Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

This is the exact kind of thinking that is wrong. It is a problem. Just saying that "it's business as usual" simply perpetuates it.

It's funny, we prosecute companies here who are trying to buy influence in foreign countries to get contracts or government approval for something, but foreign (and domestic) companies do the same thing here and we're, "meh, business as usual."

And I rest my case.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

What I find most interesting about the whole Clinton Foundation thing is how open the books are. They disclose everything. I still haven't seen Trumps Tax Returns. And obviously based on the logical comparison of those two facts Clinton is a ****ing liar and Trump should be elected President.

We will never see Trump's tax returns. He's said as much, many times over now.

 

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

This is the exact kind of thinking that is wrong. It is a problem. Just saying that "it's business as usual" simply perpetuates it.

It's funny, we prosecute companies here who are trying to buy influence in foreign countries to get contracts or government approval for something, but foreign (and domestic) companies do the same thing here and we're, "meh, business as usual."

No, I absolutely agree that it's a problem. But until you do something about it, that's how the system today operates. And anyone making partisan hay about one aspect of it while ignoring the entire thing is the lowest of the low. It's like Trump calling Hillary the liar.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

We will never see Trump's tax returns. He's said as much, many times over now.

No, I don't think he has. He said we'd see them as soon as the audit is over. Funny thing is the audit is never over. I wonder why.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

What I find most interesting about the whole Clinton Foundation thing is how open the books are. They disclose everything. I still haven't seen Trumps Tax Returns. And obviously based on the logical comparison of those two facts Clinton is a ****ing liar and Trump should be elected President.

Yeah but they only give out 88% of their contributions, which puts them on the same level of other evil schemes like UNICEF.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

And all (4) states are just as likely to go all in for him as not. And he has a couple other states in play as well. Wisconsin being one. Michigan being another.

Not really. Flip a coin 4 times. The odds of you getting the outcome you want all 4 times is a lot less than getting the outcome you want 1 out of 4 times. Unless you think Trump has put away the first 3 states. Also, if you want to say MI and WI are in play that's fine but to be fair you need to add in TX, GA, and AZ since there are a handful of polls showing those as close as the first two.

And I'm saying Clinton going 1 for 4 is far from unthinkable right now. And it's not far from 1 for 4 to have a day "on the schneid."

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it's gone from impossible to "how many ways could it happen".

(Does that make me a Disciple of Scoob? I will not adopt his college hockey philosophies. No Goofs, none of the time.)

Sure, but my point is all she has to do is go 1 for 4 and she wins.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

No, I don't think he has. He said we'd see them as soon as the audit is over. Funny thing is the audit is never over. I wonder why.

Part of the audit is already over and the IRS said he is allowed to show them and he still wont. He never will...

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Not really. Flip a coin 4 times. The odds of you getting the outcome you want all 4 times is a lot less than getting the outcome you want 1 out of 4 times. Unless you think Trump has put away the first 3 states.

Sorry, I don't think elections are coin flips. No matter how much "ground game" she has she still has to fight against all the voters who will go to the polls just to vote against her. And the way the numbers are coming out right now that looks like an even split. How many toss ups do you think she'll get? Toss ups are being split (4) ways right now. Anything could happen in that dynamic.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Sorry, I don't think elections are coin flips. No matter how much "ground game" she has she still has to fight against all the voters who will go to the polls just to vote against her. And the way the numbers are coming out right now that looks like an even split. How many toss ups do you think she'll get? Toss ups are being split (4) ways right now. Anything could happen in that dynamic.

My sense is Trump has the best chance to flip based on available polling + make up of the electorate 1) Iowa, 2) Ohio, and 3) Nevada. Also based on available polling and demographics Hillary is most likely to flip 1) NC and 2) GA.

While there's been wide variations in polling elsewhere, the leads for each party in MI, WI, VA, CO, NH, PA, AZ, TX, and MO have been a pretty consistent advantage one way or the other.

So, looking at where I think things are going, I would predict Trump flips Iowa and Hillary flips NC. Trump has a better shot at OH than he does at FL based simply on FL being a more diverse state but I'd put him at 50/50 in OH and a little less in FL. Trump will win GA by a bit more than the 3% we've been seeing in various polls. I'll also call Nevada 50/50.

Long before you get to PA, the race is decided in OH, FL and NC. In OH GOP state party is popular and Kasich/Portman are an asset. In NC McGrory/Burr are a problem. FL like NV would be a situation where minority voters stay home if Trump has a chance to win. If they show up he's toast.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

No, I absolutely agree that it's a problem. But until you do something about it, that's how the system today operates. And anyone making partisan hay about one aspect of it while ignoring the entire thing is the lowest of the low. It's like Trump calling Hillary the liar.

