At first I was going to mention the old saw about how you get fleas, as that would be appropriate for the campaign Trump is running, but something tells me this is just edgelords being edgy and ruining something because they could

RNC forced to close online convention chat after anti-Semites turn it into a Jew-bashing hatefest

If I was a savvy activist group, Id pretend to be a Trump supporter and post that shit. Who knows.

Basically, any popular online realtime chat open to everybody without moderation is going to be overrun by edgelords who claim "Mah Freeze Peach" means that they can go all racist/sexist/assholeist (also known as the 4chan effect). So that's why I said it was likely just edge-lords being edgy)

Oh. Hope everybody that reads that article understands that.

Trump is such a narcissist that he calls in to O'Reilly while his convention is going on.

For the Colbert fans out there

Really weird for Tom Cotton to use Kerry's convention speech theme from 2004.

Edit: Sorry, I didn't realize it was a Cheney theme as well from 2000.

Rep Steve King (Iowa) with some eye-opening comments about the contributions of non-Christians to Western Civilization:

All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC

Yeah, and he popped up in one of the articles I just read regarding R accusations of Obama stoking racial fires (along with Joe Walsh). Ok, guys.

Today's "TO DO" list
1. Kitchen floors 2. laundry 3. Watch any hope of a "CIC Reunion" check get flushed down the toilet.#nomoremealticket

— Willie Aames (@WAames) July 19, 2016

Willie's already fled to Canada!

And now Melania Trump in her big moment on stage is being accused of plagarizing Michelle Obama.

Melania Trump's prime-time speech was strikingly similar to Michelle Obama's - POLITICO

Can't Donald afford a speechwriter?

These damn immigrants, coming into our country and stealing our speeches.

"We'll give a speech! And make Michelle write it!!"

Bah. Manafort just said on CNN that she merely "used common words."

Seriously, dude. Just own it and move on.

He hired the Obama's speechwriter for her. And now it's a bad thing...haha!

That's from the Trump campaign about Melania's speech. I feel like this should somehow stand out as a worse statement than copying Obama's speech.

To me, that makes it sound like they think she's mentally incompetent and in no way could have come up with any part of that speech.

My parents are what you would call the typical GOP voter. Vote straight ballot without much thought, hated Trump until he became the nominee, wanted Romney to be put in, now unabashed Trump supporters. They are now defending everything that goes wrong at this convention as some sort of left wing media thing. Sometimes I wonder if Trump isn't a genius instead of an idiot. Maybe he knows he will get more support and press from a stealing from Obama controversy than McCain or Romneys wives got in the past with generic my husband is a good man speech. Believe me I am the furthest one can be from a trump supporter but everything we think are missteps have seemed to have helped him every step of the way.

:D

Sure. I can see it. It was a lot easier for me to like Rubio over Trump. Now it's Trump vs Hillary. And it's a lot tougher to disregard him.

My thought has always been that Trump has been trying to get himself kicked out of the race by saying and doing more and more outlandish things, but it backfired on him. He actually became more popular. So now, he feels he can say and do whatever he wants because his supporters don't seem to care what he says and does, they're support him no matter what.

didn't watch the speech, so hard to comment on it one the way or the other. I've seen the parts that were compared to Michelle Obama's speech and they are similar. I find it hard to believe two people with such different backgrounds were raised in the same exact way as the speeches seem to imply.

Very strange to copy Michelle Obama's speech given that her husband might hate the President more than any other person on Earth. Surely they could have chosen Laura/Barbara Bush or even Nancy Reagan. I checked the three major news networks to see what they were saying about this, and not a word (in the short time that I watched Fox) on Fox. Shocker :)

The speech thing strikes me mostly as pathetic partisan point-scoring. I mean, I'm a Democrat, and there was enough stuff said at the RNC to make my list of face-melting stupidity last night that anything in Melania Trump's pretty innocuous speech wouldn't even make the first page.

Part of that might be that I'm such a nervous public speaker that I was just hoping she'd make it through the speech without passing out. Because that's what I would have done.

Also, I was sort of hoping to be at least a little inspired by Marcus Luttrell, because I've heard he's a pretty rousing speaker. He sounded like every loudmouthed guy in a Bass Pro Shops hat at the bar in my small town. Did he have an off night? Or am I just not his demographic?

The plagiarism is a clear example of not having enough experienced pros on the team. Writing a good speech is hard and the plagiarism is a quick way out for someone not skilled enough to do it right.

That's a more valid criticism to me than carping about plagiarism, honestly. Carping about academic standards of plagiarism (which is what's on my Facebook feed) and how this violates it is liberal arts dorks standing in the quad tittering about how much more clever they are than the business majors.

I think they don't fundamentally get that for somebody like me -- who professionally plagiarizes code from sites like stack overflow because it's more efficient than re-inventing the wheel -- harping on what evil shit plagiarism is and how it's symptomatic of the decline of Western Civilization seems a bit overwrought.

I mean, for fuck's sake, David Clarke said that free citizens exercising the right to free speech and public assembly constituted anarchy, and I haven't seen anyone flipping their shit over that.

Anybody inclined to vote for Trump isn't going to care about speechwriters lifting some lines. That's all part of the cleverness of Trump's campaign (I'm not sure if it's an intentional cleverness or not). They can be amateurish, they can do things differently than other campaigns do things - it doesn't matter, and it actually helps them. Criticisms of the racist and weird things he says, or of his general lack of presidential decorum only support the themes that make him so popular. I think Republicans tried to tap into this same kind of thing with Sarah Palin 8 years ago, but Trump is much more effective at it.

