US General Election Thread III: Clinton vs. Trump

[The balkens]

Um what?

Get it, because Trump is shooting himself in the foot?

With what gun?

[Lancaster of Wessex]

That's from the choir. Trump is a dead duck on National Security issues.

With Daffy as Donald (apologies to Daffy):

[Neutraligon]

And DBW is not Hillary Clinton.

So?

I am unsure what is wrong with cooperating with the media and the DNC. Please be specific as to what is wrong with that.

Follow the discussion back, it started as a commentary about Clinton rigging the election. All of what was said was said in that context.

[Lancaster of Wessex]

That's from the choir. Trump is a dead duck on National Security issues.

Which brings up an interesting question, if he does go to the debates what is he going to do in the debate about National Security or the debate about foreign relations?

Use bluster, exaggerations, and baseless accusations (i.e. what he usually does).

[Relentless Oppression]

Follow the discussion back, it started as a commentary about Clinton rigging the election. All of what was said was said in that context.

I just saw that. Error's mine. Sorry for the dead end line of argument.

[New Jerzylvania]

You fall once and you're unqualified for the presidency, I guess.

If you're going to my president, you better be as graceful and dexterous as a ballerina, dammit!

However the President can vomit on a foreign leader.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnOnDatqENo

But it won't get you re-elected.

[Neutraligon]

Follow the discussion back, it started as a commentary about Clinton rigging the election. All of what was said was said in that context.

I just saw that. Error's mine. Sorry for the dead end line of argument.

No prob, I have done the same thing when I came into the discussion in the middle.

[New Jerzylvania]

That's from the choir. Trump is a dead duck on National Security issues.

With Daffy as Donald (apologies to Daffy):

I was thinking more Scrooge McDuck.

[Sane Outcasts]

Time to update the poll, there's a new candidate in the race: Evan McMullin

Washington (CNN)Conservative Republicans have recruited a former CIA staffer and top House GOP aide to launch an independent White House bid -- and he could cause problems for Donald Trump in a key state if he gets on the ballot.

Evan McMullin opened his bid for the White House Monday morning, announcing on his website: "It's never too late to do the right thing. And if we work together, there's nothing we can't achieve.".

"Evan has spent his entire career in service to our nation and today he's continuing on that path as a candidate for president -- he is running first and foremost out of a deep love for this country, and because he understands the true brand of American leadership that is required to be Commander-in-Chief," McMullin's campaign wrote in a message to supporters.

McMullin, who had been the policy director for the House Republican Conference, is a longshot for the White House at best -- facing high hurdles in the form of ballot access deadlines that have already passed in many states -- but will offer anti-Trump conservatives an alternative to Trump and Clinton.

Realistically, this guy has no chance of winning the election. It's too late to get on the ballot in some states, much less get his name recognition high enough to be recognized by most independent voters or get any strong donors. However, he is a conservative alternative to a candidate with a lot of negatives and there is time for him to be on the ballot in enough states to steal away conservatives votes in November. Normally I'd say he has no chance to even be a spoiler, but this election is so oddball I wouldn't be surprised to wake up tomorrow and read that the Koch brothers decided to back McMullin purely to spite Trump.

[New Jerzylvania]

Which brings up an interesting question, if he does go to the debates what is he going to do in the debate about National Security or the debate about foreign relations?

Use bluster, exaggerations, and baseless accusations (i.e. what he usually does).

He should start to vomit on Hillary but hthen Melania rushes on stage diving between the puke and Clinton, taking the stain. That might change the subject for awhile.

[Gauthier]

With Daffy as Donald (apologies to Daffy):

I was thinking more Scrooge McDuck.

Scrooge actually has money, so that's an insult to Scrooge.

