With the way the parties have sorted since 1984, a Mondale loss would be way worse than the actual Mondale loss.

While I think it's far far too early to say Trump is completely dead yet, and we're another Hilary leak away from this tightening back up, if he puts his foot in it a couple more times and the RNC does pull it's funding off the table, I don't see how he can possibly come back from that. He's rich, but I don't think he wants to put millions of his own money up and I still can't shake the nagging feeling he's doing this to try and make more money for himself in the long run.

Do you think Trump is cheering for the US in the Olympics? Cuts against the whole not winning anymore thing, right?

So what I don't understand about the polls, and let me know if I'm reading it wrong:

Every poll seems to have Obama with a solid favorability rating.

Every poll seems to have an extremely strong "country is on the wrong track" rating.

Every polls seems to have an extremely negative view of Congress.

I guess my question is, how is it that the Democrats do so poorly in Congressional elections if everyone thinks those people (majority Republicans) are doing an extremely horrible job?

Also, what does it say about Hillary if she struggles to win when most people like your sitting president and even more don't blame him for what's going wrong in the country?

It says that she is not an exciting candidate. She wasnt 8 years ago when she blew the democratic nomination and she isnt now. The only reason she is going to win is because of Trump. If Trump wouldnt have been involved a "normal" republican would have been nominated and probably have been able to exploit all of Hillary's flaws. As things are Trump got enough backing to get the nomination but turned enough people against him while doing it to leave the republicans in a lose/lose situation.

The year is 2016 and how Americans ended up with the choice of these two is sad. It gives American 4 years(2020) to basically start fresh and realize the flaws in the political system.

The Republicans knew all along that Trump wouldnt be able to gain enough support to win the election and tried to force another candidate but it just never caught fire.

Yep. Hillary would get killed by a charismatic moderate candidate. But, lucky for her, she got Trump. I think she will be a good President in the end.

I see a lot of status quo which isnt the worst thing in the world. Much better than Trump pissing off the world with his arrogance and react before thinking approach.

Isn't the problem that the Republicans didn't have a moderate candidate to run? All of them in the primaries tried to run to the right of Congress, which America hates and is controlled by their party.

That does seem to be their problem. Moderates have troubles making it through the primary stage because of the Tea Party and conservative purists. It must be a tightrope walk to avoid being primaried but still have appeal to the middle.

I heard on the radio that HRCs tax plan will break into 8 brackets. And she will raise taxes to the tune of a person making $91k will pay (Fed, state, city) 45%.

$5 million earners will pay close to 60%.

Is that right?

Depends on your state and city, I would assume.

Also, people always focus on income taxes, but payroll taxes and sales taxes and the big hit for a lot of people--especially lower income folks.

Basically, taxes are complicated.

No. They have to be just adding marginal rates, and likely in a way that pulls the highest possible marginal rates. But nobody pays anywhere close to the marginal rate, so it's meaningless. It's hard to find data for total taxation, but if you look at total federal taxes the Pete Peterson Foundation says the effective rate for the fourth quintile (78-138k) is currently 17%. State rates vary, but for that quintile they will be in the single digits. Hillary isn't proposing to double taxation for that group.

LOL. Congrats, that might be one of the ten most absurd comments in the history of the FOFC.

They could barely find anything to run OTHER than "moderates" (code for left wingers around here) and other eager to capitulate frauds. THAT is how Trump won the nomination, not failing to have a clown bus filled with worthless candidates that were effectively Ds. He won because he managed to come closest to illustrating basic common sense, in a field that displayed very little of it.

But hey, pat yourself on the back for revisionist history so close to the event I guess. Christ on a crutch, that was comedy gold.

I thought Jeb would eventually pull it out. That's who I predicted after Romney lost the last election, and who I swore would "have to win", using what I thought was common sense. Alas....no charisma and the Bush baggage did him in. Oh and Trump reminding everybody of both.

There really is a shift into radicalism afoot, I feel. And while it is very relative (and normative) to our societies, it isn't simply a middle eastern phenomenon. It is about swaths of people who feel left behind by their respective societies. Left to figure out their own paths. For those that do, it is invigorating and justly deserved. For those that don't, it is harsh and needs a bogeyman.

I think we're already at this point for reasons beyond taxation and politics. But we really do need to start having the dialog about what we expect to society to be, when we are controlled by so few. Especially as the walls of the few become taller and taller.

Man, this dude can talk out of both sides of his mouth like no other.

