Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[pilferk]

The part of the debate where he said she'd be in jail if he were president was almost worse then his half asseed explanation of the tape. He clearly has no understanding of how a special prosecutor works. Even if he had the power as president to do it exactly the way he said how would he guarantee she'd be in jail? Is he gonna bribe the prosecutor to press charges? Just cause he has her investigated doesn't make charges a certainty. If it went to trial how would he assure a conviction? Bribe the jury? It was a flat out ridiculous statement.

Trump: "But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. Because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it. And we?re gonna have a special prosecutor. When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this country are furious. In my opinion, the people that have been long time workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this where emails, and you get a subpoena. You get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena you delete 33,000 emails and then you acid wash them or bleach them, as you would say. Very expensive process. So we?re gonna get a special prosecutor and we?re gonna look into it. Because you know what, people have been?their lives have been destroyed for doing 1/5 of what you have done. And it?s a disgrace, and honestly, you oughta be ashamed of yourself"

Later:

Clinton: "You know, it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country."

Trump : "Because you would be in jail."

That scary, fascist, Banana republic dictator levels of shit.

Edit: Also...bleachbit?  Totally free program.  Doesn't cost a dime.  We use it at work to scrub clean our PC's of data (HIPPA laws) before we dispose of them.

[tim_m]

The part of the debate where he said she'd be in jail if he were president was almost worse then his half asseed explanation of the tape. He clearly has no understanding of how a special prosecutor works. Even if he had the power as president to do it exactly the way he said how would he guarantee she'd be in jail? Is he gonna bribe the prosecutor to press charges? Just cause he has her investigated doesn't make charges a certainty. If it went to trial how would he assure a conviction? Bribe the jury? It was a flat out ridiculous statement.

Trump: "But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. Because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it. And we?re gonna have a special prosecutor. When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this country are furious. In my opinion, the people that have been long time workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this where emails, and you get a subpoena. You get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena you delete 33,000 emails and then you acid wash them or bleach them, as you would say. Very expensive process. So we?re gonna get a special prosecutor and we?re gonna look into it. Because you know what, people have been?their lives have been destroyed for doing 1/5 of what you have done. And it?s a disgrace, and honestly, you oughta be ashamed of yourself"

Later:

Clinton: "You know, it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country."

Trump : "Because you would be in jail."

That scary, fascist, Banana republic levels of shit.

And yet where's the outrage about W. deleting millions of emails? That's right circkets!

[pilferk]

But...but...but...we don't KNOW....

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-was-told-russia-was-blame-hacks-long-debate-n663686

During Sunday's debate, Donald Trump once again said he doesn't know whether Russia is trying to hack the U.S. election, despite Friday's statement by the U.S. intelligence community pointing the finger at Putin -- and despite the fact that Trump was personally briefed on Russia's role in the hacks by U.S. officials.

A senior U.S. intelligence official assured NBC News that cybersecurity and the Russian government's attempts to interfere in the 2016 election have been briefed to, and discussed extensively with, both parties' candidates, surrogates and leadership, since mid-August. "To profess not to know at this point is willful misrepresentation," said the official. "The intelligence community has walked a very thin line in not taking sides, but both candidates have all the information they need to be crystal clear."

[pilferk]

And before we start buying into a bunch of that wikileaks material.....read this:

http://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635

[Dr. Blutarsky]

The part of the debate where he said she'd be in jail if he were president was almost worse then his half asseed explanation of the tape. He clearly has no understanding of how a special prosecutor works. Even if he had the power as president to do it exactly the way he said how would he guarantee she'd be in jail? Is he gonna bribe the prosecutor to press charges? Just cause he has her investigated doesn't make charges a certainty. If it went to trial how would he assure a conviction? Bribe the jury? It was a flat out ridiculous statement.

Trump: "But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. Because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it. And we?re gonna have a special prosecutor. When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this country are furious. In my opinion, the people that have been long time workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this where emails, and you get a subpoena. You get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena you delete 33,000 emails and then you acid wash them or bleach them, as you would say. Very expensive process. So we?re gonna get a special prosecutor and we?re gonna look into it. Because you know what, people have been?their lives have been destroyed for doing 1/5 of what you have done. And it?s a disgrace, and honestly, you oughta be ashamed of yourself"

Later:

Clinton: "You know, it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country."

Trump : "Because you would be in jail."

That scary, fascist, Banana republic levels of shit.

And yet where's the outrage about W. deleting millions of emails? That's right circkets!

Maybe we should investigate both of them,where no one associated with it gets immunity.  Let them both appear at a hearing at the same time, now that would be a sight.

[GeorgeSteele]

Maybe we should investigate both of them,where no one associated with it gets immunity.  Let them both appear at a hearing at the same time, now that would be a sight.

Why give no one immunity?  Don't prosecutors give accomplices immunity so that they'll speak more freely about the person who is the main target of the investigation? 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Maybe we should investigate both of them,where no one associated with it gets immunity.  Let them both appear at a hearing at the same time, now that would be a sight.

Why give no one immunity?  Don't prosecutors give accomplices immunity so that they'll speak more freely about the person who is the main target of the investigation? 

Several witnesses did not speak more freely when given immunity regarding Hillary's email investigation.  They still plead the 5th during the hearings held by Congress. One never even bothered to show up for a hearing. 

[GeorgeSteele]

Maybe we should investigate both of them,where no one associated with it gets immunity.  Let them both appear at a hearing at the same time, now that would be a sight.

Why give no one immunity?  Don't prosecutors give accomplices immunity so that they'll speak more freely about the person who is the main target of the investigation? 

Several witnesses did not speak more freely when given immunity regarding Hillary's email investigation.  They still plead the 5th during the hearings held by Congress. One never even bothered to show up for a hearing. 

Right, but their immunity deals were very limited, so theoterically they could incriminate themselves with answers to questions that do not directly relate to the investigation, so it's their right to avoid doing so. 

[Dr. Blutarsky]

And before we start buying into a bunch of that wikileaks material.....read this:

http://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635

If the leaks weren't legit you would have heard some kind of statement from the Clinton campaign.

There's a ton of stuff there and it isn't painting a pretty picture.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

One thing these leaks are showing is how corrupt the system is and a complicit media is taking sides in the election.

[tim_m]

The polls reflecting the weekend events with that tape are starting to come out and it's bad for Trump. The one poll he was winning the USC/LATimes poll he's only +2 now. The other polls Hillary is now pushing double digit leads. I'm not ready to say it is over just yet but Trump is approaching the point of no return.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Not looking good for Trump. The public seems to be more concerned about him talking about grabbing pussy 11 years ago compared to Hillary stealing the primary & screwing over Bernie as well as lying about her emails while covering up things.

My prediction is that Hillary will be our next President. And I expect us to get into another war within the next 4 years and we wont know the facts as to why based on past behavior ( Libya).

[GeorgeSteele]

As much as I'd hope for it to be the case, I don't think it's over for Trump at all. 

538 (see http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/, which I think has the soundest forecast models) had Trump's chances at 45.2% just 2 weeks ago and now has him at only 13.9%, after his numbers took a dive from his debate performances and the bus video. 

To me, that reflects a very fickle electorate.  Nothing has been revealed about Trump these past 2 weeks that everyone should have known about him already.  He's a POS, you either accept that and support him or you don't.  So, if stuff that reveals essentially nothing can move the needle so dramatically, then that means it can just as easily go the other way as well. 

[pilferk]

And before we start buying into a bunch of that wikileaks material.....read this:

http://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635

If the leaks weren't legit you would have heard some kind of statement from the Clinton campaign.

There's a ton of stuff there and it isn't painting a pretty picture.

There's a ton of stuff there thats being portrayed by people incorrectly, and out of context.  So..there's nothing for the Clinton camp to deny.

The above is a perfect example:  Someone cut and pasted an article and sent it to someone.  It's not a fake email.  But the story that was going around the right wing conspiracy sites was the person sending the email was the source of the words.  He wasn't, in fact, so the conclusion they were drawing was false. He didn't actually say anything that was attributed to him...he just forwarded an article he found interesting.  And..what's really funny is...the words latched on to were pretty much a tangent in the article, and not the main focus.  So you can't even say the person forwarding the article had some sort of weird complicit agreement or endorsement of that particular piece.

Another example is this DOJ shit that Trump insinuated via tweet yesterday.

