POTUS 2016 General Election Discussion Thread

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I would've thought Maine would be a good bet, since that's where Perot finished 2nd, but the polling has him pretty far back there.

What Libertarian streak Maine may once have had (and I don't think it ever really did) pretty much doesn't exist anymore. Maine's basically two halves. The southern part of the state (first congressional district) is very liberal, 50% "urban" and is basically the reason Clinton leads by 10 points in the state overall.

The northern part of the state (second congressional district, 70% rural) is essentially Appalachia and buys in hard to Trump's rhetoric. He's ahead in that district and because Maine splits its electoral votes, he may get those: RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - Maine CD2: Trump vs. Clinton

Once upon a time there was a strong independent streak in the state that emphasized fiscal conservatism and tolerance on social issues (of the "it's none of my or your business" variety). The collapse of traditional mill, paper, and agricultural jobs in the 2nd district especially, combined with a rising opoid epidemic, however, have given rise to the kind of angry, populist movement now seen in Trump, but also seen in Governor Paul LePage.

Anyway, more explanation than was needed, but I grew up here, and moved back 3 years ago.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

Dola - Utah. If the bleeding continues, Evan Mullins splitting the Republican vote there with Trump is something I can absolutely see happening, with Hillary a distant third.

Seems more likely you'd see all four (including Johnson) clustering around the same vote percentage.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

What Libertarian streak Maine may once have had (and I don't think it ever really did) pretty much doesn't exist anymore. Maine's basically two halves. The southern part of the state (first congressional district) is very liberal, 50% "urban" and is basically the reason Clinton leads by 10 points in the state overall.

The northern part of the state (second congressional district, 70% rural) is essentially Appalachia and buys in hard to Trump's rhetoric. He's ahead in that district and because Maine splits its electoral votes, he may get those: RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - Maine CD2: Trump vs. Clinton

Once upon a time there was a strong independent streak in the state that emphasized fiscal conservatism and tolerance on social issues (of the "it's none of my or your business" variety). The collapse of traditional mill, paper, and agricultural jobs in the 2nd district especially, combined with a rising opoid epidemic, however, have given rise to the kind of angry, populist movement now seen in Trump, but also seen in Governor Paul LePage.

Anyway, more explanation than was needed, but I grew up here, and moved back 3 years ago.

Despite being more conservative than the rest of the state, ME-2 is still 3 pts more Democratic than the nation overall. Obama won it by 12 and 8 pts. I'd say there's no way Trump wins it unless the overall nature of the election changes.

[Ryche]

I could see Johnson finishing 2nd in Colorado. Trump got crushed pretty hard here and the Republican party leadership in the state in general is unpopular and incompetent. Mix in a healthy dose of potential Democrat votes with a heavy lean of libertarianism and I wouldn't be shocked. The Republican candidate for governor finished 3rd here behind the Constitution party in 2010.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Seems more likely you'd see all four (including Johnson) clustering around the same vote percentage.

I don't think so. I think if Johnson and Mullins are both pulling significant enough pluralities to be competitive with Clinton, Trump is probably essentially being shut out.

What I think is more likely to happen is if Utahns have two non-Clinton choices who ALSO aren't Trump, they're going to coalesce around one of the two. It isn't going to matter whether it's Johnson or Mullins because neither is apt to be elected, but it will matter, if only optically, that the state doesn't vote for Clinton.

[Logan]

For Two Hours There Was a Naked Trump Statue in Union Sq.

The fate of New York’s Naked Donald is unknown. Daily Intelligencer reached out to the Parks Department to find out, who told us: “NYC Parks stands firmly against any unpermitted erection in city parks, no matter how small.”

[Ben E Lou]

OK. This is glorious.

Here's How NYers React To A Life-Size Naked Donald Trump Statue In Union Square: Gothamist

But the best part is the alleged official statement from NYC Parks Assistant Commish and Epic Shademeister, Sam Biederman:

NYC Parks stands firmly against any unpermitted erection in city parks, no matter how small.