Trump Says Remark About Obama Being ISIS Founder Was 'Not That Sarcastic' - ABC News

LOL. And HRC doesnt?

Please. Stop with the liar remarks. HRC has got to be the biggest liar of any candidate to ever run.

Trump is more of speak of the cuff. With little governor.

HRC is a cold, calculating liar. She will say whatever you want to hear. Or bar the media from places where she doesnt want you to hear something.

What on earth does her untruthfulness have to do with the fact that this guy is a world-class buffoon who richly deserves every bit of mocking that he receives?

And HRC doesnt? Im tired of the double standard. You follow HRC like a sheep and believe every lie she spews forth. And then bash Trump for talking out of his ass. At least Trump believes what he says I certainly cant say that for HRC.

You know the old joke. How can you tell HRC is lying? He lips are moving.

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just isn't the same.

:lol:

I think you need to report to the drunk guy thread.

But I would rather listen to someone who talks out of his ass and is honest about it, then someone who lies no matter what the situation.

Trump may say some stupid sh*t. But he believes it and he isnt trying to pander.

Yeah. I was going to post "I was using you, in a general sense".

I re-thought that after I posted.

Yeah, Ben is right. Drunk thread.

I think it does kind of go along that thought process. The old who would you have a beer with?

Trump is the dude that spouts out the non politically correct stuff in your crowd. Anywhere, anytime. Yeah, he can be embarrassing, but he can be right also.

HRC is the bitch that your buddies take turns banging. Until one of them starts dating her. But then he ends up with slashed tires, because of a perceived slight.

The truth (so far) behind the 2016 campaign | PolitiFact

I know people love the "Hillary is a liar" thing, but this chart shows that Trump is a much more frequent liar.

So, I guess, you are dating Trump? :confused:

Here's some of Trump's own words in sworn depositions.

In 2007, Trump was forced to face his own falsehoods. And he did, 30 times. - Washington Post

Nah. Trump is male. I do females. And I think he does too, based on his selection of hot wives.

I wouldnt date HRC. I would truly be afraid too.

LOL. Congrats, that might be one of the ten most absurd comments in the history of the FOFC.

But hey, pat yourself on the back for revisionist history so close to the event I guess. Christ on a crutch, that was comedy gold.

Nice words from the Jesus is love guy.

So very much win.

I don't want the people I drink beer with anywhere near foreign leaders or nuke codes.

Well, sure, I'd much rather listen to Trump than HRC. I got wayyyyyy more entertainment from listening to him than from listening to her. Granted, it's entertainment of the "pointing at him and laughing" variety, but hey, it's entertainment! However, if "would rather listen to" is the primary criterion, then I'd wayyyyyyyyyyyyy rather listen to Katt Williams than HRC or DJT.

But, uh, I wouldn't vote for Katt for POTUS.

Trump is unfiltered and does say what is on his mind but certainly doesn't mean its "honest". There's plenty of evidence of what he says is not true or just convenient at that point in time (contradicting past statements).

Hillary does the typical political half truths, incomplete answers, redirects etc.

I think the Hillary campaign has done a great job in blunting Trump. Obviously a lot of it is just taking opportunities when presented.

Looking like Hillary's email is the topic that will dodge her through Nov and potentially Trump's tax returns for him.

I wouldn't be surprise if it gets hacked or leaked by a sympathetic, anonymous IRS official, tax preparer etc. passing select portions to the news media.

I love this idea that Trump is telling the truth despite advocating for positions that are the direct opposite of what he's advocated his whole life until he ran for President, yet Hillary is basically Ricky Gervais in The Invention of Lying and is the first person to have the audacity to lie about anything.

Trump is a used car salesman. Problem with a used car salesman that is taped is its very easy to check your fabrications.

Think about what would happen if Trump becomes president and starts screwing around with China or Russia. At this point in time he has shown nothing to indicate he has any diplomacy skills. I would fear the next 4 years if he were elected.

You know this isn't either/or right? They both are liars.

Who said it was either/or? I've talked pretty openly here about my awareness that almost all politicians lie and I don't really care that they do. I was responding to Tarcone's analysis of the situation and this silly idea that Hillary is such a cold, calculating, lying politican as opposed to the decades of honesty we've had from other politicians.

Never have I said any other politicians were not liars. Im not that naive.
Im just saying, whether Trump is lying or not, he comes across as a off the cuff, say what you mean type of dude. And that is speaking to a large portion of Americans.
HRC is, in my opinion, a murderous, dangerous, nasty liar.

