Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[Dr. Blutarsky]

This ought to make a dull election year more interesting. Maybe Harambe really has a shot to win it.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/fbi-chief-responds-concern-cyber-threats-us-election/story?id=41740869

FBI Chief Responds to Concern Over Cyberthreats to US Election System



The FBI has responded to recent concerns about U.S. voting systems being targeted for cyberattacks as Election Day approaches, saying the agency takes the threat "very, very seriously" and is working to "equip the rest of our government with options."

FBI Director James Comey addressed the issue while speaking to government and private-industry experts attending the Symantec Government Symposium in Washington, D.C.

"We take very seriously any effort by any actor," he said, "to influence the conduct of affairs in our country, whether that's an election or something else."

His comments come one day after news surfaced about FBI warnings to the states that hackers had infiltrated one state board of election and targeted another.

Three days ago, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., sent a letter to Comey, expressing concern that "the threat of the Russian government tampering in our presidential election is more extensive than widely known and may include the intent to falsify official election results."

In late June an "unknown actor scanned a state's Board of Election website for vulnerabilities" and, after identifying a security gap, exploited the vulnerability to conduct a "data exfiltration," or unauthorized data transfer, the FBI said in a recent bulletin.

Earlier this month, hackers used the same vulnerability in an "attempted intrusion activities into another state?s Board of Election system," the FBI said.

The bulletin did not say who may be behind the cyberattacks or the attacker's or attackers' location. But many suspect Russian hackers are to blame.

FBI Warns of Cyberattacks on State Election Boards

Top Intel Official Tells Americans to End 'Hyperventilation' Over DNC Hack but Calls Breach Potentially 'Serious'

In the recent cyberattacks, voter-related information was stolen from the Illinois election system, and hackers tried to access Arizona's system, according to Yahoo News, which first reported on the bulletin.

"The prospect of a hostile government actively seeking to undermine our free and fair elections represents one of the gravest threats to our democracy since the Cold War," Reid wrote in his Aug. 27 letter to Comey, adding that the FBI should "investigate this matter thoroughly."

Reid is not alone in his concerns over potential Election Day cybervulnerabilities.

Three weeks ago, the ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security Committee called on the federal government to examine its efforts to protect election systems and voting machines in the United States against similar attacks.

"Election security is critical, and a cyberattack by foreign actors on our election systems could compromise the integrity of our voting process," wrote Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., in a letter to the Department of Homeland Security.

For months, the FBI has been investigating what appear to be coordinated cyberattacks on Democratic organizations ? the most damaging so far being the hacking of the Democratic National Committee.

Not only did the hack apparently allow cyberoperatives to steal opposition research on Republican nominee Donald Trump, but many suspect it led to the theft of internal messages that showed efforts by DNC officials to undermine Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders during the primary season.

After those damaging emails were publicly released by WikiLeaks, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz stepped down as the DNC's chairwoman.

Many suspect Russian hackers are also to blame for these cyberassaults on Democratic organizations.

At the symposium in Washington today, Comey said state-sponsored hackers from places like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea "are getting much more sophisticated [and] much more aggressive" in their online activities.

ABC News' Ali Rogin and Geneva Sands contributed to this report.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Trump is heading to MEXICO: Republican candidate confirms he will meet with president on whirlwind visit ahead of major speech in Arizona which will finally clarify his immigration policy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3766250/Trump-heading-Mexico-Republican-candidate-confirms-ll-met-president-ahead-major-speech-clarify-immigration-stance.html

All bets are off as far as what he'll say is his immigration policy - Version 7.0

[pilferk]

On the hacking thing...pretty reputable intelligence sources are saying it's the Russians.  They're just not 100% sure of their endgame/intentions.

Not that ANY of them would be good.....

[pilferk]

Trump is heading to MEXICO: Republican candidate confirms he will meet with president on whirlwind visit ahead of major speech in Arizona which will finally clarify his immigration policy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3766250/Trump-heading-Mexico-Republican-candidate-confirms-ll-met-president-ahead-major-speech-clarify-immigration-stance.html

All bets are off as far as what he'll say is his immigration policy - Version 7.0

This is risky, IMHO, for Trump.

The current President of Mexico has TERRIBLE approval ratings.  Given Trumps stature in the international community, and especially in Mexico.....the only way this works in their President's favor is if, post meeting, he basically skewers Trump to his people to drum up support.

That, of course, is likely to lead Trump down the rant path, which isn't going to do his campaign any favors.  It would probably HELP him with is hardcore voters, because he could then double down on the immigration rhetoric and go toe to toe with the President of Mexico...but I dont' see the outcome of that going his way (since he's likely to say or do something stupid, given history).