[Ben E Lou]

DAMMIT LOGAN!!!!!!1

[Kodos]

That's pretty awesome.

[JPhillips]

This is pretty shifty of Sanders:

… [W]hen federal law required Sanders to reveal, by mid-May, current details of his personal finances, his campaign lawyer asked the Federal Election Commission for a 45-day extension.

Request granted.

On June 30, Sanders’ campaign requested a second 45-day extension, saying the senator had “good cause” to delay because of his “current campaign schedule and officeholder duties.”…

Now that Sanders’ second extension has expired, spokesman Michael Briggs confirmed to the Center for Public Integrity that the senator won’t file a presidential campaign personal financial disclosure after all.

“We were told that since the senator no longer is a candidate there was no requirement to file,” Briggs said.

FEC spokesman Christian Hilland verified that Sanders has not filed a personal financial disclosure. He likewise confirmed that Sanders, who technically ceased to be a presidential candidate when Hillary Clinton secured the Democratic nomination on July 26, is no longer required to file one…

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This is pretty shifty of Sanders:

I dunno. I dont blame him at all. He found a loop hole and exploited it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

fwiw, CNN reported that exact comment from the ass't commish

[Edward64]

Trump sounding presidential. But can it last?

I would be concerned if he continues like this as he could make it close. Hillary needs a fresh angle of attack to make Trump counter-punch (e.g. mouth off) like he's been doing

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Hillary needs a fresh angle of attack to make Trump counter-punch (e.g. mouth off) like he's been doing

I imagine that they have lots stored up that they haven't needed to use yet.

That said, the media is fawning over the new Trump. Which will reinforce his latest behavior.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I imagine that they have lots stored up that they haven't needed to use yet.

That said, the media is fawning over the new Trump. Which will reinforce his latest behavior.

1. I can't imagine he has the self-control to stay in this zone.
2. The media is a slam trip. One speech vs. over a year of his foolishness,.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

DAMMIT LOGAN!!!!!!1

Gotta wake up pretttty early in the morning to beat me to small dick jokes.

[digamma]

Lots of Twitter buzz that Manafort is out.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

1. I can't imagine he has the self-control to stay in this zone.
2. The media is a slam trip. One speech vs. over a year of his foolishness,.

Yeah I think Hillary's PAC's will keep reminding people of the old Donald Trump and how he needs controlling on the campaign trail by always having his new campaign manager by his side to be an explainer for his behavior and comments, to make sure he stays under control. Almost like he's speaking in a foreign language and needs subtitles or a translator.

[Ben E Lou]

Per AP, Manafort resigns.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

1. I can't imagine he has the self-control to stay in this zone.
2. The media is a slam trip. One speech vs. over a year of his foolishness,.

Given his pattern I'd expect him to do something outrageous this afternoon.

[Thomkal]

Why Trump Isn’t Tweeting About the Olympics - POLITICO Magazine

GOP insiders: Trump's overhaul won't succeed - POLITICO

trump's first general election ad:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...t-ad-tv-227189

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Per AP, Manafort resigns.

Probably sneaking out of the country before tax evasion charges come out.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

GOP insiders: Trump's overhaul won't succeed - POLITICO

I love that they give "insiders" 3 options and the results are basically (sample size was probably not suuuuper big) evenly split 3 ways. That tells you a whole lot in and of itself, doesn´t it ?

[Ben E Lou]

Imma just leave this right here.

[SackAttack]

To be fair to Trump - which isn't on my list of favorite things to do - the context of that quote was "If I win THIS year, in four years I'm gonna win 95% of the African American vote during my re-election campaign."

I mean, delusional either way, but we're not talking about Karl Rove "math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better" levels of delusion, because he's musing about a theoretical re-election campaign.

It's a tier or two below that.

[Thomkal]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in that clip (did not see full audience pan), there was not a single black person.

[SirFozzie]

They kick out any black/brown people as "potential protestors"

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/politi...lly/index.html



Oh, and I'm sure Jon considers this a positive, but another sign of the GOPocalypse:

Donald Trump’s New Chief Steve Bannon Called Republican Leaders ‘C**ts’ - The Daily Beast

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

They kick out any black/brown people as "potential protestors"

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/politi...lly/index.html

Well that's just one event, lets see how one of Trump's advisers handled questions about him speaking in front of white crowds with the message of his African-American voter out reach.

"Maybe it would have been nice if he went and had a backdrop with a burning car"

Donald Trump’s New Chief Steve Bannon Called Republican Leaders ‘C**ts’

If it had happened recently I'd say he's just testing the waters in the room in preparation for Trump using the term talking about or to Hillary.

[whomario]

For all the issues on certain media outlets concentrating on a certain kind of news ... They dont have to look hard here, do they ? I mean, how can a presumably decently intelligent guy with experience go into an interview and just casually drop a passive-agressive line like “Maybe It Would Have Been Nice If He Went And Had A Backdrop With A Burning Car“ to a perfectly valid and not even overly agressive inquiry ? What the hell did he expect to be asked ?

Somewhere Jon Oliver is debating if thats too easy a laugh for him to use it.

[RainMaker]

I have a theory. I think Trump knows he's going to lose. I think at this point it's about future business endeavors. We're going to see TrumpTV or Trump Media after this election I believe. I think the Breitbart guy is for that. No point in moderating his appeal or toning down the rhetoric. Lose by 10 points, claim it's rigged, stir up a contingent of voters, and cash in.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in that clip (did not see full audience pan), there was not a single black person.

I think this particular rally was in a part of Michigan that's >90% white.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I think this particular rally was in a part of Michigan that's >90% white.

Of course it was. Doesn't prevent black people from showing up if they really liked him.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I have a theory. I think Trump knows he's going to lose. I think at this point it's about future business endeavors. We're going to see TrumpTV or Trump Media after this election I believe. I think the Breitbart guy is for that. No point in moderating his appeal or toning down the rhetoric. Lose by 10 points, claim it's rigged, stir up a contingent of voters, and cash in.

It's the Palin plan, but with an actual plan.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I think this particular rally was in a part of Michigan that's >90% white.

For me there's something very uncomfortable about watching a bunch of white people cheer on Donald's diagnosis of black pathologies.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

For me there's something very uncomfortable about watching a bunch of white people cheer on Donald's diagnosis of black pathologies.

Is it because you are extremely prejudice?

[Thomkal]

Trump and Clinton wreck Facebook friendships - POLITICO

Yeah see this with my family and friends on Facebook. I don't post pro-Clinton/anti-Trump stuff on Facebook (I save them for here ), and the only political stuff I post there have been gay rights stuff like when the Supreme Court OK'ed gay marriage.

But three of my brothers and a family friend (retired police chief no less) don't like Obama or Clinton and post a lot of pro-Trump/anti Clinton stuff. My twin brother is a evangelist conservative on most things, and worked in the White House during the Clinton years, and has nothing good to say about them. So I kinda have to grind my teeth during Thanksgiving/Xmas visits and have basically asked them to stop talking about politics as I'm the only real pro-Democrat amongst them.

I let everyone have their say on Facebook (though I've blocked Trump/Pence), but after the election if they keep bashing Clinton (or god forbid Trump wins ), I will likely have to threaten blocking them if they can't stop posting such negative things.

anyone else having these problems?

[bronconick]

I don't have any friends that post Pro-Trump things. A few rip Hillary and a couple Bernie folks embraced Jill Stein and post things multiple times a day which actually irritates me more. The (R)'s I have either felt the Johnson or just ready for this to be over.