If HRC came out and said something like, "Sure I'm taking money, or my Foundation is taking money, from foreign individuals or companies who want me to look favorably on them as Sec of State, a member of the Senate or POTUS, but that's the way the game is played, and until the rules are changed, I have to play by those rules if I want to get to a position where I can help people," I'd probably applaud her for her candor. I don't know that I'd vote for her. But so long as candidates like her continue to pull shenanigans like signing a pledge that says they will not be associated with their foundation while serving in office ("Hey, you never said anything about my kid, my State Department Staff or my campaign staff"), then people will still have a right to make political hay with the dissembling.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

FL like NV would be a situation where minority voters stay home if Trump has a chance to win. If they show up he's toast.

We don't know that ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d3b99a-7c54-11e6-bd86-b7bbd53d2b5d_story.html

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

Which is why this whole hoopla over the Clinton Foundation is such a joke. If any kind of quid pro quo is going on, that's just business as usual in Washington. There's probably hundreds of other politicians/former politicians with the same kind of Foundations set up. Hell, Trump's" charity seems like it's only there for him to use as his personal bank.

And yet, people only get worked up about the Clintons. Because....................Clintons.

I'd suggest there may be some reasonable concern expressed over the scale these types of things reach. Setting the Foundation completely aside, I mentioned earlier the Clintons have received millions in cash payments and familial benefits from Goldman-Sachs, which is just one source.

Put a different way--If I'm sitting in my favorite Italian restaurant in Naples and I watch a someone slip Vinnie a $20 and they get a better table, I see what's going on and I get it. Now if I watch another similar transaction, only this time Vinnie gets an envelope stuffed with ten grand in small, unmarked bills (and me knowing Vinnie fairly well) might I not legitimately start to wonder who is going to get whacked?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

It is interesting to follow the mainstream media in the last week or two. You start to get the feeling that they are looking around the newsrooms with the same reaction Kep had a few days ago, which is basically, "w t f, people, this guy might actually win." For awhile it was all fun and games. Donald Trump's lunacy sells newspapers, but he had no chance in the eyes of the media.

But they are now playing the role of Cruz, Kasich, et al. Trump hasn't been buried, and now they have to actually come forward and say truly bad things about him and hope to bury his chances.

What will be interesting is to see if the same thing happens in the general election as what happened in the Republican race. The more serious the opposition, the more popular Trump became.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

... might I not legitimately start to wonder who is going to get whacked?

If uze seez da tranzacshun and den talkz boutdit I'd sez you'd best get uze affares in ohdah. Capiche?


(Dang, I still say "The Mafia" would've been a cool new nickname for UND. )

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

We don't know that ...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d3b99a-7c54-11e6-bd86-b7bbd53d2b5d_story.html

We do know that. From the article you posted making the very same point:

"While Clinton holds a significant lead over Republican rival Donald Trump in every poll of Hispanic voters, less clear is whether these voters will turn out in numbers that Democrats are counting on to win."

The last Gooper to fundamentally change the non-white calculus was Bush II with an unprecedented 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004. The fact that Hispanics are overwhelmingly against Trump isn't in dispute. The trick (like in 2012) is getting them to turn out.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

What if news coverage of the election was 100% devoted to a comparison of the policies put forward by the candidates and methodical, quantitative analyses of the effects of policies on the budget, the economy, national defense, and other national interests?

Few people would watch. This is 21st Century America, and Dumb 'R' Us.

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

It is interesting to follow the mainstream media in the last week or two. You start to get the feeling that they are looking around the newsrooms with the same reaction Kep had a few days ago, which is basically, "w t f, people, this guy might actually win." For awhile it was all fun and games. Donald Trump's lunacy sells newspapers, but he had no chance in the eyes of the media.

But they are now playing the role of Cruz, Kasich, et al. Trump hasn't been buried, and now they have to actually come forward and say truly bad things about him and hope to bury his chances.

What will be interesting is to see if the same thing happens in the general election as what happened in the Republican race. The more serious the opposition, the more popular Trump became.

It's definitely occurred to me lately that several aspects are seeming a bit like deja vu all over again.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

In all seriousness, where the < bleep > did Birthergate 2.0 come into the news cycle over the weekend? What triggered recycling that blast from the past?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

In all seriousness, where the < bleep > did Birthergate 2.0 come into the news cycle over the weekend? What triggered recycling that blast from the past?

On Hardball with Chris Matthews. Rudy Giuliani brought up that Trump now believed Barack was born in America. Matthews had been chasing that forever and people started hammering Trump again that HE had to say it. So, he did. And then blamed Clinton for the whole fiasco. A win win for him as always.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVIII: I'm OK, You're Deplorable

What's the reputation of the LA Times/USC poll?

538 assigns it no rating. I've never seen that before. I don't know for sure, but I suspect it can't mean anything good. Perhaps that means they don't give out enough information about their methodology to be rated?