party, making light of the Purple Heart, being a lame duck about Fox sexual harassment even with a hypothetical involving his daughter - Clinton didn't even have to do anything for Trump to make these blunders.


Also the RNC giving the Republicans a boost and then the DNC giving the Democrats a boost is business as usual for polls. I wouldn't take this week as a strong indicator as far as polling goes.

The Khan thing was a bait, and Trump took the bait. That's why he's down in the polls, and why he's likely to lose; he has the same issue that - well, that I do. He can't shut his mouth when he's attacked. Not entirely a bad trait, because your enemies *will* define you if you completely fail to stick up in your own defense - but one's defenses have to be measured and made in patience, not tossed out ad hoc - and he doesn't have the capability for that. (And before anyone comments, yes, I'm well aware that I've had the same issue here over the years.)

Unfortunately for him, his first response - Muslim culture-baiting to appease the great trailer park mentality that comprises a lot of his base - was what got taken into the zeitgeist of the election...rather than the very simple truth that Hillary voted along with George W. Bush's decision to send Humayat Khan to die, and that she is thus a lot more culpable for Cpt. Khan's death than Trump is.

-----------------

Trump's best moment yet has been that "world peace would be the best deal", though. I haven't seen Hillary give two shits yet about world peace in this campaign; she's really stroking the big dicks at Defense hard behind the scenes, and she may have cause to regret that yet in the court of public opinion. Hillary has alienated a *lot* of liberals by throwing financial justice and world peace on the grand altar of her Rothschild and Goldman backers. The Democratic Party is a big tent, but a big part of that big tent is still the cultural legacy of the hippie movement of the 60's that grew up - and really, she's shitting wholesale on the peace movement and the anti-poverty movement.

I still won't vote for either one. Which is...nice, actually. Reduces the stress factor around Election Day by a lot.

Both of them are still quite likely to set the world on fire in one way or another - neither one is willing to address the root causes of increased terrorism and violence via addressing the real causes of both domestic and foreign radicalization in terms of bad war and poverty and corporate exploitation - so my own focus is shifting to "ensure my own survival through the coming years of militarism by any means necessary and ethical".

ManaMan wrote:I've heard rumors that he's just trying to distract the media from the story about him being in league with Russia/Putin on business dealings & hacking of DNC.

Isn't Russia a US ally?

Julius Seeker wrote:

ManaMan wrote:I've heard rumors that he's just trying to distract the media from the story about him being in league with Russia/Putin on business dealings & hacking of DNC.

Isn't Russia a US ally?

Since Vladimir Putin assumed power our relations with Russia have soured. The US and NATO don't like Russia's military aggression and posturing, and I don't think most of the Russian populace are crazy about Western ideals or the US in general.

Not to mention the diplomatic equivalent to the middle finger Russia's military has been giving us lately

Another week of "Wow" from Trump's camp, if not quite as busy as last week.

Trump's campaign has denied reports from Time magazine that the head of the Republican National Committee has threatened to pull funding for the presidential campaign to switch focus to Republican congressional elections. Even if this is bullshit, the fact that it's conceivable to print something like this is not a good sign for his campaign. Still super early, though. Edit: Oops - this became an actual story while I was sleeping last night lol

Trump overhauling his campaign staff for a second time in two months. I guess you can't really not do that when you're doing so bad in polls that your Democrat opponent is winning in polls from GA, a state that probably won't be a legit flip state for 2+ decades.

Of note, he is bringing on Steve Bannon as the CEO of his campaign.. I didn't even realize campaigns had CEOs but I guess the acronym can branch out easily enough. Bannon has been referred to as the most dangerous political operative in America by Bloomberg. You can see from the article why Bannon and Trump might get along, too. He may be more amenable to Trump staying off book all the time. Trump making actual speeches clearly hasn't done him any favors but under the scrutiny of a nominated candidate can Trump get things back on track? Throwing around insults behind a podium probably isn't going to swing things in his favor and you kind of get the feeling that that's what he wants to do more of and that's why he fired his last team (which was probably trying to keep him on a more scripted path).