HRC lying scares me more than any other politician. Maybe because she is smart and has a stop at nothing attitude. But doing whatever it takes does have its limits. But I dont think HRC has a limit to do whatever it takes.
Paging Frank Underwood

[IMG][/IMG]

He's really just become a caricature of himself.

Trump Says Remark About Obama Being ISIS Founder Was 'Not That Sarcastic' - ABC News

He tells it like it is, honesty aside!!!! I can get behind that. Who cares how stupid the message, he's talking off the cuff like he's in a bar with me!

Even though he's lying, it sounds like he isn't, so let's Make America Great Again!

Just as Bluto Blutarsky made Delta Tau Chi great again, so will The Donald with America. It finally dawned on me that this clip seems to be what his entire campaign uses for inspiration.

Hillary's PAC's should use that in a commercial. After all nobody says it better than Donald :)

“Remember, we weren’t even in Afghanistan by this time. Barack Obama went into Afghanistan, creating another problem.” - Katrina Pierson

I guess this off the cuff, say what you mean, whether it's true or not style extends to the entire campaign.

At this point, politics isn't about being a good liar anymore, its about seeing how many lies you can get away with. It's like the cat game from Super Troopers, except afterwards everyone just goes and plays slap ass with their big donors and swims in their pools of money regardless of the outcome.

Donald Trump wants you to be an "election observer" to make sure "Crooked Hillary" doesn't cheat and win the election:

Trump campaign launches drive to recruit 'election observers' - POLITICO

Does anyone else but me see similarities between Trump and Berlusconi?

As in:

Silvio Berlusconi: a story of unfulfilled promises | World news | The Guardian

He entered politics vowing to transform and unify the Italian right.

Berlusconi also promised to make his compatriots rich. Seeing how rich he had made himself, many believed he could.

Berlusconi pledged to reform his country's notoriously cumbersome and unpredictable system of justice. But whenever he tackled the issue it appeared to be from the standpoint of his personal interest in dodging the law.

His first party, Forza Italia, was created in a few months using the resources and techniques of the media age, which its self-appointed leader could muster in abundance.

Forza Italia, which was to become Italy's biggest political movement, was profoundly undemocratic. Berlusconi or his lieutenants decided who should fill the key posts.

Though he presented himself as a free-market campaigner, and consistently referred to himself as a liberale, Berlusconi never paid more than lip service to promoting competition or the creating of a meritocracy.

If Italians were unable to grasp the seriousness of the financial misdemeanours of which he was accused; if they were willing to give the benefit of the doubt to his claim that he was a victim of politically motivated prosecutors; if they were untroubled by his anachronistic sexism, and if latterly they failed to grasp the extent to which Berlusconi was held in contempt outside Italy, it was to a large extent because of what was said – and not said – on their small screens.

They approved more restrictive legislation on immigration, drugs and in vitro fertilisation. They introduced an electoral law that even its sponsor later called a "load of rubbish". They endorsed a string of planning and tax amnesties that helped to weaken further respect for the rule of law.

Berlusconi's second and third governments will be remembered above all for endless clashes with the opposition over bills his critics said were drawn up exclusively to protect or further his interests.

---

Basically, a media savvy guy, a raging misogynist, with a penchant for saying exactly what people want to hear, constantly embroiled in controversies and thought of as a joke outside of his country.

Definitely, at least on the surface. Decent amount of talk about it over here in Europe. The main difference (aside from the political system they are navigating) would be Berlusconis media-empire (free and controlled airtime) and the media-savy that came from it as well. As in knowing the inner workings (i don´t see Trump as media-savy, not really) and having a shitload of contacts. But other than that there´s common ground. Heck, i can think of a few even less favorable comparisons but do not want to derail things here.

Maybe less media savvy, but certainly using the media to drive a certain narrative that dominates the discussion and garners extra coverage.

This is a great comparison.

Interesting article. Parts of it appear pretty much insane, but I'm not sure that his last few sentences are too far off the mark. If Trump manages to convince a decent-sized subset of his supporters that he can only lose if the election is rigged, it's not unreasonable to think that there will be violence. (I do think he is overestimating the magnitude of said violence, though.)

Yes, the system is rigged

Wondering how the Trump business empire is doing. I've got to believe its losing the well off clientele it caters to. The people supporting Trump probably can't or wouldn't have bought Trump products and services.

There was a pretty exhaustive analysis on Medium a couple of weeks ago regarding the effect of the campaign on the Trump businesses and you are correct it has been largely negative.