The upside is, if he can actually take this meeting and appear presidential in tone (no matter what happens afterwards), it may help quell some of the doubts the indies have about his temperment. Personally, I think that ship may have sailed.  We'll see. 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Trump is heading to MEXICO: Republican candidate confirms he will meet with president on whirlwind visit ahead of major speech in Arizona which will finally clarify his immigration policy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3766250/Trump-heading-Mexico-Republican-candidate-confirms-ll-met-president-ahead-major-speech-clarify-immigration-stance.html

All bets are off as far as what he'll say is his immigration policy - Version 7.0

This is risky, IMHO, for Trump.

The current President of Mexico has TERRIBLE approval ratings.  Given Trumps stature in the international community, and especially in Mexico.....the only way this works in their President's favor is if, post meeting, he basically skewers Trump to his people to drum up support.

That, of course, is likely to lead Trump down the rant path, which isn't going to do his campaign any favors.  It would probably HELP him with is hardcore voters, because he could then double down on the immigration rhetoric and go toe to toe with the President of Mexico...but I dont' see the outcome of that going his way (since he's likely to say or do something stupid, given history).

The upside is, if he can actually take this meeting and appear presidential in tone (no matter what happens afterwards), it may help quell some of the doubts the indies have about his temperment. Personally, I think that ship may have sailed.  We'll see. 

I think it may not be a case of how presidential Trump looks VS  how bad Hillary is in comparison. Trumps negatives are burned in the public's mind now and hard to change. A second shoe may drop compliments of wikileaks or newly release emails that were supposedly deleted.

[pilferk]

I think it may not be a case of how presidential Trump looks VS  how bad Hillary is in comparison. Trumps negatives are burned in the public's mind now and hard to change. A second shoe may drop compliments of wikileaks or newly release emails that were supposedly deleted.

Right now, you have a HUGE block of indies (and, to be honest, Repubs too), according to polls, who will not vote Trump because of his...mercurial?....nature.  They don't trust him in a position of power to not go off half cocked and, basically, get us in trouble either with his mouth, or by directing our military forces to back up some inane thing he's said (or defend his honor about some perceived slight against him). I'm squarely in that boat.  That's where he has to make up ground to have any chance in the EC, and in the swing states.  People view him as dangerous.

Hillary looks dishonest (or stupid, or naive, or all of the above), and there may be some thing that crops up that makes her look more so.  But...in the polling..people have baked in her dishonesty, at this point.  These are things that have been following her for 18 months or so. Any more, on the same note, is sort of more of the same, right?  And so far "shady" > "dangerous" in the eyes of the voters.  And yes, I'm paraphrasing, but not by much.  I don't want to vote for her, either...but if it's between voting for dishonest vs dangerous...I'll hold my nose and do it. I will hate every moment of it, but I will do it because I feel, literally, like I'm protecting the country from a fascist who's advocating a police state built in his likeness....and woe be to anyone who disagrees.  Luckily, in CT, I likely have the option of lodging a protest vote of some sort, and not vote for either of these two chuckleheads, and not have it actually effect who gets our EC delegates.

So, yeah...at the end of the day, I think Hillary's bit is baked in to the polls.  People pretty much know what they're getting, and, to be honest, I don't think there's anything that SHE can do, at this point, to counteract that.  I likewise thing Trumps bit is becoming baked in, too....and that's bad news for him.

It means Trump has to counteract HIS perceptions to gain ground.  So, yeah..it is about him looking presidential and somehow demonstrating he's capable of having an even temperment (especially amongst other global leaders who might disagree with him) and actually governing without putting the country into situations where they're forced to back up his bravado with our lives or dollars.  He can do that...it's only labor day.  But I think he's quickly approaching a point (and another melt down in regards to the Mexican President would basically put him beyond that point, imho) where he might not be able to.

[pilferk]

For example, stuff like this doesn't do him any favors:

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Trump counterattacks every time someone says something about him. And usually its a trap he always walks into.

[LunsJail]

Trump counterattacks every time someone says something about him. And usually its a trap he always walks into.

It seems that to bully and bicker is the only way he knows to campaign. It somehow got him this far but it's working against on him on the bigger stage.

I'm not saying this as a card carrying Hillary supporter but I think the debates will be fascinating. It could get ugly for Trump in a hurry if he doesn't have some basic policy understanding and retreats to insults.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

It actually appears that this trip  wasn't a disaster:

Enrique Pe?a Nieto Calls Conversation With Donald Trump ?Open and Constructive?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/enrique-pe-nieto-calls-conversation-203316725.html

[tim_m]

I think it may not be a case of how presidential Trump looks VS  how bad Hillary is in comparison. Trumps negatives are burned in the public's mind now and hard to change. A second shoe may drop compliments of wikileaks or newly release emails that were supposedly deleted.

