US General Election Megathread: Trump vs Clinton

[Galloism]

Oh yeah. The Al Franken Decade needs to get a move on since he's now 65 years old.

Since Trump has been on SNL, an old SNL regular might make some sense on the other ticket... ummm... *scratches head* ...nah.

The logic around Franken as I've seen it explained is that he's singularly well-suited to deal with the fact that Trumps entire campaign is built on hot-air, media manipulation, and schoolyard bully tactics, rather than on anything in even the same ballpark as substance or policy.

So the idea goes that more 'traditional' candidates wouldn't really know how to react to Trumps constant stream of vitriol and total disregard for anything resembling policy or reasoned debate.

"Our candidate is so full of bullshit traditional politicians can't handle that level of bullshit."?

Shouldn't that be... you know... cause to pause and reflect?

[Myrensis]

The logic around Franken as I've seen it explained is that he's singularly well-suited to deal with the fact that Trumps entire campaign is built on hot-air, media manipulation, and schoolyard bully tactics, rather than on anything in even the same ballpark as substance or policy.

So the idea goes that more 'traditional' candidates wouldn't really know how to react to Trumps constant stream of vitriol and total disregard for anything resembling policy or reasoned debate.

"Our candidate is so full of bullshit traditional politicians can't handle that level of bullshit."?

Shouldn't that be... you know... cause to pause and reflect?

If Republicans were inclined toward that sort of self-reflection, I doubt Trump would be their nominee.

[Galloism]

"Our candidate is so full of bullshit traditional politicians can't handle that level of bullshit."?

Shouldn't that be... you know... cause to pause and reflect?

If Republicans were inclined toward that sort of self-reflection, I doubt Trump would be their nominee.

If the level of bullshit is so high they're having trouble finding republican politicians who can handle that level of bullshit, I'm now concerned the bullshit might collapse into itself, start a fusion reaction, and turn earth into a neutron star.

[New Jerzylvania]

"Our candidate is so full of bullshit traditional politicians can't handle that level of bullshit."?

Shouldn't that be... you know... cause to pause and reflect?

If Republicans were inclined toward that sort of self-reflection, I doubt Trump would be their nominee.

Translation: They think their shit don't stink.

Well ....TRUMP STINKS!!!

[Havenburgh]

Clinton or Trump...
Jesus this country is going to hell

[The Romulan Republic]

Clinton or Trump...
Jesus this country is going to hell

At this point, I'm just about ready to start praying for an indictment before Clinton finishes getting the nomination. But if it comes down to it, I'll back her against the bigoted buffoon. Better a corrupt President than a crazy President.

[Galloism]

Clinton or Trump...
Jesus this country is going to hell

At this point, I'm just about ready to start praying for an indictment before Clinton finishes getting the nomination. But if it comes down to it, I'll back her against the bigoted buffoon. Better a corrupt President than a crazy President.

Holy shit that's a cynical point of view.

[The Romulan Republic]

At this point, I'm just about ready to start praying for an indictment before Clinton finishes getting the nomination. But if it comes down to it, I'll back her against the bigoted buffoon. Better a corrupt President than a crazy President.

Holy shit that's a cynical point of view.

I don't really think of myself as a cynic. I think that things can get better, and that we have a duty to try to make them better. But I also recognize that sometimes you don't get everything you want right away. And with a Presidential election, especially a US Presidential election, the stakes (for the whole world) are way too high to take an all-or-nothing mentality. So yes, if I can't have the Bern I'll take the least loathsome option available.

And probably support primarying her in four years.

[The United Territories of Providence]

Clinton or Trump...
Jesus this country is going to hell

At this point, I'm just about ready to start praying for an indictment before Clinton finishes getting the nomination. But if it comes down to it, I'll back her against the bigoted buffoon. Better a corrupt President than a crazy President.

That would almost certainly lose the Democratic nominee the election. So that's rather shitty.

[New Jerzylvania]

At this point, I'm just about ready to start praying for an indictment before Clinton finishes getting the nomination. But if it comes down to it, I'll back her against the bigoted buffoon. Better a corrupt President than a crazy President.