Trump appears to be setting the table for the eventuality when he loses. He will do the same thing that it appears he does in business and blame pretty much everyone else while taking no responsibility for any of it.

He's got the RNC, the media and now the process firmly in his sights as his own personal scapegoat.

Heh. Just checked this Twitter account and he posted this moments ago.

I am not only fighting Crooked Hillary, I am fighting the dishonest and corrupt media and her government protection process. People get it!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 14, 2016

And another. Apparently in TrumpWorld, writing anything that isn't 100% accurate should be illegal.

It is not "freedom of the press" when newspapers and others are allowed to say and write whatever they want even if it is completely false!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 14, 2016

It's pretty amazing to me that he can go all day stroking the fire of the second amendment supporters while appearing to be ready to violate the first and have those same rabid supporters of the constitution right there with him.

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 5h5 hours ago If the disgusting and corrupt media covered me honestly and didn't put false meaning into the words I say, I would be beating Hillary by 20%


yeah he's going hard on the corrupt media excuse. And it is not "freedom of Donald Trump" to say whatever the hell he wants either, and not suffer the consequences.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - you could abrogate literally every right in the Constitution except the right to bear arms, and the 2A crowd would cheer you on every step of the way. For those people, the Second Amendment *is* the Constitution and nothing else matters.

The media IS covering Trump honestly. Reporting his every word. That's why he's losing. He just never recalibrated his message

100% this. I went to the Green Bay Trump rally, not because I expected anything different, but because this way I'd at least be able to arm myself against those of my family who insist that the media just won't give him a fair shake.

The Trump you see in the media *is* Donald Trump. There is no exaggeration. That is who he is.

That must be in Article XII of the Constitution.

I do think going after the media is a decent strategy. They have an abysmal approval rating at the moment and are heavily bias. But the way he's going about it is embarrassing. It just comes across as childish name calling.

If he wanted to attack the media he needed to start earlier. He used the media to help him get the republican nomination and now that he's behind in the polls in the general he wants to attack them? It looks like desperation and I doubt it goes over well outside of his base. His base will eat up everything he throws at them that further entrenches the "us vs them" mentality though.

It's just Trump being Trump. While we all know the media is biased, it's not like we can get an honest discussion about it...through the media. It's just him rocking the boat to keep himself in focus. We hardly even know Hillary is also running. That's the only thing I can think of that he wants out of this. But yeah, it's not well done if it's a serious criticism.

Whining about the umpires only plays to your team's fans.

When your team's fans have a predilection for firearms and like to talk about how the tree of liberty needs to be refreshed with blood from time to time, it only NEEDS to play to your team's fans to have an impact.

It can play to everyone. Media has a ridiculously low level of popularity these days. Especially among moderates that he needs to lure.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/171740/am...mains-low.aspx

I don't think people give a shit about how someone thinks they're being treated by the media. Go win. GWB did. A ton of GOP congress people did. Most of the country's governors did. You can't whine about the game being rigged when you win most of the hands.

ping: tarcone

LOL. Like I said at least he is believes the crap he talks out his ass about.

See my Gary Johnson video up there.

I dont agree with it all. But those 2 guys have a positive track record dealing with issues.

No, he doesnt believe it. He says the complete opposite depending on the situation.

"Hillary is a wonderful women, works hard, and Ive known her for a very long time."

"Hillary is the worst Secretary of State in History and a liar"

Those are not opposite statements though. HRC could be wonderful and a hard worker. But she can also be the worst Sec. of State ever and lie.

I dont agree with the 1st statement at all.

The 2nd seems right.

Seriously, I don't want to get involved in this shit but how you can possibly believe somebody is being truthful when he's said and done completely the opposite for the entire rest of their life is beyond me. But I guess each to their own.

I think this is a pretty good ad, it deserves to get seen by more people.

Ive never said he was being truthful. I said he believes the crap he says. He may lie but he will sell it.
I dont think HRC believes anything she says. I think she will say whatever gets her what she wants. I honestly dont think she knows what the truth is.

In my mind there is a difference.

So you are saying Trump is a rambling idiot that doesnt check facts before spouting a bunch of false information out of his mouth? Is that better than just being liar?

One of the two lies considerably more than the other while campaigning. One of the two has switched stances on his political views in order to run for a specific party. Yet the other one doesn't know what the truth is and will say anything to get what she wants?

Look, Hillary is far from the ideal candidate. She's got baggage. A lot of that baggage comes simply from being inhigh level politics for so long while some of its her own doing. This image that people who don't want to vote for her project onto her has little to no backing though.

Trumps approach since he started has been throw as much bullshit out there as he can and focus his bullshit in the areas that stick with the people. What he's found out is that doesn't play well with people outside of his hardcore base which has him apologizing for shit he says while at the same time telling that base he really isn't sorry.

:+1:

I dont disagree with you what you said about Trump.
I do disagree with what you say about HRC. I believe there is much backing that isnt being shown to us. Or being hidden.

I think there is a lot more to HRC then we know about. There is no politician that I distrust more then HRC.

I will never vote for her. Its that simple. I believe she will scew up everything she touches but whitewash and sell it to us as a grand accomplishment. I believe she will blame anything else but herself for any failings.

She is the political politician that this country has ever seen.

Oh come on. Hillary has switched political stances as much as anyone in politics. She was against gay marriage and now she's for it. For nationalized health care and now against it. She was against global trade partnerships like NAFTA a few years ago and now she's all about TPP. She loved her husband's crime bill but now says we need justice system reform to reverse mass incarceration.

She's changed her position on the Keystone pipeline, immigration (her views were very much in line with Trump), gun control (she was for more regulation, than none, now wants more), and Cuba. There's a bunch more too if you look.

Clinton is a political chameleon who will say anything to get elected. Lets not pretend that she hasn't switched political views a lot. Or that she doesn't lie incessantly. The best thing she has going for her is that she's not Donald Trump.

I didn't claim Hillary doesn't or hasn't changed her political stances. There's a big difference between changing your political stances and changing them strictly to run for a party, which is what Trump did.

Hillary never went "well, I can't win as a democrat. Time run as a republican!" and switch her viewpoints to make herself electable that way.

I mean a couple years ago Clinton was talking about how we need to send undocumented children back to where they came from and bragging about how she funded walls along the Mexico border.

I guess the "paper of record" forgot that in their puff piece about her stance on immigration.

Log In - The New York Times

But at least Hillary has maintained her stance on inclusiveness in the face of Trump's racism.

I'm of course ignoring when her campaign passed out the photo of Obama in Somali garb, the co-chair of her campaign called him a drug dealer, and her husband claimed he was just Jesse Jackson and incapable of winning a national election. Or when her surrogates went around claiming the only reason he was in the position was because he was black. And of course when she sort of hinted that the Church he attends might be sympathetic to Muslim terrorists.

Umpires are biased?

More bad news for Trump?

Secret Ledger in Ukraine Lists Cash for Donald Trump’s Campaign Chief

yeah I was wondering why Trump was bad-mouthing the NY Times so much over the weekend. Now I know why. "many people have said" he's behind the DNC and Hillary hack too. See Donald I can do that too! :)

It's amazing that the guy who tells it like it is and hates the establishment is refusing to release tax returns or his donors. For the big liar Hillary, she has released decades of tax returns and much of her bundlers' info.

Election Update: 10 Big Questions About The Election, Revisited | FiveThirtyEight


I think at this point the major question is if Trump will get the lowest popular vote of any major party nominee in the past 80 years.

This is prior to Hillary owning Trump in the debates. You will see Hillary work him over in the debates. Her lawyer skills against his speak with no thought skills and short childish patience level.

yeah I think if Hillary can come out of the first debate as "the winner" and get Trump to say some of his usual racist stuff, then the election is over. Of course that depends on what may come out about Hillary before November too.

Just a reality check that people have been saying this since 2006. There is no Clinton smoking gun. She and Bill have been under intense media, congressional and investigative scrutiny since 1992, all of which failed to turn up anything more substantive than some blow jobs. Finding a smoking gun would literally make millions for the media outlet that got it, and set the "finder" up for a lifetime on whatever punditry circuit.

I'm happy to have Trump supporters, or Clinton haters, hold out hope that one day between now and November it's all going to fall down, but they're deluding themselves if they really believe this.

For those interested, Johnson/Weld are having a donation push today to try and get some media attention, and of course money. If inclined to donate, Gary Johnson for President 2016: Official Website

They've already reached $1.2 million of their $1.5 million dollar goal.

I don't disagree with you really Flere. I think too, like Trump, she has a "no-stick" box around her. I don't think anything seems to harm her anymore too much. Her emails. Benghazi, etc. But there is still stuff that could come out I think, like on the Clinton Foundation or Wiki Links, that timed well, could hurt her. Foreign events/terrorist action here in the US that she had no control over could also hurt her.

Thanks. I just donated.