2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.


I did point out that it started as conspiracy. And some surrogates ran with it when things got desperate for Hillary. I looked up the same fact check. Was Hillary aware of the surrogates circulating it? Did she squash it? I don't know. Trump is incorrect in directly attributing it Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.
 
Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.

You better watch your mouth, pal ...
:bonodrum:
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.



In other words, your team lost and your method to hide your jealousy is to make fun of the winner.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

...no?

If Bernie were the nominee, I'd still be debating Trump supporters the way I am here, simply because I don't understand how anyone can support Trump, period. And I'm not just ranting about Trump, either. My posts have been addressing various issues that have troubled me about the GOP in general.

Also, "Clinton fanatics". Yeah. No.
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.


Look at that, one more thing you have in common with Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Did Bernie ever get a nickname from Trump?

I'm just curious.

I still think this is all being made for a new Trump book. "The Art of a Nomination"

I still believe he is faking all of this. He's taking it as far as he can and his ego loves it.....but it's still a inside joke.

He has no law experience, business ventures that are meh, bare bones staff, he spends little $, doesn't really advertise, holds press conferences for everything.....and tweets nonstop bullshit

And yet he won the nomination of the grand old party. Outside of the fear of him actually winning, this will probably be the most fascinating campaign to study in any sort of political science class


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
...no?



If Bernie were the nominee, I'd still be debating Trump supporters the way I am here, simply because I don't understand how anyone can support Trump, period.


Don't be silly, we'd all be sleeping, for the messiah would be coming to save us.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

:hmm: Interesting. Especially as only a few minutes earlier I saw this quote:
“I’m not often critical of the media, but I am this year. And it’s driven mostly by television, and ratings. They never really vetted Bernie Sanders, and to this day have not vetted Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton? Oh my God. No human being in history has been more vetted.”

Had Sanders been the nominee I think those on the left would've been in for some nasty surprises.
 
Care to give us some bullet points to explain your position?

- setting the mental health care system in america back at least 50 years

- horrible supply side economic policy a major cause of today's income inequality

- explosion in national debt due to the arms race, all resulting from his giant fucking ego desperately wanting to be the president who destroyed the soviets

- destroyed labour unions resulting in wage stagnation over the last 30 years relative to the previous 30 years

- over six thousand dead before addressing the aids crisis - imagine if obama let 6,000 people die of swine flu before even so much as admitting it exists.

- the most corrupt administration ever by number of staff members convicted of criminal wrongdoing related to their employment

- funding and arming osama bin laden and all that entailed

DaveC - Channeling 'The Guns of August'

i'm listening to a podcast by dan carlin called blueprint for armageddon, about WWI, and it's constantly frustrating to listen to the realities of the meat grinder that the western front was and think of how close the world was to avoiding that hell, along with everything that came after as a result.
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.

...please go to the nearest mental health clinic in your area. you are clearly hallucinating and having a delusional episode.
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.




I look forward to so many more of these kinds of attention seeking posts over the next few months.
 
Just as I look forward to most of the people in this thread trying to prop up a heavily flawed candidate that nobody is excited for and half her inevitable November voters don't even like.

I'm very happy outside of the Democratic party bubble. :up:
 
Just as I look forward to most of the people in this thread trying to prop up a heavily flawed candidate that nobody is excited for and half her inevitable November voters don't even like.

I'm very happy outside of the Democratic party bubble. :up:


Yeah, I guess we could have gone with the other option; an incredibly flawed candidate who's excited disciples had the hardest time explaining how any of his policies worked, hasn't even been vetted yet, and we were left to question if he understood his own platform.

Hey, but at least you were excited:up:


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Last edited:
Yet another fine example of "Free Your Mind" :hug:



Oh come on. Was that not the most blatant trolling you've seen in here in a while?

BMP has been regularly and vigorously engaged and has taken obvious joy and effort in responding. There's been no shortage of dialogue and give-and-take on his favorite subjects. He may be alone, but FYM is about having a space to discuss and defend ideas not a drum circle.
 
I guess we can move on now.


sure thing.

here's a news article i just came across:


All the New Polls Tell the Same Story: Trump Is in Trouble
By Josh Voorhees


Good news for those of us who live in fear of the words President Donald J. Trump: The latest batch of polling suggests that the presumptive Republican nominee is losing ground to Hillary Clinton, becoming even more unpopular among key demographic groups, and—perhaps most telling of all—facing a potential backlash to his hate-filled, xenophobic response to this past weekend’s mass shooting in Orlando, Florida.

The caveats: General election polling this far out from November tells us far more about the present than it does the future. Clinton has her own serious popularity problem to deal with. And the public’s reaction to this past weekend’s domestic terror attack could still change as we learn more about it. But, even with those disclaimers, the numbers suggest that at this particular moment in time, Trump is in trouble.

Consider a new CBS News poll out Wednesday, which asked Americans how they felt about Trump, Clinton, and President Obama’s respective responses to the Orlando attack, which was the worst mass shooting in U.S. history: 44 percent of Americans approved of Obama’s response, while 34 percent disapproved (net: plus-10); 36 percent approved of Clinton’s response, while 34 percent disapproved (net: plus-2); and 25 percent approved of Trump’s response, while 51 percent disapproved (net: minus-26).

The survey spanned only two days—Monday and Tuesday—but the results suggest that Americans prefer their presidential hopefuls to actually act presidential in the wake of a national tragedy as opposed to acting like, well, Trump. That’s particularly important given a terror attack on domestic soil is often cited as something that might help Trump overcome the many other electoral factors that favor Clinton. The early returns instead suggest that his authoritarian-style fearmongering is unlikely to benefit him in the general election the same way it did in the Republican primary.