[The Klishi Islands]

To address some common points against her:
-I don't believe she is actively corrupt per say, but I believe she is part of a system which can seem corrupt to those outside it. I do wish politicians were held to higher standards on misleading the public (for example, if a CEO misrepresents something in a report, he could get fired, fined or put in jail; politicians like Clinton get a public slap on the wrist or "administrative sanctions"). I'm not naive enough to think that is possible, though.
-I believe the Benghazi scandal is bull. Please, stop talking about it. It's stupid.
-I believe that she did do something wrong with her emails. Wrong does not mean illegal, and I will trust the FBI on that point. But I think it can be filed under two things: either following what her predecessors did without asking questions or understanding the technology, ignoring her subordinates' warnings, and getting caught, OR being "extremely careless" as Comey put it. Those are similar, I know.
-To quote my cousin, "She is a woman with no morals." I disagree. I think she's cold, distant, pragmatic, and sometimes probably selfish, but as an optimist I believe that nearly everyone has a moral compass.

To some extent, I agree. But as per my post near the end of the previous megathread:

Okay, so I've been here and read hundreds of emails to or from Hillary Clinton, possibly over a thousand. I don't pretend to have read them all, or even most of them, but I've read a fair cross-section across many subjects. And here's what I've found:

- Emails from Chelsea to do with the Clinton Foundation's work in Haiti, showing significant policy nous and concern for stuff that actually affects Haitians (as opposed to Western ideals which sound good, but don't help living arrangements), although Chelsea appears rather naive as far as Practical Politics 101 goes;
- A lot of heavily-redacted, though marked "unclassified", emails which appear from the context and headers to be prep-work for upcoming meetings/conferences/etc.;
- Even more emails from Clinton to Cheryl Mills (then her Chief of Staff), forwarding other emails and asking her to "pls print", presumably to leave a hardcopy record and/or to read in places/situations where e-reading is less appropriate/practical;
- Sid Blumenthal is a kiss-ass who thinks far, far too highly of himself and his unnamed "sources", whether they be in London, Libya or inbetween;
- Many (and probably genuine, given the informal tone of the emails in question and that they're sent to people in Clinton's inner circle) emails expressing significant concerns for civilians caught in the crossfire of particular conflicts;
- A lot of back-and-forth emails about the Haitian situation, including those by Chelsea (at top) - unsurprising given that it's literally on America's front doorstep and US neglect of a crisis there would almost certainly have spillover effects;
- Many emails addressing/referencing Clinton "old hands" in a diplomatic context (such as Strobe Talbott, for instance - his name pinged for me because I'd read his book Engaging India - a good read, incidentally);

Notably, what I did not find here - at least not as of yet - is anything even remotely nefarious. Nothing about the Clinton Foundation (or donors to it), nothing about any bribes or even references to them. The deeper I look into this, the more Emailgate looks like a tempest in a teacup - there's a "there" there (keeping the records on her own server was silly at best), but not much of one. A few emails have some classification markings on themselves or subsidiary (previous in the chain) emails, but it's very rare - the vast majority of redactions came from unclassified emails, indicating up-classification after the fact.

If I had to compile a professional profile on Clinton solely on what I've seen in the emails, I'd say this. Clinton appears to:

- Be a very hard and conscientious worker. She gets sent a lot of info over the internet, and her follow-up remarks often indicate that she did take the time to at least skim it. Also, many of the emails are sent/received as Clinton's in transit, rather than sitting in the office;
- Run a tight ship in general - all evidence is that her personal staff are/were a well-oiled machine that got the work done quickly;
- Consider prevention of a problem more important than curing it - this is most evidenced in her concerns about human trafficking in Haiti after the earthquake there, although it's also evident elsewhere;
- Focus hard on the immediate over the long-term. I saw very little evidence in the emails that Clinton looked much beyond the short-term consequences of decisions. This may be partly due to the crisis-driven nature of State's work, but it's not a desirable trait in the President;
- Have a very dry, almost acerbic, sense of humour, as well as little tolerance for "improper" behaviour past a certain point (see: Rudd, Kevin - who apparently swore like a sailor in Clinton's presence);
- Have, but not show, a level of compassion uncommon in senior leaders;
- Be quite capable of deep thought - i.e., seeing beneath the surface to ID the root cause of a problem; and
- Be very process-oriented over people-oriented. Her approach to a problem was to approach the problem, not the people involved in it. Personal diplomacy appears to be something she's capable of, but it's not her first thought. I'd classify it as "distant", rather than "cold" - more defensive than indicating any low level of regard for others.

Overall, I'm surprised she accepted the State Department in the first place - I'd say it's a fairly poor fit for her temperament, which would be better suited to more technically-oriented Departments, such as the Treasury.

If I had to give Clinton some advice as she looks increasingly likely to win the White House, it'd be largely as follows:

- Learn to delegate more, while still retaining oversight;
- Don't be afraid to connect to people on a personal level, especially when they're people who'll be working with/for/around you over a number of years - the personal touch can often make the impossible merely difficult;
- Focus more on the long-term effects of your actions. Let other people do short-term crisis management (unless matters get completely out of hand) - simply by entering a situation, you're escalating it due to being the President;
- Kick Sid Blumenthal to the curb - nicely, of course, but his advice is a prime example of GIGO.

I think that a lot of Clinton's coming off as a "cold" person are an artifact of the armour she's built up over her years in politics. It's to be expected - politics ain't beanbag, and it's not a place to wear your heart on your sleeve, either - but there's some sexism here, too. A senior male politician who's reserved, "on his dignity" and generally a little aloof is called "dignified" or "serious". But Clinton, who is certainly no colder than most of her one-time Senate colleagues, is called "cold" and "calculating".

I didn't see this reply. As I stated elsewhere (I think?), I don't think "cold and calculating" is necessarily a bad thing. As someone who is a bit cold and calculating and pragmatic myself, I appreciate someone who can separate themselves from their emotions and make rational, thought-out decisions. I'd call Clinton "dignified" and "serious" just the same, no doubt.

[New Jerzylvania]

Time to update the poll, there's a new candidate in the race: Evan McMullin

Washington (CNN)Conservative Republicans have recruited a former CIA staffer and top House GOP aide to launch an independent White House bid -- and he could cause problems for Donald Trump in a key state if he gets on the ballot.

Evan McMullin opened his bid for the White House Monday morning, announcing on his website: "It's never too late to do the right thing. And if we work together, there's nothing we can't achieve.".

"Evan has spent his entire career in service to our nation and today he's continuing on that path as a candidate for president -- he is running first and foremost out of a deep love for this country, and because he understands the true brand of American leadership that is required to be Commander-in-Chief," McMullin's campaign wrote in a message to supporters.

McMullin, who had been the policy director for the House Republican Conference, is a longshot for the White House at best -- facing high hurdles in the form of ballot access deadlines that have already passed in many states -- but will offer anti-Trump conservatives an alternative to Trump and Clinton.

Realistically, this guy has no chance of winning the election. It's too late to get on the ballot in some states, much less get his name recognition high enough to be recognized by most independent voters or get any strong donors. However, he is a conservative alternative to a candidate with a lot of negatives and there is time for him to be on the ballot in enough states to steal away conservatives votes in November. Normally I'd say he has no chance to even be a spoiler, but this election is so oddball I wouldn't be surprised to wake up tomorrow and read that the Koch brothers decided to back McMullin purely to spite Trump.

There's a thread on the subject: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=386189

[New Jerzylvania]

I was thinking more Scrooge McDuck.

Scrooge actually has money, so that's an insult to Scrooge.

Maybe Duckman then? He was so politically incorrect, so that part fits, and he was rude. Hey.

[The Klishi Islands]

Time to update the poll, there's a new candidate in the race: Evan McMullin



Realistically, this guy has no chance of winning the election. It's too late to get on the ballot in some states, much less get his name recognition high enough to be recognized by most independent voters or get any strong donors. However, he is a conservative alternative to a candidate with a lot of negatives and there is time for him to be on the ballot in enough states to steal away conservatives votes in November. Normally I'd say he has no chance to even be a spoiler, but this election is so oddball I wouldn't be surprised to wake up tomorrow and read that the Koch brothers decided to back McMullin purely to spite Trump.

There's a thread on the subject: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=386189

I'm enjoying how on this thread there is discussion to move to that thread, and on that thread there is discussion to move to this thread.

[PaNTuXIa]

Bernie was asked many times what his religious beliefs were. Perhaps "rigging elections" was inaccurate. But high-level members of her staff did cooperate with the media and DNC.

I am unsure what is wrong with cooperating with the media and the DNC. Please be specific as to what is wrong with that.

If it was 2003, and George Bush was doing this in order to drum up support for the Iraq War, you would be up in arms. But since it's Hillary, you find it perfectly acceptable. Manipulating public opinion via the news media is not acceptable, no matter who does it.

[PaNTuXIa]

Anyway, I updated my prediction:
http://www.270towin.com/maps/R6nJB

[Maineiacs]

This song is by request to Maineiacs (from the previous page).

Donald's Calling ~ (apologies to The Clash)

Donald's calling to the faraway towns
Now war is declared and battles dumbed down
Donald's calling to the underworld
Come out of the graveyard, old boys and girls
Donald's calling, now don't look to us
Phony Trumpmania has just bitten the dust
Donald's calling, see he ain't got cha-ching
'Cept for the ring of that xenophobic thing

The Nice age is coming, the truck is zooming in
Rundowns expected, the street's a bloody sin
Engines start running, and I have to fear
'Cause Donald is clowning, and I, I live with my niggas

Donald's calling in the immigration zone
Forget it, fuckers, you can go it alone
Donald's calling all the Nazis of death
Quit holding out and draw another breath
Donald's calling and I don't want to shout
But when he was talking I saw you nodding out
Donald's calling, see he ain't no tough guy
'Cept to that girl with the blood out her eyes

The Nice age is coming, the truck is zooming in
Rundowns expected, the street's a bloody sin
Engines start running, and I have to fear
'Cause Donald is clowning, and I, I live with my niggas

The Nice age is coming, the truck is zooming in
Rundowns expected, the street's a bloody sin
Engines start running, and I have to fear
'Cause Donald is clowning, and I, I live with my niggas

Now get this:

Donald's calling, yes, I can swear, too
An' you know what they said? Well, some of them were Jews!
Donald's calling to hack computer files
And after all this, could you not yell seig heil?

I never felt so much Third Reich, Third Reich, Third Reich.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vHvzybkqfo

Instructions: Copy link above, open another tab, paste link, play the song there as you read along back here on this tab.

Awesome!

[Neutraligon]

I am unsure what is wrong with cooperating with the media and the DNC. Please be specific as to what is wrong with that.

If it was 2003, and George Bush was doing this in order to drum up support for the Iraq War, you would be up in arms. But since it's Hillary, you find it perfectly acceptable. Manipulating public opinion via the news media is not acceptable, no matter who does it.

You are basing that on...what? Cooperating with the media is not the same as what you just described.

[PaNTuXIa]

If it was 2003, and George Bush was doing this in order to drum up support for the Iraq War, you would be up in arms. But since it's Hillary, you find it perfectly acceptable. Manipulating public opinion via the news media is not acceptable, no matter who does it.

You are basing that on...what? Cooperating with the media is not the same as what you just described.

It's an example. Say Bush or one of his staff decided to cooperate with Fox News in order to swing favorability towards Bush. That would be cooperating with the media.

[New Jerzylvania]

There's a thread on the subject: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=386189

I'm enjoying how on this thread there is discussion to move to that thread, and on that thread there is discussion to move to this thread.

Sideshow Bob or Krusty, hmmm?

[Lancaster of Wessex]

You are basing that on...what? Cooperating with the media is not the same as what you just described.

It's an example. Say Bush or one of his staff decided to cooperate with Fox News in order to swing favorability towards Bush. That would be cooperating with the media.

Fox "News" is an unofficial official wing of the Republican Party anyway, much like CNBC used to stump for the Dems on most issues (so it seemed).

[PaNTuXIa]

It's an example. Say Bush or one of his staff decided to cooperate with Fox News in order to swing favorability towards Bush. That would be cooperating with the media.

Fox "News" is an unofficial official wing of the Republican Party anyway, much like CNBC used to stump for the Dems on most issues (so it seemed).

Yeah, I know, just like MSNBC is owned by the Dems.

[Lancaster of Wessex]

Fox "News" is an unofficial official wing of the Republican Party anyway, much like CNBC used to stump for the Dems on most issues (so it seemed).

Yeah, I know, just like MSNBC is owned by the Dems.

Sorry, that's what I meant, MSNBC, not CNBC.

[Blakk Metal]

Get it, because Trump is shooting himself in the foot?

With what gun?

The concealed handgun he made up in order to look conservative.