He essentially took issue with someone at the DOJ having a conversation with an HRC spokesman about publicly available information. A conversation, I might add, that was about making sure HRC was being compliant with the investigation.  Nothing untoward was going on, nothing unusual in an investigation, discovery process, or procedural process was done.  "What's the judge mean by that"...."You'll probably get a better idea at the hearing tomorrow".  A hearing who's subject, presider, and contents was already on the pubic court docket, already known to everyone involed....and at which HRC attorney's and reps were already scheduled to be.

And he turned it into some wack job conspiracy theory. Which, to be honest, is either dishonest...or a stunning lack of knowledge how just about everything works, ever, in law and legal investigations.

The problem is...the pictures aren't being painted.  One small section of the painting is being looked at, and the whole is being judged on that, rather than using logic and context to see there's really nothing there.  Because people WANT to look for more stuff to hate her for.  It's 95% bullshit.

And the 5% that's actually interesting seems to be getting ignored.

[pilferk]

One thing these leaks are showing is how corrupt the system is and a complicit media is taking sides in the election.

Where?

I haven't really seen much of that, in context.

I've seen a lot of accusations, and right wing conspiracy sites posting links...and then you read the emails and it's like "WTF".

Smoke. And. Mirrors.

[pilferk]

The polls reflecting the weekend events with that tape are starting to come out and it's bad for Trump. The one poll he was winning the USC/LATimes poll he's only +2 now. The other polls Hillary is now pushing double digit leads. I'm not ready to say it is over just yet but Trump is approaching the point of no return.

I think it'll even out a bit over the next few days. I think that 11 point lead was an outlier poll. I expect it's more like 7 to 9, once we get more polling over the coming days. 

Can I reiterate how stupid RCP and other aggregate pollsters using that USC poll is? Blech.

It started at like +7 Trump...it's a poll of 400 people, every morning, taken from the same pool of 3k people they selected at the start.  It will move up and down based on which 400 people get snagged each day, but it's never going to be an actual accurate scientific poll.  I don't get why they keep using it.  It's NOT a traditional poll...it's a pulse taker.  Different.

[pilferk]

Not looking good for Trump. The public seems to be more concerned about him talking about grabbing pussy 11 years ago compared to Hillary stealing the primary & screwing over Bernie as well as lying about her emails while covering up things.

My prediction is that Hillary will be our next President. And I expect us to get into another war within the next 4 years and we wont know the facts as to why based on past behavior ( Libya).

I don't think it's over.

But I think he's going to need something substantial to make up ground.  Right now I'd peg him at about 37%. That's his core.  He's going to need about 47% to win.  It could happen.....HRC has a lot of flaws to exploit.  But he's going to have to be much more disciplined, and find the right one that resounds with the voters, than he's proven so far.

[tim_m]

Not looking good for Trump. The public seems to be more concerned about him talking about grabbing pussy 11 years ago compared to Hillary stealing the primary & screwing over Bernie as well as lying about her emails while covering up things.

My prediction is that Hillary will be our next President. And I expect us to get into another war within the next 4 years and we wont know the facts as to why based on past behavior ( Libya).

I think another war under Trump would be much more likely.

[tim_m]

The polls reflecting the weekend events with that tape are starting to come out and it's bad for Trump. The one poll he was winning the USC/LATimes poll he's only +2 now. The other polls Hillary is now pushing double digit leads. I'm not ready to say it is over just yet but Trump is approaching the point of no return.

I think it'll even out a bit over the next few days. I think that 11 point lead was an outlier poll. I expect it's more like 7 to 9, once we get more polling over the coming days. 

Can I reiterate how stupid RCP and other aggregate pollsters using that USC poll is? Blech.

It started at like +7 Trump...it's a poll of 400 people, every morning, taken from the same pool of 3k people they selected at the start.  It will move up and down based on which 400 people get snagged each day, but it's never going to be an actual accurate scientific poll.  I don't get why they keep using it.  It's NOT a traditional poll...it's a pulse taker.  Different.

Yep most i am seeing are 7-9 which is still a significant number to overcome now less than 30 days to election day and only one debate left. It's certainly not impossible but it's gonna be very hard. He hasn't come close to putting that tape to bed and he's guaranteed to say more stupid shit between now and November 8th.

[tim_m]

FYI now today Trump isn't even winning the USC/LATimes poll. They are tied. This is bad news for Trump.