I'm hoping the Game Change/Double Down crew are planning a similar book about this election.

Somebody save me the trouble of reading shit I don't actually give a damn about (I mean, c'mon, am I supposed to care what a long shot potential first lady says at this point?)

Was the speech word for word for multiple sentences, or not?
(a phrase here, a phrase there, even maybe an entire short sentence, maybe shit happens kinda like the infinite monkeys producing Shakespeare)

Or was it copied theme after bullet point after theme, then poorly re-written to say the exact same shit but with slightly different words/synonyms/etc?
Kinda like a poorly disguised version of using Cliff Notes to write a term paper.

I'd say more this. Especially if one has to confine their semantic alphabet to the concepts and word choices surrounding "I want to support the hopes and dreams of children everywhere to grow up and be successful and have enough to eat."

The conversation on my Facebook has now dissolved into counter-charges that Michelle plagiarized her 2008 speech from someone else first.

To which I say: Who.TheFuck.Cares?

I'd suggest that people take this whole thing offline and talk about it face-to-face, but they'd probably have too much trouble figuring out which bathroom to stand in.

I'm not sure what the proper way to handle this in the media is, but quoting My Little Pony is probably not it.

Here is the RNC'a chief strategist citing My Little Pony to argue that Melania Trump did not plagiarize her speech pic.twitter.com/eRifu41wHC

— Dave Itzkoff (@ditzkoff) July 19, 2016

I am disappointed that the Rick Roll in the middle of the surf isn't getting any attention.

It's maybe 3 paragraphs but it is about as close to word for word as you can get.

At this point I can't tell whether the plagiarism story sucking up all the media coverage is absolutely peerless PR management, an example of media vapidity or the end state of the long swirl to the bottom of the barrel for political discourse in this country. Or all three.

Uh perhaps you shouldn't have a Women for Trump meeting at the convention...where only 17 women show up:

'Women Vote Trump' Event at RNC Draws Only 17 People

Jon, I would look at the article NobodyHere posted. It's on Politco, and has both of their speeches together.

Melania Trump's prime-time speech was strikingly similar to Michelle Obama's - POLITICO

Trump’s Boswell Speaks - The New Yorker

Interesting read on Trump, take it for what you will.

I would not say this was limited to Trump. I know many Sanders supporters that would feel the same way. It is a function of the outsider candidate and what makes them appealing.

I'm confused. Alaska announced a 12-11-6 but then afterwards on stage they said 28 to Trump.

Okay, they explained it. Odd rule.

This roll call is getting annoying. Just announce your damn votes.

Now I'm actually convinced that the Trump campaign is just a sham to guarantee a Hillary presidency.

Tradition!

You honestly don't see the difference between utilizing pre-existing code and academic/speech plagiarism?

Good thing Drake isn't in the music business! ;)

Of course I do.

In the same way that I understand that a potential first lady speech at a political convention is not academic work. In the same way that I also don't give my pastor shit on Sunday morning when he quotes or paraphrases the Apostle Paul without attribution, either. When I don't give him shit for giving other people's sermons because he found them so effective he wanted to share. In the same way that I didn't give half of my instructors in college shit when I finally figured out that very few of them were giving me their original thoughts and just regurgitating what they'd learned from better minds and better scholars who actually had the fortitude to think originally and insightfully about the material.

I get that academics are precious about this sort of thing. They have to be. It's in their job description.

But to make it the singular focus of their attention for point-scoring when they had a whole sea of dangerous and stupid shit that they could have engaged on a pure discourse level from the first day of the convention is the definition of pedantic.

The fact that you're mistaking your shrillness for cleverness here is part of my point.

Also, while I'm not a Republican, from a purely entertainment perspective, Chris Christie is absolutely fucking killing it tonight.

He couldn't convince me to vote for Trump with a gun to my head, but it was a pretty compelling presentation for a NotHillary vote.

Things are interesting away from the convention as well. I saw the clip where Steve King implied that nothing great has come from non-white societies (or Western society as he "clarified"). I guess he knows his demographic.

I'm kind of interested in seeing how the media plays into this election. You basically have 95% of the media going hard after Trump and pushing for Clinton. On paper you'd think that would benefit Clinton a ton but with how low the approval rating for the media is, I wonder if it'll backfire by the time the election comes around.

I figure relatively little in terms of that will happen.

A lot of folks who have the strongest understanding (and disdain) of the MSM have already tuned it out. It's kind of ... abstract.

So it's good rah-rah for those aligned with their agenda but hard to backlash against something you try to ignore.

Okay, somebody check me on something here.

Did any state release their delegates in order for them to vote for Trump (in the ol' 'unity behind the presumptive nominee' gimmick)?

If not, an interesting thing happens on the way to the current narrative.

Last convention, Romney got something like 90 someodd percentage of votes on the convention floor ... but that was due to the #2 & #3 candidates both releasing their delegates to vote for him in the whole unity thing. Put those 400 delegates back to their rightful recipients, Romney would have had 72% of the floor.

Trump, with all the "OMG the party is fractured by all this" ... got 69.7 percentage of floor votes.


So, my question to the FOFC factual types: did Trump get any additional delegates tonight via the "released by their candidate" method?