Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Ghostpanther]

Interesting new poll which shows Trump gaining support with African Americans and Hispanics. http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...icanamericans/

While I understand how much the liberals hate Breitbart, the poll was not conducted by them. If this type of supports translates over to the election, ( not saying it will ) it will indeed be a bad night for Hillary.

[Orbitus]

Interesting new poll which shows Trump gaining support with African Americans and Hispanics. http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...icanamericans/

While I understand how much the liberals hate Breitbart, the poll was not conducted by them. If this type of supports translates over to the election, ( not saying it will ) it will indeed be a bad night for Hillary.

He would still need 47% of Hispanics to win, he won't get that and some sort of black support higher than that of what the poll suggested. The Franklin University poll, never even heard of it, has a B- rating from fivethirtyeight.com.

[jdbond592]

Interesting new poll which shows Trump gaining support with African Americans and Hispanics. http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...icanamericans/

While I understand how much the liberals hate Breitbart, the poll was not conducted by them. If this type of supports translates over to the election, ( not saying it will ) it will indeed be a bad night for Hillary.

I wouldn't know what Breitbart is if not for people like you quoting it. I am glad this "Breitbart" conducted a poll. Could be no worse than fox polls or something called Rasmussesn (?) poll. Come back to me when Mexico writes a check for a big beautiful walls and generals submit a plan to "destroy" ISIS.

[Breccia]

Well, another 24 hours, another couple things Trump has done to demonstrate his inability to be President.

One, he claimed that in his security briefings (ugh) that the intelligence officials seemed unhappy that Obama and Clinton didn't listen to their recommendations when making policy. Naturally some former intelligence officials made it clear to the public that intelligence officials don't set policy, and don't recommend policy, period.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politi...ama/index.html

Two, Trump claimed Clinton could not be president because she said she didn't remember something during a deposition (incidentally, it was about being trained how to use email correctly). Trump himself, in the Trump U depositions, said he didn't know/didn't remember dozens or hundreds of details, including the instructors he supposedly hand-picked.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...he-presidency/

Which is worse, the "it's okay if I do it, but not if she does it" or "my feelings are more important than your facts"? Or, was he just outright lying?

[Blobfish]

The "Shy Trumpers" could get Trumpy over the line

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/...1d6a9c8ae8f7e0

Republican and Democratic pollsters alike claim there is a growing number of ‘Shy Trumpers’ showing up in some polls — people who will vote for the Republican candidate on the day of the election, but won’t publicly admit to it.

The term ‘Shy Trumpers’ may be relatively new, but this phenomenon goes back to the early 1990s, when the UK’s Conservative Party won by a significantly higher vote than expected from the opinion polls. This became referred to as the ‘Shy Tory Factor’.

“Political correctness suggests that people are afraid to speak out about issues that they genuinely care about, when they’re out of touch with — how should I put this — the ‘elite opinion’,” said Switzer.
“They feel that they will get demonised if they say this publicly, and they’re ashamed to admit they would vote for Trump so publicly.”

“A lot of Americans are profoundly unhappy about the direction in which their country is going,” he said, adding that the Democratic candidate is one of the most unpopular runners for president we’ve seen.

There’s a number of reasons to explain Clinton’s recent fall in the polls, particularly the continuing interest in the private emails scandal,
which makes her seem untrustworthy.

[Ghostpanther]

I wouldn't know what Breitbart is if not for people like you quoting it. I am glad this "Breitbart" conducted a poll. Could be no worse than fox polls or something called Rasmussesn (?) poll. Come back to me when Mexico writes a check for a big beautiful walls and generals submit a plan to "destroy" ISIS.

It is clear you did not read my post well or the link. They ( Breitbart ) did not conduct the poll.

Mexico is not going to write a check for the wall.

And if Trump is elected I am sure some generals will give their advice to him on how to defeat ISIS. They may be however, different generals than the ones giving Obama advise.

[LaserSharkDFB]

The "Shy Trumpers" could get Trumpy over the line

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/...1d6a9c8ae8f7e0

Republican and Democratic pollsters alike claim there is a growing number of ‘Shy Trumpers’ showing up in some polls — people who will vote for the Republican candidate on the day of the election, but won’t publicly admit to it.

The term ‘Shy Trumpers’ may be relatively new, but this phenomenon goes back to the early 1990s, when the UK’s Conservative Party won by a significantly higher vote than expected from the opinion polls. This became referred to as the ‘Shy Tory Factor’.

“Political correctness suggests that people are afraid to speak out about issues that they genuinely care about, when they’re out of touch with — how should I put this — the ‘elite opinion’,” said Switzer.
“They feel that they will get demonised if they say this publicly, and they’re ashamed to admit they would vote for Trump so publicly.”

“A lot of Americans are profoundly unhappy about the direction in which their country is going,” he said, adding that the Democratic candidate is one of the most unpopular runners for president we’ve seen.

There’s a number of reasons to explain Clinton’s recent fall in the polls, particularly the continuing interest in the private emails scandal,
which makes her seem untrustworthy.

This has come up before, and it's the same kind of logic that was used to 'unskew' the polls in 2012. In any case, it's not a particularly helpful theory either way. It can't be proven that these people exist in enough numbers to sway the election, and if they do it's not really something candidates can influence; you have to focus on actual issues instead.

-----------

Mexico is not going to write a check for the wall.

That's right, because they're not going to pay for it. They have said so, very firmly, despite Trump's attempts to lie about that fact. How is he going to get them to pay for it without resorting to outright extortion?

[Shalcker]

This has come up before, and it's the same kind of logic that was used to 'unskew' the polls in 2012. In any case, it's not a particularly helpful theory either way. It can't be proven that these people exist in enough numbers to sway the election, and if they do it's not really something candidates can influence; you have to focus on actual issues instead.

I think the right way to approach this is to go with which issues people consider important - regardless of their preferences on solutions of either candidate, then look at which candidate leads on each issue.

And from what i've seen lately i think that would point to Trump (most people consider security important, and Trump leads there as the one promising some solutions, while Clinton is more of "it's already fine!").

[Breccia]

The "Shy Trumpers" could get Trumpy over the line

I have to ask...if you're "ashamed to admit they would vote for Trump" doesn't that speak volumes? A lot of people here aren't thrilled with Clinton, but aren't ashamed they're voting for her. Hell, there have been lots of posts from top-tier Republicans who have brazenly admitted it.

The debates cannot get here fast enough. Trump likes to keep beating the same drum on Clinton, over and over, but in a debate that won't work. For every issue Trump tries to throw at Clinton, even the ones that don't work and make no sense, she can throw five back his way.

"The emails!"
"Okay, fair enough. You lied about your talk with Nieto, you don't have a plan for ISIS, you lied about your support for the Iraq war, you lied about your support for the Libyan invasion, and you hired Manafort who works for Putin."
"Benghazi!"
"(laughs)Okay? You've been sued and lost by federal, state, and local governments dozens of times, you have a proven history of misogyny, your tax plan will bankrupt the economy, your trade plans with Mexico and China are mutually contradictory, and your trial for fraud begins in a few weeks."
"The Clinton Foundation! Pay for play!"
"Seriously? The one that has an A-rating while yours isn't even rated? Okay. You lied about giving to the charity you skipped a debate for, you handed out Play-Doh for 49 seconds, you wrote a check to a hate group instead of relief aid, most of your economic team are donors who don't have degrees in economics, and by the way, where are your tax returns?"
"Um...you're sick!"
"(waves Trump's doctor's note) And you're sure you/re not, with all those positive test results? Fine. You invited Russia to hack the election, you insulted most of the Armed Service but mostly the Khan family and women, you've gone bankrupt four times, you didn't know Russia was in the Ukraine, and you personally advocated war crimes."
"You--"
"You cheated on your wife and admitted it, you've directly insulted every continent on the planet, you allowed amnesty no you didn't yes you did no you didn't, you employ illegal immigrants on your work sites, you quintupled your rent when your donations started coming in, you got caught red-handed bribing a DA, and you don't understand why we can't use nukes."
"That was more than five."
"I can keep this up all day. This list is HUUUUUUUGE."

The Matt Lauer thing will also come crashing down on the debates as well. Even NBC admitted it was a disaster that he didn't call out a blatant lie to his face. Now we have a bunch of moderators saying "oh, well in that case we're going to need to do that". Clinton's a proven more careful debate planner, and is far less likely to make shit up on the fly -- or to double-down on a lie, which Trump does routinely. Trump needs to step up his game, or he'll be torn to pieces on live TV.

[Paranoid Android]

Minnesota DFL asks state Supreme Court to order Trump, Pence removed from ballot

Because the state GOP missed the Aug. 29 deadline to comply with state law, “the Secretary of State had no authority to certify Trump and Pence … thereby causing their names to be placed on the general election ballot in Minnesota,” the document said.

Basically this is over some stupid law about not filing for a deadline. What a bad move by the DFL (Democrat Party). Why even waste the time on this.

[Breccia]

Basically this is over some stupid law about not filing for a deadline. What a bad move by the DFL (Democrat Party). Why even waste the time on this.

You mean, because someone was careless enough to get fired because they didn't know the rules, but at most it's a minor transgression and nobody was hurt, but one side seems to politicize the crap out of it more than it deserves, it's a waste of time?

I couldn't agree more.

Man, I love metaphors.

- - - Updated - - -

If Trump can't even get his paperwork in by a deadline how the hell is he going to run this country? And it's not a bad move or a waste of time. If he's not legally on the ballot he shouldn't be on the ballot.

Not that I disagree, but Minnesota is so deep into the blue that it wouldn't matter if he was on the ballot or not.

[Paranoid Android]

You mean, because someone was careless enough to get fired because they didn't know the rules, but at most it's a minor transgression and nobody was hurt, but one side seems to politicize the crap out of it more than it deserves, it's a waste of time?

I couldn't agree more.

Man, I love metaphors.

- - - Updated - - -



Not that I disagree, but Minnesota is so deep into the blue that it wouldn't matter if he was on the ballot or not.

I just think its petty. Plain and simple.

[Breccia]

I just think its petty. Plain and simple.

Maybe, but it fits the rest of this election pretty well, doesn't it?

P.S. After all the things Trump has said disqualify other candidates (Cruz, Obama, etc) it's just another "it's okay if I do it, but not if you do it" to throw on the pile.

[LaserSharkDFB]

"Seriously? The one that has an A-rating while yours isn't even rated? Okay. You lied about giving to the charity you skipped a debate for, you handed out Play-Doh for 49 seconds, you wrote a check to a hate group instead of relief aid, most of your economic team are donors who don't have degrees in economics, and by the way, where are your tax returns?"

Really? I hadn't heard about that one. Man, you need a program to keep up with all the Trump failures out there.

Minnesota DFL asks state Supreme Court to order Trump, Pence removed from ballot



Basically this is over some stupid law about not filing for a deadline. What a bad move by the DFL (Democrat Party). Why even waste the time on this.

I dunno, pointing out how the Trump campaign and its supporters continue to be utterly incompetent at basic tasks seems like a solid strategy.

[Paranoid Android]

Maybe, but it fits the rest of this election pretty well, doesn't it?

P.S. After all the things Trump has said disqualify other candidates (Cruz, Obama, etc) it's just another "it's okay if I do it, but not if you do it" to throw on the pile.

Well irony from both sides. Is the Republicans getting upset, yet making up all these bullshit voter id laws or restrict voting times/places. The Dems crying about the voter laws, yet doing this shit.

For record I think laugh when people think we have to make a law for something that is not needed. Example. Not even 1% Voter Fraud, but hey lets make some laws.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Well irony from both sides. Is the Republicans getting upset, yet making up all these bullshit voter id laws or restrict voting times/places. The Dems crying about the voter laws, yet doing this shit.

For record I think laugh when people think we have to make a law for something that is not needed. Example. Not even 1% Voter Fraud, but hey lets make some laws.

I hope you're not trying to say that the deadline for getting on the ballot was created specifically to prevent the GOP candidate from being represented, are you? Because that's just silly. There's a big difference between (pointlessly) following an existing rule that has probably been there a long time and creating new laws to prevent people from doing something they could have done previously.

[Shalcker]

I have to ask...if you're "ashamed to admit they would vote for Trump" doesn't that speak volumes?

Yeah, doesn't it speak volumes about how oppressive your society is when people can be assumed to be afraid to voice contrarian opinion? And enough people to turn elections at that?

"The Clinton Foundation! Pay for play!"

That is probably going to come up a lot... there are serious concerns that it cannot be considered charity, and should probably have their status revoked and forced to pay taxes for all those years.

Clinton's a proven more careful debate planner, and is far less likely to make shit up on the fly -- or to double-down on a lie, which Trump does routinely. Trump needs to step up his game, or he'll be torn to pieces on live TV.

"Far less"? As in 1% less out of 50% chance of either lying?

[May90]

That is probably going to come up a lot... there are serious concerns that it cannot be considered charity, and should probably have their status revoked and forced to pay taxes for all those years.

Almost all reputable analyzes put Clinton's foundation near the / on the top of all charitable organizations in the world, with very favorable scores in every category. Your "serious concerns", I'm afraid, exist only in the minds of conspiracy theorists.

https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings...foundation/478

[DocSavageFan]

For record I think laugh when people think we have to make a law for something that is not needed. Example. Not even 1% Voter Fraud, but hey lets make some laws.

And don't forget Election fraud as well as it is much more destructive to the process. Anyway, it seems that Democrats are incredibly concerned that voter ID laws can disenfranchise some voters and yet seem to be totally unconcerned about registered voters who are disenfranchised by fraudulent votes that effectively cancel their vote. Personally, I like to see signs prominently posted at the polls which clearly state that voter/election fraud is a federal offense and punishable up to an $X fine and Y number of years in prison.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Yeah, doesn't it speak volumes about how oppressive your society is when people can be assumed to be afraid to voice contrarian opinion? And enough people to turn elections at that?

Number one, ashamed isn't the same thing as afraid; the root word is 'shame', not 'fear'. Number two, only people who are extremely stupid would think there would be any kind of 'oppression' that results from an anonymous phone survey, and I'd like to see you prove that these hypothetical people exist in enough numbers to 'turn elections'. And number three, this isn't Russia, where the government actually does assassinate journalists and suppress the will of the people.

And don't forget Election fraud as well as it is much more destructive to the process. Anyway, it seems that Democrats are incredibly concerned that voter ID laws can disenfranchise some voters and yet seem to be totally unconcerned about registered voters who are disenfranchised by fraudulent votes that effectively cancels their vote. Personally, I like to see signs prominently posted at the polls which clearly state that voter/election fraud is a federal offense and punishable up to an $X fine and Y number of years in prison.

Democrats are not concerned about election/voter fraud because it doesn't happen. There have only been the tiniest fraction of fraud cases reported compared to the number of votes actually cast. There is literally no reason to be concerned about it unless you're trying to scare people into letting you disenfranchise voters.