Well, it's happening, Trump is starting to lose bad in the polls..

[Pangean]

Don't dissapoint Newt. I'm counting on you.

Ladbrokes current odds

Jeff Sessions 3/1
Newt Gingrich 3/1
Chris Christie 3/1
John Kasich 5/1
Mike Pence 10/1

[Mafic]

Well, welcome to American politics then. It is often a choice between the lesser of two evils.

It has never been this way in the past. This is a recent phenomena.

[Pangean]

Things are still rough on the SS Trump with crew members jumping ship.

Two more resignations hit Donald Trump’s tumultuous campaign

DENVER — Donald Trump’s campaign is in a tumultuous state, with at least two staffers resigning this week and joining a growing list of personnel who have parted ways with the campaign in recent months.

Kevin Kellems, who was recently brought on to be the director of surrogates on Trump’s campaign, announced his resignation in a short email to associates obtained Friday by The Washington Post. Erica Freeman, another aide who worked with surrogates, also resigned, a person familiar with her decision said.

At the same time, Trump continues to add staff for the general election. He announced Friday that he has hired veteran Republican strategist Kellyanne Conway, who joins the team fresh off a stretch working for a super PAC that supported Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and was highly critical of Trump. The campaign also promoted Karen Giorno to senior political adviser.

The moves will add two experienced women to a senior team that has been predominantly male.

But even as Trump continues to staff up, many of his aides have left as part of ongoing turmoil in the team’s ranks.

Kellyanne Conway, a former supporter of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), has signed on with Donald Trump’s campaign. (Rainier Ehrhardt/AP)
Vincent Harris, a strategist whom the campaign recently enlisted to help with its digital efforts, is no longer associated with the campaign, Harris said this week.

Last week, Trump fired his longtime campaign manager Corey Lewandowski after months of him clashing with other staffers and concerns from his children that Lewandowski was not up to the task.

And in late May, Trump ousted Rick Wiley, an experienced GOP operative who, like Lewandowski, clashed with others on the team.

“While brief, it has been an interesting experience, and am proud of the contributions made through our early-phase project endeavors,” Kellems wrote in the email announcing his departure. “Also have enjoyed meeting some fine and dedicated individuals throughout the organization. Look forward to running across several of you going forward.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...mepage%2Fstory

[Thepersona]

im for hillary, but like pangean said, not because i like her... but (in my case) because as a latin american that wants to do a post-graduate degree on your country, i dont want to be in a hate-filled zone just because of my surname (and i dont even look latino lol)
you had a good candidate (sanders) and you people on the right have a decent candidate (the libertarian guy). clinton is far from being good, but is the best thing you have
PS: and i have the most latino sounding surname, Gonzalez

[Bollocks]

im for hillary, but like pangean said, not because i like her... but (in my case) because as a latin american that wants to do a post-graduate degree on your country, i dont want to be in a hate-filled zone just because of my surname (and i dont even look latino lol)
you had a good candidate (sanders) and you people on the right have a decent candidate (the libertarian guy). clinton is far from being good, but is the best thing you have
PS: and i have the most latino sounding surname, Gonzalez

Sanders a good candidate? I mean he has the best intentions but he isn't precisely the most suited man to be president and a lot of his ideas, specially economic policies are a bit cuckoo.

[Breccia]

So the genius who vetted Palin is vetting Trump's choice for VP. How did that work out last time? Is this a sign of things to come?

Wait, he's asking the possible VP picks to turn over their tax records? Isn't that the height of hypocrisy?

[Pangean]

Sanders a good candidate? I mean he has the best intentions but he isn't precisely the most suited man to be president and a lot of his ideas, specially economic policies are a bit cuckoo.

I think like in all things we let our own priorities determine the continuum of politicians and where these politicians fall on it. I am fairly left but one of the first things that turned me off of the Clinton campaign is the hereditary nature of American politics. Presidents 41-43 and possibly 45 are all from the same two family's. In a nation of over 300 million people that is a travesty and cannot continue. Regardless of her politics and her actions this alone was enough to discount Clinton as a candidate for me. After that her normal baggage is an issue for me.

But in the continuum of politics I would still vote for her over Trump or Johnson. Trump for obvious reasons and Johnson because he is anti-worker. No candidate is perfect and there are faults with all of them. All we can do is place them on our continuum and vote for who best matches our ideal.

- - - Updated - - -

Wait, he's asking the possible VP picks to turn over their tax records? Isn't that the height of hypocrisy?

I assume that's a rhetorical question? You know reporters are going to go after him for this.

[Thepersona]

Sanders a good candidate? I mean he has the best intentions but he isn't precisely the most suited man to be president and a lot of his ideas, specially economic policies are a bit cuckoo.

some policies of sanders are doable, but with anything they require time, a lot of time (like 10 years). and now we live in a short-lived politician agenda

[Bollocks]

some policies of sanders are doable, but with anything they require time, a lot of time (like 10 years). and now we live in a short-lived politician agenda

The idea of his policies are doable, but how he plans to execute them are wrong IMO. Like his increase to 15$ minimum wage.

[Alydael]

The number of terrorist attacks are actually decreasing on the whole, believe it or not.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...t-in-the-west/

I'm on the side that agrees terrorism probably isn't something we need to build a platform on. Defense as a whole, yes, but singling out terrorism is probably more dangerous than not. It takes like 0.00000001% of people to make a bad decision to really affect the way we think, and it's really hard to protect against that.

Terrorism isn't my main concern either, although I live in a place that is routinely targeted. However don't think it isn't an important topic for most people. Personally, I believe that the number (and ferocity) of the attacks leading up to the election could play a role in the results.

- - - Updated - - -

It has never been this way in the past. This is a recent phenomena.

It doesn't really matter how it was in the past, that's the way it is now (and, unless something unforeseen happens), the foreseeable future.

[Felya]

It has never been this way in the past. This is a recent phenomena.

I don't think it's really the candidates that changed, nearly as much as media exposure. The Internet and the mobile internet has expanded media influence beyond any point in history. Even ignoring Trump's social media presence as an outlier, politicians have far greater exposure than ever in history.

Other than that, the only thing unique about our current main candidates is what's on ones resume and what's between the legs of the other.

[Deleted]

Clinton is the real life burning legion and will be in prison by september

[alexw]

So as folks know Trump's VP picks have leaked. A lot of attention has been on the candidates themselves. There have even been jokes about Palin being a possible candidate. The world being very small in GOP circles I stumbled on this. Not sure how I missed it before.

"The contenders under the most serious consideration, such as Gingrich and Christie, have been asked by attorney Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr. to answer more than 100 questions and to provide reams of personal and professional files that include tax records and any articles or books they have published.

Culvahouse, a former White House counsel who is managing the vetting for Trump, was the lawyer who vetted then-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin for the GOP vice-presidential nomination during the 2008 campaign. "
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...275_story.html

So the genius who vetted Palin is vetting Trump's choice for VP. How did that work out last time? Is this a sign of things to come?

In Christie's case I think the reporters have got confused and mistaken PV next to his name as a typo of VP. Its not. Christie is running for the position of presidential valet.

[Pangean]

In Christie's case I think the reporters have got confused and mistaken PV next to his name as a typo of VP. Its not. Christie is running for the position of presidential valet.

Lol. Regardless of which position, Christie is being smart looking for a new job given how much folks in New Jersey think he is horrible as governor. The problem though is the outfit Trump is making him wear.



- - - Updated - - -

So Trump's campaign is firmly in the hands of Paul Manafort with the firing of Corey Lewandowski. I am sure some know the character of the person already for those that don't this article should give you all you need to know.

The hypocrisy at the heart of Trump’s campaign

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, had a message to deliver.

“Hillary Clinton is the epitome of the establishment; she’s been in power for 25 years,” he informed Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last Sunday.

When Trump, Manafort added, “says he’s going to bring real change to the country, voters believe him — unlike Mrs. Clinton, who has been saying that for 25 years and in those 25 years, the only changes that have happened have made people’s lives worse.”

But then, at the tail end of the interview, Manafort slipped when discussing evangelical Christians’ support for Trump. “In my 40 years in politics, I have never seen such a broad-based base of support within that community for one candidate.”

Forty years in politics? But it’s Clinton’s 25 years that make her the “establishment”?

If that weren’t enough, Manafort was giving the interview from the Hamptons — playground of the eastern elite.

This is the hypocrisy at the heart of the Trump campaign, now under Manafort’s undisputed control. Manafort’s inspiration, which Trump has embraced, is to portray Clinton as the embodiment of the establishment. But Manafort (not unlike Trump) has been the voice of the wealthy and the well-connected for four decades, building a fortune by making common cause with the world’s most avaricious.

Among Manafort’s boasts: representing kleptocrats Ferdinand Marcos, Mobutu Sese Seko and Kenya’s Daniel arap Moi, defending Saudi Arabia’s interests against Israel’s and Pakistan’s against India’s, and making the case for a Nigerian dictator, a Lebanese arms dealer and various and sundry Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs. He successfully lobbied to arm a Maoist rebel in Angola, needlessly extending fighting that killed thousands.

It’s Manafort’s right to represent dictators and thugs and regimes that torture. He has, for decades, helped autocrats who battle human rights and democracy. But now this man, who made his fortune helping the rich and powerful get more so, is setting up a general-election campaign that portrays Trump as a man of the people and Clinton as the captive of special interests.

Manafort has been widely credited with this week’s speech by Trump laying out his general-election theme: that Clinton is the defender of the big-money interests and the “rigged” economy.

“Hillary Clinton has perfected the politics of personal profit and even theft. She ran the State Department like her own personal hedge fund, doing favors for oppressive regimes,” Trump argued. “Hillary Clinton wants to bring in people who believe women should be enslaved and gays put to death. . . . Hillary Clinton may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency of the United States.”

And the man who led Trump to deliver such accusations? Here’s what my Post colleagues Steven Mufson and Tom Hamburger reported in April:

“In one case, Manafort tried unsuccessfully to build a luxury high-rise in Manhattan with money from a billionaire backer of a Ukrainian president whom he had advised.

“In another deal, real estate records show that Manafort took out and later repaid a $250,000 loan from a Middle Eastern arms dealer at the center of a French inquiry into whether kickbacks were paid . . . ”

“And in another business venture, a Russian aluminum magnate has accused Manafort in a Cayman Islands court of taking nearly $19 million intended for investments, then failing to account for the funds. . . . ”

Manafort has been a paragon of the Washington Republican establishment for two generations, working on Gerald Ford’s reelection in 1976 before helping Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole. He started two lobbying firms, and he has used his contacts in attempts to enrich himself. His lobbying firm recruited veterans of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, then lobbied for $43 million in subsidies for a housing project, while holding an option to buy a stake in the project.

Manafort is steeped in the racial politics Trump has exploited. As Franklin Foer writes for Slate, Manafort ran Reagan’s Southern operation in 1980; the candidate kicked off his general-election campaign outside Philadelphia, Miss., scene of the murder of civil rights activists in 1964. Manafort later became a business partner of Lee Atwater, who gained fame for Bush’s Willie Horton campaign in 1988.

Introduced to Trump by Roy Cohn, lawyer to Joe McCarthy, Manafort helped Trump fight Indian casinos by alleging that the Native Americans had a crime problem; Trump and his associates paid a $250,000 fine after secretly funding advertisements besmirching the Indians.

Now Trump is engaged in a general-election campaign to portray Clinton as the candidate of the establishment. That’s fair enough: She has been atop the country’s elite for a quarter-century. But the man leading this effort spent a much longer career benefiting the wealthy and powerful, including Trump, at the expense of the poor and weak. That’s rich.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...homepage/story

[Ripster42]

Lol. Regardless of which position, Christie is being smart looking for a new job given how much folks in New Jersey think he is horrible as governor. The problem though is the outfit Trump is making him wear.



- - - Updated - - -

So Trump's campaign is firmly in the hands of Paul Manafort with the firing of Corey Lewandowski. I am sure some know the character of the person already for those that don't this article should give you all you need to know.

The hypocrisy at the heart of Trump’s campaign

Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, had a message to deliver.

“Hillary Clinton is the epitome of the establishment; she’s been in power for 25 years,” he informed Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last Sunday.

When Trump, Manafort added, “says he’s going to bring real change to the country, voters believe him — unlike Mrs. Clinton, who has been saying that for 25 years and in those 25 years, the only changes that have happened have made people’s lives worse.”

But then, at the tail end of the interview, Manafort slipped when discussing evangelical Christians’ support for Trump. “In my 40 years in politics, I have never seen such a broad-based base of support within that community for one candidate.”

Forty years in politics? But it’s Clinton’s 25 years that make her the “establishment”?

If that weren’t enough, Manafort was giving the interview from the Hamptons — playground of the eastern elite.

more stuff]

Not much of an argument against trump, so much as manafort. I hate trump but he could easily construe this as him gaining political savvy by using people to accomplish his goals. He's just a campaign manager, not part of his cabinet, and unless he actually wins, we'll never know what the quid manafort is getting for his pro. Go after him for actual things, this complaint seems lacking.

[Pangean]

Not much of an argument against trump, so much as manafort. I hate trump but he could easily construe this as him gaining political savvy by using people to accomplish his goals. He's just a campaign manager, not part of his cabinet, and unless he actually wins, we'll never know what the quid manafort is getting for his pro. Go after him for actual things, this complaint seems lacking.

Yeah that's the point.

[Wulfey]

Not much of an argument against trump, so much as manafort. I hate trump but he could easily construe this as him gaining political savvy by using people to accomplish his goals. He's just a campaign manager, not part of his cabinet, and unless he actually wins, we'll never know what the quid manafort is getting for his pro. Go after him for actual things, this complaint seems lacking.

When you use a bad man's words, strategies, and deceptions; do you not absorb some of his badness? What about when you pay him for such crapitude? Trump has made Manafort his number 1 in Trump's most important project (running for president). Trump has endorsed Manafort to the maximum extent Trump can. And Manafort's history of representing demagogues and dictators fits nicely with working with Trump. We can read back Manafort's actions onto Trump.

[Pangean]

Hmm so while Trump is continuing to refuse to release his tax returns (while asking for others) people have been questioning why he is doing so. Some think it's because his charitable donation claims are bullshit (which lots of reporting have demonstrated) or he is not as wealthy as he claims. To the latter the Guardian has a report that Wells Fargo Securities submitted to the SEC a report showing he was worth less than half of that in 2012. I am sure his supporters will claim he more than doubled his wealth in three years.

SEC document shows Trump was worth less than half of $10bn claim in 2012

On the 2016 campaign trail, Donald Trump has insisted that he is worth more than $10bn. However, a statement filed to the Securities and Exchange Commission by Wells Fargo Securities on Trump’s behalf in 2012 indicated that the real estate developer was then worth less than half that, with comparatively few of the liquid assets that may now finance his campaign for president.

In the document, which concerned the securitization of commercial mortgages on properties including Trump Tower in New York City, Trump was described as being worth more than $4.2bn, with liquid assets of more than $250m.

A passage in the 132-page filing says: “The sponsor is Donald J Trump. Mr Trump has significant commercial real estate holdings worldwide including interests in office, retail, residential, golf-clubs and hospitality properties in markets including New York, San Francisco, Florida, Washington DC, and Scotland. As of 30 June 2011, Mr Trump reports a net worth in excess of $4.2bn and liquidity in excess of $250m.”

The Trump campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Jessica Ong, a spokeswoman for Wells Fargo, insisted the 2012 filing was correct.

She said: “Obviously, if it was inaccurate, we wouldn’t have filed it with the SEC.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...es-us-election

- - - Updated - - -

Lol according to Trump the investigation of Clinton has ended with her not being charged.



Someones reading the right wing nutter blogs again.

[edw]

Polls are showing a very high unfavorable rate among American (70%). Polls are showing the lead Clinton has is starting to expand. Things are not going to end well for Trump. GOP keep backing away from him like he has the plague. Trump is going to declare Independent soon, mark my words.

The guy backtracked so so much ... anyway he should start a fund raiser if he loses to build that wall of his no?

[Zyster]

Hmm so while Trump is continuing to refuse to release his tax returns (while asking for others) people have been questioning why he is doing so. Some think it's because his charitable donation claims are bullshit (which lots of reporting have demonstrated) or he is not as wealthy as he claims. To the latter the Guardian has a report that Wells Fargo Securities submitted to the SEC a report showing he was worth less than half of that in 2012. I am sure his supporters will claim he more than doubled his wealth in three years.

SEC document shows Trump was worth less than half of $10bn claim in 2012

On the 2016 campaign trail, Donald Trump has insisted that he is worth more than $10bn. However, a statement filed to the Securities and Exchange Commission by Wells Fargo Securities on Trump’s behalf in 2012 indicated that the real estate developer was then worth less than half that, with comparatively few of the liquid assets that may now finance his campaign for president.

In the document, which concerned the securitization of commercial mortgages on properties including Trump Tower in New York City, Trump was described as being worth more than $4.2bn, with liquid assets of more than $250m.

A passage in the 132-page filing says: “The sponsor is Donald J Trump. Mr Trump has significant commercial real estate holdings worldwide including interests in office, retail, residential, golf-clubs and hospitality properties in markets including New York, San Francisco, Florida, Washington DC, and Scotland. As of 30 June 2011, Mr Trump reports a net worth in excess of $4.2bn and liquidity in excess of $250m.”

The Trump campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Jessica Ong, a spokeswoman for Wells Fargo, insisted the 2012 filing was correct.

She said: “Obviously, if it was inaccurate, we wouldn’t have filed it with the SEC.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...es-us-election

- - - Updated - - -

Lol according to Trump the investigation of Clinton has ended with her not being charged.



Someones reading the right wing nutter blogs again.

Mocking Trump supporters while creating a conspiracy theory that won't get infracted by using supporting evidence in a worth in $$ that is 4 years old. Keep up the good fight!