Right now, you have a HUGE block of indies (and, to be honest, Repubs too), according to polls, who will not vote Trump because of his...mercurial?....nature.  They don't trust him in a position of power to not go off half cocked and, basically, get us in trouble either with his mouth, or by directing our military forces to back up some inane thing he's said (or defend his honor about some perceived slight against him). I'm squarely in that boat.  That's where he has to make up ground to have any chance in the EC, and in the swing states.  People view him as dangerous.

Hillary looks dishonest (or stupid, or naive, or all of the above), and there may be some thing that crops up that makes her look more so.  But...in the polling..people have baked in her dishonesty, at this point.  These are things that have been following her for 18 months or so. Any more, on the same note, is sort of more of the same, right?  And so far "shady" > "dangerous" in the eyes of the voters.  And yes, I'm paraphrasing, but not by much.  I don't want to vote for her, either...but if it's between voting for dishonest vs dangerous...I'll hold my nose and do it. I will hate every moment of it, but I will do it because I feel, literally, like I'm protecting the country from a fascist who's advocating a police state built in his likeness....and woe be to anyone who disagrees.  Luckily, in CT, I likely have the option of lodging a protest vote of some sort, and not vote for either of these two chuckleheads, and not have it actually effect who gets our EC delegates.

So, yeah...at the end of the day, I think Hillary's bit is baked in to the polls.  People pretty much know what they're getting, and, to be honest, I don't think there's anything that SHE can do, at this point, to counteract that.  I likewise thing Trumps bit is becoming baked in, too....and that's bad news for him.

It means Trump has to counteract HIS perceptions to gain ground.  So, yeah..it is about him looking presidential and somehow demonstrating he's capable of having an even temperment (especially amongst other global leaders who might disagree with him) and actually governing without putting the country into situations where they're forced to back up his bravado with our lives or dollars.  He can do that...it's only labor day.  But I think he's quickly approaching a point (and another melt down in regards to the Mexican President would basically put him beyond that point, imho) where he might not be able to.

100% this. People are terrified of a Trump presidency. So much so that here in Texas since the primaries there has been half a million new democratic registrants. I saw it on the local news last night. People are calling asking how to register and when the deadline is and they are all saying they are scared of Trump becoming president. They expect even more to register before the October 11th deadline too. We now have 14.7 million people registered in Texas, which i view as a good thing. The more people involved in what's going on and voting the better off we are.

[LunsJail]

^^Do you have to register as Democrat or Republican in Texas? Even in a state that big, half million isn't a number to sneeze at.

[tim_m]

^^Do you have to register as Democrat or Republican in Texas? Even in a state that big, half million isn't a number to sneeze at.

No i don't believe so, even our primaries are open, meaning you can vote for whoever you want no matter if you are registered as Republican, Democrat or Independent. I doubt half a million new registered Democrats is quite enough to turn Texas blue this year but if it does Trump better bend over and kiss his ass goodbye. Texas has 38 EC. I can't see him making that up in another state without turning some blue ones red.

[tim_m]

So Trump revealed his immigration plan earlier which really wasn't a "plan" at least not a viable one. Did he basically end his chances tonight? Thoughts?

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Our immigration and border security system is broken.  My feeling is mixed on his immigration policy, while some of it seems feasible and long overdue, how does he go about accomplishing what he says? And something like this has to go thru congress. You can executive order something like this. 

 Lets start with the wall. Seems like a good idea but if it is a physical wall, where do you build it? On our side of the Rio Grande? That screws over people such as farmers who rely on the river.  And you dont need a physical wall from the Gulf to the Pacific, some of the terrain already accomplishes that.   

 Sounds like he isn't going to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants. Perhaps reality smacked him in the face. Deporting of the illegal immigrants that are violent criminals and cutting funding to sanctuary cities I'm on board with. And not granting citizenship to those who came here illegally. ( I dont think any candidate is for that anyway).

100% for Kate's law. I dont understand why anyone in Washington is against that.

We definitely need to take into account the needs of American Citizens, particularly the legal immigrants that came here thru the system and broke no laws. Unfair to them if you give preferences to someone who hopped the fence to get here. I do like the idea of updating the immigration policy as the needs of the country and circumstances change. 

I'm sure I'm missing a lot, but it would take me hours to analyze and critique his whole policy speech and I need to get ready to go to work.

[tim_m]

He could still try and do the deportation. From what i read he really didn't give any direct info on that. Then he wants to cherry pick immigrants including the muslim ban. That to me is a dangerous game. Anyone no matter where you are from should have to chance to come here legally. "It's our right as a sovereign nation to choose immigrants that we think are the likeliest to thrive and flourish and love us."
By asserting authority to pick and choose immigrants, Trump was defending some of his most controversial campaign proposals -- including a ban on Muslims, which he called for and has not yet disavowed, and a more targeted restriction on immigrants from countries that don't satisfy his vetting requirements.