[SirFozzie]

I've tried to take the tact that with folks who will just disagree with me, we
ll "Agree to disagree" and if they don't interact with my stuff, I won't interact with theirs. Kinda like how I treat others here on FOFC, I won't get into a full fledged argument, but I'll make a comment. (my tweaks of Jon being slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun, being an example)

Stuff where it devolves into them insulting me (sheep, idiot, etcetera), yeah, I'll unfollow (and in one case, unfriend someone who is so hard-left wing and so.. agressive for lack of a better phrase about pushing his beliefs, that I finally said It's not worth it)

[Thomkal]

heh here I posted about facebook, and this pops up on my facebook page:

Why You'll Always Lose As A Woman On The Internet | Cracked.com

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Trump and Clinton wreck Facebook friendships - POLITICO

Yeah see this with my family and friends on Facebook. I don't post pro-Clinton/anti-Trump stuff on Facebook (I save them for here ), and the only political stuff I post there have been gay rights stuff like when the Supreme Court OK'ed gay marriage.

But three of my brothers and a family friend (retired police chief no less) don't like Obama or Clinton and post a lot of pro-Trump/anti Clinton stuff. My twin brother is a evangelist conservative on most things, and worked in the White House during the Clinton years, and has nothing good to say about them. So I kinda have to grind my teeth during Thanksgiving/Xmas visits and have basically asked them to stop talking about politics as I'm the only real pro-Democrat amongst them.

I let everyone have their say on Facebook (though I've blocked Trump/Pence), but after the election if they keep bashing Clinton (or god forbid Trump wins ), I will likely have to threaten blocking them if they can't stop posting such negative things.

anyone else having these problems?

I found the bold part interesting and would like you to expand.

Right now, as it stands, I read this as, your twin knows the Clintons first hand and doesnt like them. Yet you are ignoring your twin and backing them. Even though your twin doesnt like them

This is weird that you would put your blind trust in a person that your twin knows first hand and dislikes.

You would think it would be the opposite.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I found the bold part interesting and would like you to expand.

Right now, as it stands, I read this as, your twin knows the Clintons first hand and doesnt like them. Yet you are ignoring your twin and backing them. Even though your twin doesnt like them

This is weird that you would put your blind trust in a person that your twin knows first hand and dislikes.

You would think it would be the opposite.

As opposed to blind trust in the person with no political experience?

I think most car mechanics are crooks. I'm still not having my engine rebuilt by someone that isn't a trained mechanic.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I found the bold part interesting and would like you to expand.

Right now, as it stands, I read this as, your twin knows the Clintons first hand and doesnt like them. Yet you are ignoring your twin and backing them. Even though your twin doesnt like them

This is weird that you would put your blind trust in a person that your twin knows first hand and dislikes.

You would think it would be the opposite.

Which one is the evil twin?

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Atocep

As opposed to blind trust in the person with no political experience?

I think most car mechanics are crooks. I'm still not having my engine rebuilt by someone that isn't a trained mechanic.

But wouldnt you look for someone you trust to tell you who is a more reliable mechanic? Or is a really terrible mechanic?

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I found the bold part interesting and would like you to expand.

Right now, as it stands, I read this as, your twin knows the Clintons first hand and doesnt like them. Yet you are ignoring your twin and backing them. Even though your twin doesnt like them

This is weird that you would put your blind trust in a person that your twin knows first hand and dislikes.

You would think it would be the opposite.

You would think right? I actually will answer this in a PM as it goes a bit far from the intent of this thread.

[larrymcg421]

I have a couple friends who support Trump and several more who were very anti-Trump in the primaries and will either hold their nose and vote for him or vote for Johnson. However, the only people who have defriended/blocked me have been Sanders supporters.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by tarcone

But wouldnt you look for someone you trust to tell you who is a more reliable mechanic? Or is a really terrible mechanic?

Not if I didn't think that person was a good judge of mechanics, or at least a good judge of what I look for in mechanics. My closest friend in the world could personally know Trump and say he's a wonderful person, while also knowing Clinton and saying she's a terrible person, and that wouldn't change my voting decision. I firmly reject what Trump wants to do as President and will not support him under any circumstances.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Dutch

you are extremely prejudice

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

Which one is the evil twin?

I would guess that would depend on whom you are voting for?

[JPhillips]

I don't know why it took me until last night to make the connection between Ted Cruz and Maj. Frank Burns.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Is it because you are extremely prejudice?

Obviously, but I can never remember if I hate the white people or the black people.