While it will take time for post-Orlando feelings to settle, a handful of other recent polls suggest the presumptive GOP nominee was trending down before this past weekend. A Bloomberg survey released Tuesday showed Clinton with a 12-point lead on Trump in a three-way race that also included Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson, who got 9 percent. (Clinton’s lead in that survey was actually down from where it was the last time those same pollsters asked about a hypothetical head-to-head matchup in March, but that was before Trump got a bump from securing the GOP nomination.) The new Bloomberg survey marked the first time Clinton was up by double-digits on Trump in a major poll since the start of last month.

Meanwhile, the latest RealClearPolitics rolling average has Clinton leading Trump, 44.1 percent to 38.6 percent. As National Review points out, in the three most recent presidential elections, no nominee of a major party ever averaged less than 40 percent at any point in an election year. Trump dipped below that mark last week for the first time since he became his party’s presumptive nominee last month.

Trump and Clinton remain the least popular major presidential candidates in modern history, so to that degree, we’re still in uncharted territory. But Clinton’s dismal favorability ratings are largely holding steady while Trump’s even-more-dismal scores continue to fall as he finds new ways to alienate large swaths of the country. He is currently doing that by demonizing Muslim Americans; he did it before by suggesting that an American-born judge was biased because of his Mexican heritage; he’ll do it again.

Trump wants his voters to see the world through an Us vs. Them lens, but he continues to define an increasing number of Americans as the latter. It’s not a shock, then, that in a new Washington Post/ABC New poll out Wednesday, 88 percent of nonwhites and 77 percent of women said they had an unfavorable view of Trump. (The poll was conducted over a five-day stretch ending this past Sunday.) More surprising—and heartening—is that Trump is also becoming less popular among those groups that he’s trying to rile up with his nativist bluster. His net-favorable rating in the survey was minus-20 among whites, minus-26 among men, and minus-36 among those who never attended college. As the Post’s Greg Sargent points out, one of the only subsets that viewed Trump favorably in the poll is noncollege white men, and even their opinions are mixed, with 52 percent saying they have a positive view and 46 percent saying the opposite.

A lot will happen between now and November. But the limited evidence we do have suggests that Trump’s decision to pivot even further to the right—as opposed to the center, as his campaign had promised Republicans he would do after locking up the nomination—isn’t just hurting him among the GOP establishment. It’s hurting him with the people who matter most: the voters.
 
The interesting thing about the last few pages of the thread is how in-depth people are going with their back-and-forth responses. Trump supporters versus scared Clinton fanatics that are afraid of Trump because of how poorly their candidate has been doing in the polls against him.

Had Sanders been the nominee, those on the left could sleep a lot easier. Now, the Clintonistas are clearly having buyer's remorse and have turned what was supposed to be a slam-dunk into an actual contest.

As a non-partisan and more rational onlooker, I can sit back and laugh at the paranoia and anger of both sides.
200w.gif
 
Yeah, I guess we could have gone with the other option; an incredibly flawed candidate who's excited disciples had the hardest time explaining how any of his policies worked, hasn't even been vetted yet, and we were left to question if he understood his own platform.

I see you've been given the same DNC memos that were supplied to the Superdelegates. #RegisteredDEM4Lyfe #PartyBubble #ImWithHerAtAllCosts
 
I see you've been given the same DNC memos that were supplied to the Superdelegates. #RegisteredDEM4Lyfe #PartyBubble #ImWithHerAtAllCosts


It's like talking to a wall.

Wait, I have a great idea! You should give Trump a call, I heard he's looking for one. I think you two would get along pretty well. I'll even waive my referral fee.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Trying to lump in potential allies on the left with being supportive of a racist buffoon candidate from the right simply because us liberals aren't going to fall in line with The Chosen One. For shame.
 
Adding on to the article Irvine linked to and quoted earlier:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-campaign-hits-low-republicans-170011496.html

Ryan denounced the presumptive GOP nominee's proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., telling reporters on Tuesday, "I do not think a Muslim ban is in our country's interest. I do not think it is reflective of our principles, not just as a party but as a country." Ryan called for "a security test, not a religious test" for immigrants, according to The Washington Post.

Other Republican leaders have tried to distance themselves from Trump's comments. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to answer questions about Trump at his weekly news conference. And Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming said of Trump, "I'm just not going to comment on more of his statements. It's going to be five months of it."

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, a Republican who has praised Trump in the past, called the mogul's response to the national tragedy "disappointing." "Traditionally, it is a time when people rally around our country, and it's obviously not what's occurred, and it's very disappointing," Corker said.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a vocal Trump critic, said, "I don't think he has the judgment or the temperament, the experience to deal with what we are facing."

Graham and other Republicans have also decried Trump's implications that Obama is somehow linked to terrorists and that he "continues to prioritize our enemy over our allies and, for that matter, the American people."

Graham said that Trump "seems to be suggesting that the president is one of 'them.' I find that highly offensive. I find that whole line of reasoning way off base. My problems with President Obama are his policy choices."

But hey, y'know, us "Clinton fanatics" just don't click with "John Q. Public" and are just scared about how Clinton will fare against Trump.

(Mind, if one wants to be cynical, we could say that some of these people are speaking out against him more so because they want to protect their own positions in the party or whatever...but I'd like to think at least a few of these quotes come from a sincere place.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom