Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Breccia]

I don't know if this was posted recently. Glenn Beck went on MSNBC to talk about how one of his callers (so, a pretty far right conservative) threatened Trump with violence if Trump backed down on his immigration policy. The caller was offered an out, and doubled down on it. Beck called the the spookiest call he's ever gotten.

Glenn Beck's 15 minutes might be ticking down, but when he says "Donald Trump is frightening" and "I don't think Donald Trump has even read the Constitution" (yes exact quotes, yes correct context, watch the video) it still carries weight.

[Pangean]

Honestly, they should have a few folks there whose sole job is to fact check both candidates and call them out when they're wrong.

And Gilbert Gottfried is the one to do all the speaking on their behalf and argue with candidates when they don't like being fact checked.

Yeah I think the first or second time would be enough for me to turn off the tv. I can't stand his persona, no offense to him. I think it should be Morgan Freemen.

[Edge-]

Crowley read the transcript, and it said what it said. Romney was bullshitting and Crowley couldn't remain neutral and chose objectivity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfmKpA30Xeo

Yeah, same thing happened during the Republican primary debates with the guy fact checking Cruz on the SCOTUS issue. To which the crowd boo'd the moderator for daring the correct Cruz with facts.

Trump will present a terrible problem in the debate. I kind of hope he just bails on them because our media system won't be able to deal with the neutrality/objectivity conflict.

If Trump wants to try to get away with continuing to lie through his teeth, that's his problem. If he ends up saying more dishonest shit than Hillary and consequently has a disproportionate amount of time spent correcting him, that's his problem. I just hope the moderators will have the balls (metaphorically speaking) to call both candidates out any time either one says something dishonest.

Yeah I think the first or second time would be enough for me to turn off the tv. I can't stand his persona, no offense to him. I think it should be Morgan Freemen.

That's kinda the point. To make the result of fact checking be so odious and unappealing that the candidates are forced to stick to facts for fear of pissing off literally the entire viewing audience with a Gottfried fact check : D

[Noxx79]

Neutrality is about avoiding taking sides.
Objectivity is fidelity to the facts and acknowledging/correcting self biases in viewing said facts.

Cooper can pull off neutrality when he tries. But when Trump says something demonstrably impossible or untrue, the debate moderator is going to have to suspend objectivity and pretend like the facts aren't as they are in order to maintain neutrality.

EDIT: my point is that you have to choose. We can't have both a Neutral moderator and an objective Moderator and have them be the same person.

You can remain neutral and objective as long as both sides are treated the same. If trump lies and the moderator corrects him, then he'd have to correct a Hillary lie as well.

If one side is constantly lying, that's not on the moderator - that's on the debater.

In a perfect world, this wouldn't be necessary, as both sides should agree to reality and debate what they think should be policy. There can be legitimate disagreement with policy even if both sides agree to the same facts.

Of course the sign of a weaker argument (or bad persuasive skills) is fudging or skewing facts to bolster your argument.
If you have to lie to prove a point, it's not a very good point.

[Breccia]

I kind of hope he just bails on them because our media system won't be able to deal with the neutrality/objectivity conflict.

Cooper recently had an interview with Trump which I linked above. You could see him, trying to dart in when facts were being manhandled, but it was just him and Trump and Trump don't stop a lie for nobody. But in the debate, Clinton could very easily call out "that's a lie" when he repeats any of his laundry list of repeated, factually false statements (which I'm 100% sure she'll memorize before coming). Cooper could back her up, mostly by not cutting her off, or throwing her a chance to rebut the claim over and above her next scheduled question. It's possible, but riskier, that he'd just flat out confirm "she's right, you're wrong". If he does, I'll get a plane ticket to Atlanta and shake the man's hand.

[DeadmanWalking]

I don't know if this was posted recently. Glenn Beck went on MSNBC to talk about how one of his callers (so, a pretty far right conservative) threatened Trump with violence if Trump backed down on his immigration policy. The caller was offered an out, and doubled down on it. Beck called the the spookiest call he's ever gotten.

Glenn Beck's 15 minutes might be ticking down, but when he says "Donald Trump is frightening" and "I don't think Donald Trump has even read the Constitution" (yes exact quotes, yes correct context, watch the video) it still carries weight.

Not to mention that he doesn't know the policies and practices of the party he is now the head of?

[Breccia]

You can remain neutral and objective as long as both sides are treated the same. If trump lies and the moderator corrects him, then he'd have to correct a Hillary lie as well.

I agree and endorse this, because I'm pretty sure Clinton's far safer from this threat. Let aside she lies less often, she's a lawyer, and trained better. Trump's a salesman.

- - - Updated - - -

Not to mention that he doesn't know the policies and practices of the party he is now the head of?

I believe that's largely what scares Beck, yes. And I believe it because he says so in the interview.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Honestly, they should have a few folks there whose sole job is to fact check both candidates and call them out when they're wrong.

And Gilbert Gottfried is the one to do all the speaking on their behalf and argue with candidates when they don't like being fact checked.

But if they did this, then there'd be even more crying that the media has a liberal bias! Reality is liberally bias after all.

[mvaliz]

Honestly, they should have a few folks there whose sole job is to fact check both candidates and call them out when they're wrong.

And Gilbert Gottfried is the one to do all the speaking on their behalf and argue with candidates when they don't like being fact checked.

We have that - it's called "PolitiFact.com" - but every time Dump gets called out on more of his lies than Clinton does, the Dumpsters claims they have a "liberal bias" and shuns it.

Seriously, as of this count - apparently the FBI, The CIA, The Secret Service, Science, Every single news network sans Breitbart, Facebook, PolitiFact and every single current polling station are, according to the Dumpsters, totally biased against Dump.

I mean, how the hell do you convince these tools if it walks, talks and acts like a liar - it's a fukkin liar!? They yell at Clinton for "lying all the time" yet she does not, and Donald Dump lies MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY and they won't even bat an eye!!!!

[Ghostpanther]

I don't know if this was posted recently. Glenn Beck went on MSNBC to talk about how one of his callers (so, a pretty far right conservative) threatened Trump with violence if Trump backed down on his immigration policy. The caller was offered an out, and doubled down on it. Beck called the the spookiest call he's ever gotten.

Glenn Beck's 15 minutes might be ticking down, but when he says "Donald Trump is frightening" and "I don't think Donald Trump has even read the Constitution" (yes exact quotes, yes correct context, watch the video) it still carries weight.

Glenn Beck is another GOP far right conservative who is still fuming that so many voted for Trump. I would take what he says with a hefty dose of salt. :P

[ringpriest]

We have that - it's called "PolitiFact.com" - but every time Dump gets called out on more of his lies than Clinton does, the Dumpsters claims they have a "liberal bias" and shuns it.

Seriously, as of this count - apparently the FBI, The CIA, The Secret Service, Science, Every single news network sans Breitbart, Facebook, PolitiFact and every single current polling station are, according to the Dumpsters, totally biased against Dump.

I mean, how the hell do you convince these tools if it walks, talks and acts like a liar - it's a fukkin liar!? They yell at Clinton for "lying all the time" yet she does not, and Donald Dump lies MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY and they won't even bat an eye!!!!

They (the Dumpsters) are sort-of, technically, correct - because in 21st Century US politics, the GOP (and in particular its self-labeled "conservative" wing) have become strongly associated with willful ignorance and reality denial. So a site like Politifact, or any objective journalist is "biased" because they refuse to buy in to the (insanely idiotic and reprehensible) idea that ignorance is as good (if not better than) knowledge.

[Breccia]

Well it's 50 minutes to showtime. Anyone want to guess what Trump will say Wednesday on immigration, that will somehow win him more voters than his already-cemented white uneducated male xenophobic/racist base, that would vote for him no matter what? I mean, we know about the wall. We know about the deportations. We know about no amnesty. And we know, if he backs off on any of that, a chunk of his core following will turn on him with such relentless bile that it scares even Glenn Beck, who doesn't like Trump at all. So what else could he possibly add to this, that will get him people besides those?

[Shalcker]

Well it's 50 minutes to showtime. Anyone want to guess what Trump will say Wednesday on immigration, that will somehow win him more voters than his already-cemented white uneducated male xenophobic/racist base, that would vote for him no matter what? I mean, we know about the wall. We know about the deportations. We know about no amnesty. And we know, if he backs off on any of that, a chunk of his core following will turn on him with such relentless bile that it scares even Glenn Beck, who doesn't like Trump at all. So what else could he possibly add to this, that will get him people besides those?

Actually we do not know how big is that "rabid" chunk, and if they can be persuaded by other concessions (like The Wall still being built). You're obviously exaggerating threat of him "going soft".

So far his position seems to be "get them in queue for citizenship, no special programs, no cutting the line, possibly no welfare for them, and deport criminal offenders". ...and current official queue for citizenship is extremely limited in throughput, which will give an out for his xenophobic (but not necessarily racist - those two are not the same) base to keep supporting him.

[zenkai]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...l-lead-n639591



Hillary Clinton's national lead over Donald Trump has narrowed slightly to 6 points, according to the latest NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll

Clinton now enjoys 48 percent support, while Trump holds steady with 42 percent. Last week, Clinton led Trump by 8 points. The latest NBC News|SurveyMonkey poll was conducted online from August 22 through August 28 among registered voters.

[Ghostpanther]

Well it's 50 minutes to showtime. Anyone want to guess what Trump will say Wednesday on immigration, that will somehow win him more voters than his already-cemented white uneducated male xenophobic/racist base, that would vote for him no matter what? I mean, we know about the wall. We know about the deportations. We know about no amnesty. And we know, if he backs off on any of that, a chunk of his core following will turn on him with such relentless bile that it scares even Glenn Beck, who doesn't like Trump at all. So what else could he possibly add to this, that will get him people besides those?

Basically, build a wall, do away with sanctuary cities practices and enforce the laws on illegal immigration, will have compassion for the families here illegally who are not or have been involved in criminal activity and non for those who have.

The only shift will be a more reasonable and humane way to deal with the millions who are here illegally ( and not committed crimes ) other than rounding them up and shipping them out. A process which will require them to do in order to stay.

That is my guess from what I have seen him say about it recently. And I do not give 2 shits what Beck thinks. A softening of deporting 11+ million illegals here is not going to make him lose votes overall. In fact, I predict he will gain more than he loses.

[zenkai]

Source

BIAS ALERT: CNN scrubs 'Crooked' from Trump tweet

CNN ensured a Sunday night Donald Trump statement about Hillary Clinton wasn’t “crooked” – but that might be the entire problem for the news network.

A tweet from the Republican presidential candidate appeared to be edited and scrubbed of the word “crooked” when a graphic on Trump was shown Sunday night, Breitbart News reported. The only word omitted from the tweet was part of Trump’s infamous descriptor for his Democratic opponent, whom he almost unfailingly calls “Crooked Hillary.”

No other words were left out of the CNN graphic or anchor Jim Sciutto’s read of the tweet.

Donald J. Trump
✔ @realDonaldTrump

I think that both candidates, Crooked Hillary and myself, should release detailed medical records. I have no problem in doing so! Hillary?


CNN appeared to edit the word "Crooked" from Donald Trump's tweet on Sunday.

Trump had originally written: “I think that both candidates, Crooked Hillary and myself, should release detailed medical records. I have no problem in doing so! Hillary?”

Trump’s use of nicknames to describe his adversaries – Crazy Bernie, Lyin’ Ted, Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, Goofy Elizabeth Warren – have been one of his most consistent traits during the 2016 cycle

Not sure why they would edit out a direct quote...

[GennGreymane]

I don't know if this was posted recently. Glenn Beck went on MSNBC to talk about how one of his callers (so, a pretty far right conservative) threatened Trump with violence if Trump backed down on his immigration policy. The caller was offered an out, and doubled down on it. Beck called the the spookiest call he's ever gotten.

Glenn Beck's 15 minutes might be ticking down, but when he says "Donald Trump is frightening" and "I don't think Donald Trump has even read the Constitution" (yes exact quotes, yes correct context, watch the video) it still carries weight.

Much spook!

[mvaliz]

Well it's 50 minutes to showtime. Anyone want to guess what Trump will say Wednesday on immigration, that will somehow win him more voters than his already-cemented white uneducated male xenophobic/racist base, that would vote for him no matter what? I mean, we know about the wall. We know about the deportations. We know about no amnesty. And we know, if he backs off on any of that, a chunk of his core following will turn on him with such relentless bile that it scares even Glenn Beck, who doesn't like Trump at all. So what else could he possibly add to this, that will get him people besides those?

Easy, he's going to say he's for allowing an easier path for current illegal immigrants (that of course is NOT amnesty ;P) while keeping forign muslims out and build the wall so that no more illegals come through. Then he will also say in the end of the speech he will beef up security to mass deport current illegals in the US...

The media and any logical person would see the obvious contradiction, but Dump will blame the media for twisting his words, and the Alt-conserv mongrel white trash will focus on just the last part about deportations and ignore the contradictions.

[Breccia]

I guess what worries me is this new twist of his, that he dropped during the Cooper interview. Why make peaceful illegals leave, then come back? Then I figured it out -- I think.

The President has the power to ban people of a certain group, such as those coming from certain countries, from entering the US. Trump's a HUUUGE fan of this, as he's brought it up dozens of times, maybe a hundred times. By requiring the illegals to leave first, he can throw them in with the "no, you're a terrorist, you can't enter" checklist he's adamant he's going to make. Illegal immigrants from, say, Iran, when they leave, won't be allowed back into the country because they're "from" Iran, and therefore a terrorist -- regardless of why they left Iran in the first place.

Now he's made statements later that may, or may not, be a retraction of this. It's honestly hard to tell. But with the legal power to block certain countries from entering, the "they all have to leave first" could be a back door of kicking specific illegals out of the country, namely, those from the countries Trump says harbor terrorists, which happen coincidentally to be predominantly Muslim countries. (His original ban idea for Muslims, and it seems highly unlikely he'll label Russia, Mexico or China as a country with "proven history of terrorism", so everyone knows what he means)

Either way, I suspect mvallas is right. He's going to slyly wink at both the moderates, and his own hardcore followers, hinting that he'll do only what one group wants. Should that come to pass, I will enjoy watching Trump and his staff get grilled over the definition of "amnesty" and how their plan differs from Jeb Bush's, It is, after all, easy to claim your words have been twisted when you're the one twisting them.

EDIT: Also, another Republican is jumping ship. Ronald Reagan's solicitor general and Harvard Law professor Charles Fried, who fled the Nazis to come to the US, says of Trump "This is a man about whom the best you can say is that he doesn't believe anything he says. After that, it's downhill all the way."

[Jimmy Woods]

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...l-lead-n639591



Hillary Clinton's national lead over Donald Trump has narrowed slightly to 6 points, according to the latest NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll

Clinton now enjoys 48 percent support, while Trump holds steady with 42 percent. Last week, Clinton led Trump by 8 points. The latest NBC News|SurveyMonkey poll was conducted online from August 22 through August 28 among registered voters.

Predictable though. Trump seems to have a hard cap of support around 38%. As Clinton's lead grows more people feel more confident saying they will vote for Stein or Johnson, and then once it becomes too close for comfort they throw their support back to Clinton. Trump needs to suppress the vote, which maybe he's doing with his "outreach to blacks and minorities" and Trump needs to boost Stein and Johnson support if he wants to win with his tiny coalition of support.


Trump employed Illegal Immigrants as 'Trump Models' and possible human trafficking?

"I was there illegally," she said. "A sitting duck."

"Honestly, they are the most crooked agency I've ever worked for, and I've worked for quite a few," said Rachel Blais.

"The apartment was like a sweatshop," said a former Trump model.

Man, it's so fun seeing all the shit being discovered by the real media digging into Trump's past. Even Trump's campaign CEO Bannon has said in the past the "liberal media" is the best at what they do when they get their sights set on a story.


Meanwhile, Trump is going to walk into court next month accused of raping a child. NO BIG DEAL MEDIA... Maybe too close ties to Bill Clinton, but last time I checked he's not running for President despite how much the mouth breathers link his actions to Hillary Clinton.