Insulting Clinton just isn't going to give him the same return it would during the Republican primaries when they're all interacting on stage. Even during the eventual debates I can't see it looking anything other than pathetic to the people who haven't already been convinced to vote for him. I guess he really either needs to come up with something new or he needs Clinton to make a huge blunder.

He's pretty much done, he's already making excuses for why he's gonna lose in November. It'll probably be one of the most lopsided victories in American history.

Amazingly, it may be the biggest margin of victory for one of the most hated confirmed candidates in history too

I dunno the McGovern election will probably be worse. It's also too early to tell for sure yet. The United States is so much more polarized than it used to be. A lot of the red states will still be red states because that's just how things are these days. And even if the trend continues for Trump it'll be interesting to see how well he still does with the popular vote.

For reference, this is how the election map looked for the McGovern election. He managed to lose every state except for Massachusetts and got a few votes from Washington DC which still isn't technically a state. Not including third party votes the margin was about 62% vs 38% which is just kind of an unimaginable split with the United States these days.

So Trumps appeal to Hispanic voters was a picture of himself eating out of a taco bowl. His appeal to black voters today was "What do you have to lose?" This fucking guy lol. If the polls are to be believed, Hillary may get even more of the black vote (percentage-wise, at least) then Obama. It is astounding that this is his way of fixing that.

Honestly in terms of incredulous entertainment this election is definitely the best I've paid attention to. I'm honestly a little disappointed when I look around and he hasn't said anything new.

Well, I will take the devils advocate position -- what, in his appeal to black voters, is lol-worthy? Democrats have failed black voters for how many decades? You have to look no further than the democrat strongholds in the US, that are riddled with crime, overspending and poverty.

Can you defend your position? What is your position?

The reality is the welfare / handout policies of the left have hurt the communities they are intended to help. They have also bankrupted the nation. You have a black president for nearly a decade and race relations have never been worse. So what now is the plan...? A woman president to combat the fictional patriarchy? How progressive. Another 4 years of the same but with another glass ceiling smashed to make the intellectually sluggish left feel smug and satisfied.

It's lol-worthy because he didn't actually SAY anything that could be done about it. It was all rhetoric. It's condescending. And when he says "What do you have to lose?" when there are black people who were alive during the civil rights era still around then there's actually a reply to that. There's a lot to lose.

Also the Republicans are the party whose constituents spit in their face, sometimes literally. Crossing party lines to join with a party whose base really just doesn't want anything to do with them?

Race relations have never been worse? Even playing devil's advocate this is absurd.

Eugenics? Forced sterilization? Segregating the armed forced in World War 2? Emmett Till? Lynchings in general? Separate but equal? Jim Crow? SLAVERY? The 3/5s compromise? Hell, even actual race riots? These are just off the top of my head. There are so many examples of race relations being worse in the Untied States.

This is a man whose rallies have the chant "Build the wall, kill them all." His rallies seem like a level juuuust under a white power rally. This week he also talked about putting Muslim immigrants through "extreme vetting" through testing. This, to anyone who's aware of American history, is a clear call back to the literacy tests and whatnot that the southern states used to basically de facto take away the rights of black people to vote. While admittedly that's a tenuous link, it's still what it reminds me of.

And as for my position - this is a general election thread where we're mostly just posting random tidbits and venting. I don't really have interest in shitposting my "position" in it for you to cherry pick what you want to go after. What would telling you my position even entail? A ramble-y essay on where I stand on black rights in the United States and how I think Republican policy threatens them over and over again? I don't owe you that. You're clearly out for blood lately in terms of starting shit. Admitting devil's advocate may mean that your post is like a 3/10 example of your trolling lately doesn't dismiss the clear invitation for you to troll the fuck out of me. Because of that, I don't really have any interest in interacting with you about things like this. When Replay doesn't take the bait in your argument with vitriol you just go after me? Bored?

I didnt attack you, you fucking baby; so if all you are going to do is play the victim (*cough* How leftist...) just dont bother replying.

Back on topic and ignoring your 'whinging'...
I love how you stretched back decades to list some things that were bad...and what was the point? To insinuate thats what Trump has in store has for Black America? Lol. Or maybe it was a non sequitor? It certainly couldnt be to dismiss my point taken obtusely literally and covering all of history...

Here are the actual stats of black america currently.
- as of 2013, blacks commited 38% of homicides (despite being 13ish% of the population...or more realistically 6-7% [males]. This is not a new trend, this has been ongoing since at least the 80's
- at last count that I saw, blacks made up 65% of the prison population. This again has been a steady trend for decades.
- 1 out of 4 Black Families are below the poverty line. Once again, a trend that has largely continued.

The fact of the matter is a black voter needs to ask themselves if they are happy with the status quo or do they want something different?

And finally...I love your comments on trump rallies. Using your own cherry picking logic and standards, I can now label you a racist that wants to kill whites and cops. If the fact that I can do that doesnt wake you up to flaws in your position, I guess nothing will.

You dont have to defend your opinion but I am still going to call you out if it seems flawed or I am bored.

Lol

Edit: You claimed that race relations were at their worst. And I argued that point. Wut

Edit 2: Part of your argument went back decades. And I'm not allowed to? Wut

Please be serious - if you think my comment wasnt to be taken in a more reasonable context and I somehow dont know about inequalities in US history -- then I will need to tailor my language very specifically for you...to the point it is silly.

I went back to establish trends a reasonable time after the civil rights movement and the leftist policies that resulted. And the only reason I did that was to put the statistics in the proper context. Its not new. Its been nearly 40 years of the same. When is it time for real change?

The real change is Trump? With his history? With the ideas he brings to the table?

You make grandiose statements like "race relations have never been worse" and somehow I've taken it out of context when I reply to it as if I'm supposed to recognize some specific context that you were using that that doesn't make you sound uneducated in our history. You attack progressives and leftists and it's just more of the same old rhetoric where you're arguing points I haven't even brought up because surely this is how I feel about things based on things I've posted.

You outright admit to playing devils advocate.

And then you act like I'm the one who isn't be serious. Why would I be serious in this conversation? Especially with you, with our recent post history? You name me as a racist who wants to kill white cops and expect me to react with respect and seriousness? When whether or not you're actually taking it seriously is constantly up in the air? How am I supposed to know with you these days? Most of the posts you made this past week or two read as satire. And I'm just not supposed to reply to them as such? Hah.

Trump is change. You can argue he is an unknown - but you shouldnt mischaracterize what he does actually say. He doesnt hate mexicans. He doesnt hate women. He doesnt hate blacks.

Anyway, nice job missing the point on the kill whites and cops thing. I just threw your own cherry picking standards and logic back at you....and it leads to obscenely stupid claims....and you missed the irony I guess. Too bad.

As to our post history, dunno what you are referring to -- best untwist those panties and let it go. I suppose you could refresh my memory and we can discuss it, since it appears to weigh heavily on your mind....but I, being an alpha male, am not much for talking it out....

Fucking lol I apparently am not the only one missing points here

Might as well call me a beta cuck while you're at it. This is the direction your posts have been moving lately.

Good luck with that, you alpha male, we're all super impressed... Not really helping with the whole me taking you seriously thing. And I have no interest in "talking it out" with you.

Shrinweck wrote: Good luck with that, you alpha male, we're all super impressed... Not really helping with the whole me taking you seriously thing. And I have no interest in "talking it out" with you.

You accused me of shtick...so I gave you a full paragraph with zero subtlety. Are you for real or has your likely gluten free vegan diet left you brain damaged...? Lol.

Bro fist or panty twist...you decide cuck.