Holy shit that's a cynical point of view.

Cynical

[sin-i-kuh l]

adjective
1.
distrusting or disparaging the motives of others; like or characteristic of a cynic.
2.
showing contempt for accepted standards of honesty or morality by one's actions, especially by actions that exploit the scruples of others.
3.
bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic.

First two definitions sound like our 2 major party candidates. Third definition clearly is the electorate.

[The Romulan Republic]

At this point, I'm just about ready to start praying for an indictment before Clinton finishes getting the nomination. But if it comes down to it, I'll back her against the bigoted buffoon. Better a corrupt President than a crazy President.

That would almost certainly lose the Democratic nominee the election. So that's rather shitty.

What would? An indictment?

If it happened post-convention, quite probably. If it happened before then, it would be awkward, and could prove fatal, I suppose, but their'd still be an option for a different nominee.

Let me put it this way: if an indictment's coming, better it come now than two months from now.

[New Jerzylvania]

That would almost certainly lose the Democratic nominee the election. So that's rather shitty.

What would? An indictment?

If it happened post-convention, quite probably. If it happened before then, it would be awkward, and could prove fatal, I suppose, but their'd still be an option for a different nominee.

Let me put it this way: if an indictment's coming, better it come now than two months from now.

The Director of the FBI isn't stupid enough to let that happen after the convention. If it did, his head would be on a silver platter and deservedly so.
If this happens it has to be before June 15 so the repercussions can be felt ahead of Americans going on summer vacations. Probably, the real deadline was this past Friday, before the Memorial Day Weekend.

[The Romulan Republic]

What would? An indictment?

If it happened post-convention, quite probably. If it happened before then, it would be awkward, and could prove fatal, I suppose, but their'd still be an option for a different nominee.

Let me put it this way: if an indictment's coming, better it come now than two months from now.

The Director of the FBI isn't stupid enough to let that happen after the convention. If it did, his head would be on a silver platter and deservedly so.
If this happens it has to be before June 15 so the repercussions can be felt ahead of Americans going on summer vacations. Probably, the real deadline was this past Friday, before the Memorial Day Weekend.

First of all, as I recall, the FBI does not have the power to indict. They can investigate, but the call on weather to indict or not would ultimately be the Justice Department/Attorney General's.

Also, why would peoples' vacations have anything to do with it? Do people stop watching the news when they're on vacation, generally?

Anyway, while I understand not wanting to do it at a politically disastrous time (like where it would basically be the JD handing the election to Donald), a thorough investigation also will take a certain amount of time. Rushing and half-assing it would be disastrous too.

Of course, it may be that they simply don't have a strong enough case against Clinton, and this will eventually peter out.

[Geilinor]

What would? An indictment?

If it happened post-convention, quite probably. If it happened before then, it would be awkward, and could prove fatal, I suppose, but their'd still be an option for a different nominee.

Let me put it this way: if an indictment's coming, better it come now than two months from now.

The Director of the FBI isn't stupid enough to let that happen after the convention. If it did, his head would be on a silver platter and deservedly so.
If this happens it has to be before June 15 so the repercussions can be felt ahead of Americans going on summer vacations. Probably, the real deadline was this past Friday, before the Memorial Day Weekend.

If an indictment was going to happen, it would have happened already. We know that Clinton didn't follow all the State Department rules but it wasn't illegal.

[The United Territories of Providence]

That would almost certainly lose the Democratic nominee the election. So that's rather shitty.

What would? An indictment?

If it happened post-convention, quite probably. If it happened before then, it would be awkward, and could prove fatal, I suppose, but their'd still be an option for a different nominee.

Let me put it this way: if an indictment's coming, better it come now than two months from now.

Well, we're only 7 weeks out from the convention. I'm pretty sure that if the leading candidate of a major political party was indicted by the Justice Department, that would fuck the party all the way down the ticket. Because now, no matter the candidate, we are the corruption party for the next few years. Think 1974 and 1976. Nixon fucks the party, so Democrats increase their Senate Majority 5 seats and House Majority 49 Seats. Then Ford loses to Carter 2 years later. There were other factors, and Watergate was a hell of a lot more complicated than this e-mail nonsense...but the principle is the same. You can't have the leader of your party, or rather next in line, implicated in something that is criminal. If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that way, he'd lose in a landslide. Most Americans haven't been paying attention to the primary, and they haven't formed an opinion of him. So these high favorable would more than likely, fall through the floor if Hillary is indicted, because that will be the only thing that most voters will know. They didn't watch the debates, or even vote in the primaries, they just know that the Democrats almost ascended a criminal to the top of their ticket. Not only that, a criminal was supported by 14 million democrats, nearly every democratic senator, governor, and house member and probably the President of the United States. Then Republicans will make the argument, and it'll be a good argument...

Reince Priebus, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, and All of the Former GOP candidates: "How can we trust anyone these people put forward? She kills 4 Americans in Libya, she lies, she enables a sex offender, she is horribly corrupt, she's the symbol of dynastic politics and now she's going to jail. That's who the party says represents them. Does she represent you? A lying, corrupt, career politician? You may have your differences with Mr.Trump, but he's no criminal. We Republican would never stand behind someone who would put Americans at risk like she has, and by the way, we didn't indict her. People appointed by her boss indicted her. So we're not saying she's a criminal, Obama is. Obama never indicted Donald Trump"

An indictment should've come....Before Iowa, and Michigan at the latest. Now? We'd be Fucked with a capital F.

[The Romulan Republic]

Maybe.

But Donald has his own scandals hanging over his head. Trump University law suit, anyone?

[Maurepas]

I honestly don't think she's going to be indicted. I would be surprised if Loretta Lynch actually let that happen while staring a Trump Presidency in the face. I mean, that might be cynical, but I think that's what it's going to come down to.

[The Romulan Republic]

I honestly don't think she's going to be indicted. I would be surprised if Loretta Lynch actually let that happen while staring a Trump Presidency in the face. I mean, that might be cynical, but I think that's what it's going to come down to.

Well, I doubt they'd be investigating this long and throughly if their was nothing their. And while its not an indictment, obviously, the recent State Department report (from the Obama State Department) looks pretty damning, from what I've seen.

[New Jerzylvania]

The Director of the FBI isn't stupid enough to let that happen after the convention. If it did, his head would be on a silver platter and deservedly so.
If this happens it has to be before June 15 so the repercussions can be felt ahead of Americans going on summer vacations. Probably, the real deadline was this past Friday, before the Memorial Day Weekend.

First of all, as I recall, the FBI does not have the power to indict. They can investigate, but the call on weather to indict or not would ultimately be the Justice Department/Attorney General's.

Also, why would peoples' vacations have anything to do with it? Do people stop watching the news when they're on vacation, generally?

Anyway, while I understand not wanting to do it at a politically disastrous time (like where it would basically be the JD handing the election to Donald), a thorough investigation also will take a certain amount of time. Rushing and half-assing it would be disastrous too.

Of course, it may be that they simply don't have a strong enough case against Clinton, and this will eventually peter out.

Attorney General is appointed by whom now? (POTUS, Obama) FBI director reports evidence to AG. FBI Director also reports to Obama. This thing has already been done. Kaput.
Vacations? Because the big decision makers in this country get nice long summer vacation and they wouldn't want this hanging over their heads. It is just the way it works.
So....the Email thing is something that happened in the past and needed investigating. The timing of that investigation was under those people's control. They have had plenty of time to get 'er done.
Conclusion: It's done. Over and out. Happy summer America!

[New Jerzylvania]

I honestly don't think she's going to be indicted. I would be surprised if Loretta Lynch actually let that happen while staring a Trump Presidency in the face. I mean, that might be cynical, but I think that's what it's going to come down to.

Well, I doubt they'd be investigating this long and throughly if their was nothing their. And while its not an indictment, obviously, the recent State Department report (from the Obama State Department) looks pretty damning, from what I've seen.

And what is your area of expertise?

[The Romulan Republic]

Think you could dial up the smug condescension just a little bit more?

[Galloism]

Think you could dial up the smug condescension just a little bit more?

He really can't. I have several patents on the most extreme forms of smug condescension in existence, and if he violates my patents, I will use every legal resource to protect them.

[The United Territories of Providence]

Maybe.

But Donald has his own scandals hanging over his head. Trump University law suit, anyone?

Wasn't Secretary of State, Hasn't been blamed for 4 Americans dying in Libya, never guided US foreign policy, and never handled Top Secret information. Donald Trump has scandals, but at the end of the day...he's just some rich racist with neo-fascist tendencies. He was never in charge of anything of any consequence, or made a decision that could've killed people. He can lie and defraud and flip-flop, but he wasn't a member of the government. We hold our politicians to higher standards than our short fingered multi-millionaires who lie about being billionaires. So whatever his scandal...it won't ever compare to "You were secretary of state, you were a member of the Obama administration, all of our lives were affected by your choices...and you acted criminally, you were irresponsible, and you lied to the voters."

Not that she'll be indicted though. Loretta Lynch and James Comey don't have the audacity....

[New Jerzylvania]

What would? An indictment?

If it happened post-convention, quite probably. If it happened before then, it would be awkward, and could prove fatal, I suppose, but their'd still be an option for a different nominee.

Let me put it this way: if an indictment's coming, better it come now than two months from now.

Well, we're only 7 weeks out from the convention. I'm pretty sure that if the leading candidate of a major political party was indicted by the Justice Department, that would fuck the party all the way down the ticket. Because now, no matter the candidate, we are the corruption party for the next few years. Think 1974 and 1976. Nixon fucks the party, so Democrats increase their Senate Majority 5 seats and House Majority 49 Seats. Then Ford loses to Carter 2 years later. There were other factors, and Watergate was a hell of a lot more complicated than this e-mail nonsense...but the principle is the same. You can't have the leader of your party, or rather next in line, implicated in something that is criminal. If Bernie Sanders got the nomination that way, he'd lose in a landslide. Most Americans haven't been paying attention to the primary, and they haven't formed an opinion of him. So these high favorable would more than likely, fall through the floor if Hillary is indicted, because that will be the only thing that most voters will know. They didn't watch the debates, or even vote in the primaries, they just know that the Democrats almost ascended a criminal to the top of their ticket. Not only that, a criminal was supported by 14 million democrats, nearly every democratic senator, governor, and house member and probably the President of the United States. Then Republicans will make the argument, and it'll be a good argument...

Reince Priebus, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, and All of the Former GOP candidates: "How can we trust anyone these people put forward? She kills 4 Americans in Libya, she lies, she enables a sex offender, she is horribly corrupt, she's the symbol of dynastic politics and now she's going to jail. That's who the party says represents them. Does she represent you? A lying, corrupt, career politician? You may have your differences with Mr.Trump, but he's no criminal. We Republican would never stand behind someone who would put Americans at risk like she has, and by the way, we didn't indict her. People appointed by her boss indicted her. So we're not saying she's a criminal, Obama is. Obama never indicted Donald Trump"

An indictment should've come....Before Iowa, and Michigan at the latest. Now? We'd be Fucked with a capital F.

Meanwhile Bush 43 and pals are wanted for war crimes in several nations.

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/3 ... war-crimes
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/po ... ar-crimes/
http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/201 ... -absentia/
https://www.darkmoon.me/2015/germany-pl ... ar-crimes/

Hillary's e-mails? Her fucking e-mails are the problem?
Ha-ha-ha!

Think you could dial up the smug condescension just a little bit more?

So how was that for ya?

[New Jerzylvania]

Think you could dial up the smug condescension just a little bit more?

He really can't. I have several patents on the most extreme forms of smug condescension in existence, and if he violates my patents, I will use every legal resource to protect them.

I have a competing product line which is copyright protected and far superior in measurable smugness as measured and published by J D Power and Associates.