[pilferk]

It actually appears that this trip  wasn't a disaster:

Enrique Pe?a Nieto Calls Conversation With Donald Trump ?Open and Constructive?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/enrique-pe-nieto-calls-conversation-203316725.html

Or...not.

Because now the Mexican President (as I suspected he would) is trashing Trump in front of any microphone, and in any publication, that he can. And accusing Trump of lying about at least part of their conversations (Trump said they did not discuss "The wall", the Mexican president said they did, in fact, discuss it and he told Trump that Mexico would, in no uncertain terms, "pay for the wall".)

And thats on top of an immigration speech which basically obliterated any "outreach" he'd been engaging in the past week or so.  In addition, from reports coming from his own campaign, his insistence on taking a hard line approach ended up being the exact OPPOSITE of what he had told his new campaign manager, Kelly Ann Conway, he was going to take. He took the Banon/Breitbart line, instead.

Which made her look like a complete fool in the interviews and press she'd done in the days leading up to his speech.

He played to the true believers....which isn't going to actually do anything to help him.  His most vocal Hispanic supporters, his Hispanic advisory council members, are literally lining up to tell anyone who will listen they have abandoned their support of him.

This is the story of his campaign: One step forward, two steps back.

[tim_m]

It actually appears that this trip  wasn't a disaster:

Enrique Pe?a Nieto Calls Conversation With Donald Trump ?Open and Constructive?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/enrique-pe-nieto-calls-conversation-203316725.html

Or...not.

Because now the Mexican President (as I suspected he would) is trashing Trump in front of any microphone, and in any publication, that he can. And accusing Trump of lying about at least part of their conversations (Trump said they did not discuss "The wall", the Mexican president said they did, in fact, discuss it and he told Trump that Mexico would, in no uncertain terms, "pay for the wall".)

And thats on top of an immigration speech which basically obliterated any "outreach" he'd been engaging in the past week or so.  In addition, from reports coming from his own campaign, his insistence on taking a hard line approach ended up being the exact OPPOSITE of what he had told his new campaign manager, Kelly Ann Conway, he was going to take. He took the Banon/Breitbart line, instead.

Which made her look like a complete fool in the interviews and press she'd done in the days leading up to his speech.

He played to the true believers....which isn't going to actually do anything to help him.  His most vocal Hispanic supporters, his Hispanic advisory council members, are literally lining up to tell anyone who will listen they have abandoned their support of him.

This is the story of his campaign: One step forward, two steps back.

Question is now, is the party over for Trump? i believe it is.

[pilferk]

It actually appears that this trip  wasn't a disaster:

Enrique Pe?a Nieto Calls Conversation With Donald Trump ?Open and Constructive?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/enrique-pe-nieto-calls-conversation-203316725.html

Or...not.

Because now the Mexican President (as I suspected he would) is trashing Trump in front of any microphone, and in any publication, that he can. And accusing Trump of lying about at least part of their conversations (Trump said they did not discuss "The wall", the Mexican president said they did, in fact, discuss it and he told Trump that Mexico would, in no uncertain terms, "pay for the wall".)

And thats on top of an immigration speech which basically obliterated any "outreach" he'd been engaging in the past week or so.  In addition, from reports coming from his own campaign, his insistence on taking a hard line approach ended up being the exact OPPOSITE of what he had told his new campaign manager, Kelly Ann Conway, he was going to take. He took the Banon/Breitbart line, instead.

Which made her look like a complete fool in the interviews and press she'd done in the days leading up to his speech.

He played to the true believers....which isn't going to actually do anything to help him.  His most vocal Hispanic supporters, his Hispanic advisory council members, are literally lining up to tell anyone who will listen they have abandoned their support of him.

This is the story of his campaign: One step forward, two steps back.

Question is now, is the party over for Trump? i believe it is.

Nah....not yet. I mean, this most RECENT "softening" party is over, but...there's plenty more partying to do.

There's still too much time left.  Something else shady will come up about Hillary, Trump will say more stupid shit, and we have a few debates to go. It will tighten and widen another bazillion times before early November.

Ask me who's going to win on Halloween.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Trump is AHEAD in national poll as Clinton slumps to 39 per cent before crucial Labor Day watershed

    Donald Trump captures 40 per cent of voters versus Clinton's 39, a weekly Rasmussen poll shows. Last week Clinton was at 42 and Trump at 38
    Presidential campaigns go into overdrive after Labor Day, so whichever candidate is polling ahead on the holiday is seen as significant
    The poll shows a reversal in the candidates' fortunes, although Rasmussen cautions that the margin of error is 3 percentage points
    Two other separate polls by Fox News and Reuters/Ipsos also show Clinton's lead narrowing sharply


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3768945/Donald-Trump-AHEAD-national-poll-Clinton-slumps-39-cent-ahead-crucial-Labor-Day-watershed.html#ixzz4J5xk6DTz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook