Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[pilferk]

So remember those 500,000 new voter registrations i mentioned in Texas awhile back? A poll today by the local ABC tv affiliate shows Trump only up by 4. That's bad news for the republicans. Texas has been red since the 70s.

That's amazing.  States that haven't been in play for decades are in play for the Dems.

Arizona.  Georgia.  Utah.

Never in doubt for the red column, and for years.

Because hes a joke, and not really a conservative, at all.

Hes an alt right, sleezy, conspiracy theory, breitbart/infowars level nut job who also hapoens to be a terrible human being.

He is the worst part of the republcan party, manifested for everyone to see. Hes the ultra left wing liberals republcan stereotype, live, and in color.  He has none of the fiscal restraint, and quadruple the alt right crazy.

I've still seen nothing that makes me want to vote for either one of these chuckeheads.  Shes terrible, because shes an untrustworthy career politician...hes 100x worse.

Cthulhu/godzilla 2016.

If evan mcmullin was on the ballot in ct..l'd probably vote for him. If i have to write in, though....i'm gonna make a point.

[tim_m]

If Texas really is that close and in play i will have to do what Pilf is dreading. Hold my nose and pull the lever for her because as bad as she is Trump is Infinitely worse. If there's really a chance he can lose Texas the only thing he will be president of is his own reality. We have the most electoral votes and he has to win Texas.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Worst-election- ever......

On top of everything else going on with this election, there's voter fraud as the cherry on top.

Voter Fraud Is Real. Here?s The Proof
Data suggests millions of voter registrations are fraudulent or invalid. That?s enough to tip an election, easily.

By John Gibbs
October 13, 2016

This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn?t exist. A recent Salon article argues that ?voter fraud just isn?t a problem in Pennsylvania,? despite evidence to the contrary. Another article argues that voter fraud is entirely in the imagination of those who use voter ID laws to deny minorities the right to vote.

Yet as the election approaches, more and more cases of voter fraud are beginning to surface. In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote. Stunningly, ?a woman named Sara Sosa who died in 2009 cast ballots in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.? In Virginia, it was found that nearly 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

In Texas, authorities are investigating criminals who are using the technique of ?vote harvesting? to illegally procure votes for their candidates. ?Harvesting? is the practice of illegally obtaining the signatures of valid voters in order to vote in their name without their consent for the candidate(s) the criminal supports.

These are just some instances of voter fraud we know about. It would be silly to assume cases that have been discovered are the only cases of fraud. Indeed according to a Pew Research report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations are ?significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.? Since there are 146 million Americans registered to vote, this translates to a stunning 18 million invalid voter registrations on the books. Further, ?More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.? Numbers of this scale obviously provide ripe opportunity for fraud.

Don?t Let Data Contradict My Narrative

Yet in spite of all this, a report by the Brennan Center at New York Univeristy claims voter fraud is a myth. It argues that North Carolina, which passed comprehensive measures to prevent voter fraud, ?failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing in-person voter fraud in North Carolina.? However, this faulty reasoning does not point to the lack of in-person voter fraud, but rather to lack of enforcement mechanisms to identify and prosecute in-person voter fraud.

The science of criminal justice tells us that many crimes go unreported, and the more ?victimless? the crime, the more this happens. The fact is, a person attempting to commit voter fraud is very unlikely to be caught, which increases the incentive to commit the crime.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is a sophisticated, comprehensive effort to catalog ?the number and types of crimes not reported to law enforcement authorities.? However, it tends to deal mostly in violent crimes. As complex as the NCVS is, gathering accurate data for unreported victimless crimes such as voter fraud is even harder, since 1) outside of the criminal, no one may know a crime has taken place, and 2) there is no direct victim to report the crime in the first place. Yet we are expected to believe that, unlike violent crime, voter fraud is limited only to the cases that are actually reported and prosecuted? This is a senseless position.

Further, the Brennan Center report argues that because prosecutor Kris Kobach?s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate), voter fraud is so statistically small that it?s a non-issue. Let?s follow this logic. Does the fact that 109 people were cited for jaywalking in Seattle in 2009 mean that only 109 people jaywalked in Seattle that year? Does the fact that 103,733 people were cited for driving without a seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015 mean that only that many people were driving without seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015?

Absolutely not. This can be proven easily because in 2014, the previous year, only 29,470 people were cited. The disparity is largely due to increased enforcement efforts in 2015. In other words, increasing enforcement of the crime revealed a much larger number of people committing the crime.

The exact same is true for voter fraud. We have no reason to believe that the low number of prosecutions means only that exact amount of voter fraud is happening. Rather, it could mean a lack of enforcement is failing to reveal the bulk of the violations that are occurring. Thus, as with many types of crimes, especially victimless crimes, the real number of cases is likely significantly higher than the number reported.

How to Effectively Target Voter Fraud

So now that we know voter fraud is a serious issue, what are some solutions to this problem? States like Michigan have Poll Challenger programs, where observers from both parties may be present at voter check-in tables at precincts. They check each voter?s ID against a database of registered voters for that precinct to ensure the person attempting to vote is actually legally qualified to vote in that precinct. If there?s a discrepancy, the poll challenger may officially challenge the ballot. Other states should implement similar programs.

States should sponsor initiatives to remove dead voters and correct the registrations of people registered in multiple states (make them choose just one state). Since many local jurisdictions are reluctant to clean their voter rolls, federal or state oversight with teeth may be necessary.

Further, voter ID laws, such as the one implemented by North Carolina, but (wrongly) struck down by three liberal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit? one appointed by Bill Clinton and the other two appointed by President Obama?are needed to ensure there?s no cheating with votes. States should continue to press the issue regardless of recent setbacks by liberal activist judges.

Finally, some have claimed that strong voter ID laws are racist, because they disproportionately impact minorities and would prevent minorities from voting. As a black person, I?m naturally interested in this claim. Thankfully, it turns out to be false. The Heritage Foundation has shown that black voter turnout actually increased after North Carolina passed its voter ID law.

Not only was the claimed negative outcome false, but the reasoning was faulty as well. The fact that the law disproportionately impacts minorities does not mean that it is discriminatory. It means, unfortunately, that fewer minorities are in compliance with common-sense safeguards to protect the integrity of our elections (i.e., having a driver?s license or photo ID).

To mitigate this concern, states can offer a service that will take people without valid ID to their local government office to apply for proper ID, free of charge. Users could schedule the pickup with their smartphone or a phone call. That way there will be as few barriers as possible to those who want to vote and are capable of obtaining a valid ID, but cannot due to transportation concerns (a reason often given by those who claim voter ID laws hurt minorities).

So let us not believe false claims that voter fraud doesn?t exist. It?s real, and we must work to stop it, while making sure those who are eligible to vote but without proper ID are accommodated fairly.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/13/voter-fraud-real-heres-proof/

[Dr. Blutarsky]

 This should concern any fair minded person regarding the state of journalism today.

CNN?s Jake Tapper blasts leak of town hall question to Clinton campaign: ?Journalistically it?s horrifying?

Jake Tapper of CNN was a moderator of a March 13 Democratic town hall event in which Hillary Clinton appears to have gotten an unfair advantage. As disclosed earlier this week in a WikiLeaks trove of emails relating to Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta, the Clinton campaign received word from then-CNN contributor Donna Brazile that a death-penalty question was on tap for the event, which took place at Ohio State University. A man named Ricky Jackson, who was exonerated after being sentenced to death, pressed the candidate on her support for the ultimate punishment.

It appears that Clinton may have seen the question coming.

?From time to time I get the questions in advance,? wrote Brazile in the pre-town-hall email. At the time, Brazile was vice chair of the Democratic National Committee in addition to being a CNN contributor. She stopped being a contributor in mid-summer, when she started serving as interim DNC chair.

more https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/10/13/cnns-jake-tapper-blasts-leak-of-town-hall-question-to-clinton-campaign-journalistically-its-horrifying/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.b378a7c92925
 

[pilferk]

Worst-election- ever......

On top of everything else going on with this election, there's voter fraud as the cherry on top.

Voter Fraud Is Real. Here?s The Proof
Data suggests millions of voter registrations are fraudulent or invalid. That?s enough to tip an election, easily.

By John Gibbs
October 13, 2016

This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn?t exist. A recent Salon article argues that ?voter fraud just isn?t a problem in Pennsylvania,? despite evidence to the contrary. Another article argues that voter fraud is entirely in the imagination of those who use voter ID laws to deny minorities the right to vote.

Yet as the election approaches, more and more cases of voter fraud are beginning to surface. In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote. Stunningly, ?a woman named Sara Sosa who died in 2009 cast ballots in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.? In Virginia, it was found that nearly 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

In Texas, authorities are investigating criminals who are using the technique of ?vote harvesting? to illegally procure votes for their candidates. ?Harvesting? is the practice of illegally obtaining the signatures of valid voters in order to vote in their name without their consent for the candidate(s) the criminal supports.

These are just some instances of voter fraud we know about. It would be silly to assume cases that have been discovered are the only cases of fraud. Indeed according to a Pew Research report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations are ?significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.? Since there are 146 million Americans registered to vote, this translates to a stunning 18 million invalid voter registrations on the books. Further, ?More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.? Numbers of this scale obviously provide ripe opportunity for fraud.

Don?t Let Data Contradict My Narrative

Yet in spite of all this, a report by the Brennan Center at New York Univeristy claims voter fraud is a myth. It argues that North Carolina, which passed comprehensive measures to prevent voter fraud, ?failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing in-person voter fraud in North Carolina.? However, this faulty reasoning does not point to the lack of in-person voter fraud, but rather to lack of enforcement mechanisms to identify and prosecute in-person voter fraud.

The science of criminal justice tells us that many crimes go unreported, and the more ?victimless? the crime, the more this happens. The fact is, a person attempting to commit voter fraud is very unlikely to be caught, which increases the incentive to commit the crime.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is a sophisticated, comprehensive effort to catalog ?the number and types of crimes not reported to law enforcement authorities.? However, it tends to deal mostly in violent crimes. As complex as the NCVS is, gathering accurate data for unreported victimless crimes such as voter fraud is even harder, since 1) outside of the criminal, no one may know a crime has taken place, and 2) there is no direct victim to report the crime in the first place. Yet we are expected to believe that, unlike violent crime, voter fraud is limited only to the cases that are actually reported and prosecuted? This is a senseless position.

Further, the Brennan Center report argues that because prosecutor Kris Kobach?s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate), voter fraud is so statistically small that it?s a non-issue. Let?s follow this logic. Does the fact that 109 people were cited for jaywalking in Seattle in 2009 mean that only 109 people jaywalked in Seattle that year? Does the fact that 103,733 people were cited for driving without a seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015 mean that only that many people were driving without seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015?

Absolutely not. This can be proven easily because in 2014, the previous year, only 29,470 people were cited. The disparity is largely due to increased enforcement efforts in 2015. In other words, increasing enforcement of the crime revealed a much larger number of people committing the crime.

The exact same is true for voter fraud. We have no reason to believe that the low number of prosecutions means only that exact amount of voter fraud is happening. Rather, it could mean a lack of enforcement is failing to reveal the bulk of the violations that are occurring. Thus, as with many types of crimes, especially victimless crimes, the real number of cases is likely significantly higher than the number reported.

How to Effectively Target Voter Fraud

So now that we know voter fraud is a serious issue, what are some solutions to this problem? States like Michigan have Poll Challenger programs, where observers from both parties may be present at voter check-in tables at precincts. They check each voter?s ID against a database of registered voters for that precinct to ensure the person attempting to vote is actually legally qualified to vote in that precinct. If there?s a discrepancy, the poll challenger may officially challenge the ballot. Other states should implement similar programs.

States should sponsor initiatives to remove dead voters and correct the registrations of people registered in multiple states (make them choose just one state). Since many local jurisdictions are reluctant to clean their voter rolls, federal or state oversight with teeth may be necessary.

Further, voter ID laws, such as the one implemented by North Carolina, but (wrongly) struck down by three liberal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit? one appointed by Bill Clinton and the other two appointed by President Obama?are needed to ensure there?s no cheating with votes. States should continue to press the issue regardless of recent setbacks by liberal activist judges.

Finally, some have claimed that strong voter ID laws are racist, because they disproportionately impact minorities and would prevent minorities from voting. As a black person, I?m naturally interested in this claim. Thankfully, it turns out to be false. The Heritage Foundation has shown that black voter turnout actually increased after North Carolina passed its voter ID law.

Not only was the claimed negative outcome false, but the reasoning was faulty as well. The fact that the law disproportionately impacts minorities does not mean that it is discriminatory. It means, unfortunately, that fewer minorities are in compliance with common-sense safeguards to protect the integrity of our elections (i.e., having a driver?s license or photo ID).

To mitigate this concern, states can offer a service that will take people without valid ID to their local government office to apply for proper ID, free of charge. Users could schedule the pickup with their smartphone or a phone call. That way there will be as few barriers as possible to those who want to vote and are capable of obtaining a valid ID, but cannot due to transportation concerns (a reason often given by those who claim voter ID laws hurt minorities).

So let us not believe false claims that voter fraud doesn?t exist. It?s real, and we must work to stop it, while making sure those who are eligible to vote but without proper ID are accommodated fairly.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/13/voter-fraud-real-heres-proof/

This is, entirely, an opinion piece phrased as an editorial. I"d argue THIS is whats wrong with journalism.

There have been about 30 documened cases of voter fraud since 1975.  Thats out of literally thousands of cases that have been investigated.  No matter how much the trump train wants it to be. Its not a thing. The conservatives play this card every election, because the demographics of the country continue to work against them. Every election its debunked. There are literally snopes level disproven "examples" in this article. There are far more cases of voter intimidation, by those "election watchers" than there are voter fraud.

This is a disgusting attempt to undermine election outcomes...and nothing else.

If trump loses, it has nothing to do with voter fraud. It has everything to do with trump.

[pilferk]

This should concern any fair minded person regarding the state of journalism today.

CNN?s Jake Tapper blasts leak of town hall question to Clinton campaign: ?Journalistically it?s horrifying?

Jake Tapper of CNN was a moderator of a March 13 Democratic town hall event in which Hillary Clinton appears to have gotten an unfair advantage. As disclosed earlier this week in a WikiLeaks trove of emails relating to Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta, the Clinton campaign received word from then-CNN contributor Donna Brazile that a death-penalty question was on tap for the event, which took place at Ohio State University. A man named Ricky Jackson, who was exonerated after being sentenced to death, pressed the candidate on her support for the ultimate punishment.

It appears that Clinton may have seen the question coming.

?From time to time I get the questions in advance,? wrote Brazile in the pre-town-hall email. At the time, Brazile was vice chair of the Democratic National Committee in addition to being a CNN contributor. She stopped being a contributor in mid-summer, when she started serving as interim DNC chair.

more https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2016/10/13/cnns-jake-tapper-blasts-leak-of-town-hall-question-to-clinton-campaign-journalistically-its-horrifying/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.b378a7c92925
 

We've covered it earlier.  If its legit, its concerning.

The parties involved say its not.

We have enough emails proven to not be legit to question one way or the other.  So we will likely be left to wonder if it was her campaign...or the Russians.

I'm less concerned cause shes not my candidate....so i can just shrig and move on to more important issues.

[pilferk]

This is what happens when a candidate runs a full assault on the press. Say what you will, but i think we can all agree the stuff described in this article is disgusting....and seems to be endorsed by the candidates daily stump speeches:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/2016/10/16/publisher-response-to-threats-after-republic-endorsement-clinton-trump/92058964/

[tim_m]

Worst-election- ever......

On top of everything else going on with this election, there's voter fraud as the cherry on top.

Voter Fraud Is Real. Here?s The Proof
Data suggests millions of voter registrations are fraudulent or invalid. That?s enough to tip an election, easily.

By John Gibbs
October 13, 2016

This week, liberals have been repeating their frequent claim that voter fraud doesn?t exist. A recent Salon article argues that ?voter fraud just isn?t a problem in Pennsylvania,? despite evidence to the contrary. Another article argues that voter fraud is entirely in the imagination of those who use voter ID laws to deny minorities the right to vote.

Yet as the election approaches, more and more cases of voter fraud are beginning to surface. In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote. Stunningly, ?a woman named Sara Sosa who died in 2009 cast ballots in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.? In Virginia, it was found that nearly 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

In Texas, authorities are investigating criminals who are using the technique of ?vote harvesting? to illegally procure votes for their candidates. ?Harvesting? is the practice of illegally obtaining the signatures of valid voters in order to vote in their name without their consent for the candidate(s) the criminal supports.

These are just some instances of voter fraud we know about. It would be silly to assume cases that have been discovered are the only cases of fraud. Indeed according to a Pew Research report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations are ?significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.? Since there are 146 million Americans registered to vote, this translates to a stunning 18 million invalid voter registrations on the books. Further, ?More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters, and approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.? Numbers of this scale obviously provide ripe opportunity for fraud.

Don?t Let Data Contradict My Narrative

Yet in spite of all this, a report by the Brennan Center at New York Univeristy claims voter fraud is a myth. It argues that North Carolina, which passed comprehensive measures to prevent voter fraud, ?failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing in-person voter fraud in North Carolina.? However, this faulty reasoning does not point to the lack of in-person voter fraud, but rather to lack of enforcement mechanisms to identify and prosecute in-person voter fraud.

The science of criminal justice tells us that many crimes go unreported, and the more ?victimless? the crime, the more this happens. The fact is, a person attempting to commit voter fraud is very unlikely to be caught, which increases the incentive to commit the crime.

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is a sophisticated, comprehensive effort to catalog ?the number and types of crimes not reported to law enforcement authorities.? However, it tends to deal mostly in violent crimes. As complex as the NCVS is, gathering accurate data for unreported victimless crimes such as voter fraud is even harder, since 1) outside of the criminal, no one may know a crime has taken place, and 2) there is no direct victim to report the crime in the first place. Yet we are expected to believe that, unlike violent crime, voter fraud is limited only to the cases that are actually reported and prosecuted? This is a senseless position.

Further, the Brennan Center report argues that because prosecutor Kris Kobach?s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate), voter fraud is so statistically small that it?s a non-issue. Let?s follow this logic. Does the fact that 109 people were cited for jaywalking in Seattle in 2009 mean that only 109 people jaywalked in Seattle that year? Does the fact that 103,733 people were cited for driving without a seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015 mean that only that many people were driving without seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015?

Absolutely not. This can be proven easily because in 2014, the previous year, only 29,470 people were cited. The disparity is largely due to increased enforcement efforts in 2015. In other words, increasing enforcement of the crime revealed a much larger number of people committing the crime.

The exact same is true for voter fraud. We have no reason to believe that the low number of prosecutions means only that exact amount of voter fraud is happening. Rather, it could mean a lack of enforcement is failing to reveal the bulk of the violations that are occurring. Thus, as with many types of crimes, especially victimless crimes, the real number of cases is likely significantly higher than the number reported.

How to Effectively Target Voter Fraud

So now that we know voter fraud is a serious issue, what are some solutions to this problem? States like Michigan have Poll Challenger programs, where observers from both parties may be present at voter check-in tables at precincts. They check each voter?s ID against a database of registered voters for that precinct to ensure the person attempting to vote is actually legally qualified to vote in that precinct. If there?s a discrepancy, the poll challenger may officially challenge the ballot. Other states should implement similar programs.

States should sponsor initiatives to remove dead voters and correct the registrations of people registered in multiple states (make them choose just one state). Since many local jurisdictions are reluctant to clean their voter rolls, federal or state oversight with teeth may be necessary.

Further, voter ID laws, such as the one implemented by North Carolina, but (wrongly) struck down by three liberal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit? one appointed by Bill Clinton and the other two appointed by President Obama?are needed to ensure there?s no cheating with votes. States should continue to press the issue regardless of recent setbacks by liberal activist judges.

Finally, some have claimed that strong voter ID laws are racist, because they disproportionately impact minorities and would prevent minorities from voting. As a black person, I?m naturally interested in this claim. Thankfully, it turns out to be false. The Heritage Foundation has shown that black voter turnout actually increased after North Carolina passed its voter ID law.

Not only was the claimed negative outcome false, but the reasoning was faulty as well. The fact that the law disproportionately impacts minorities does not mean that it is discriminatory. It means, unfortunately, that fewer minorities are in compliance with common-sense safeguards to protect the integrity of our elections (i.e., having a driver?s license or photo ID).

To mitigate this concern, states can offer a service that will take people without valid ID to their local government office to apply for proper ID, free of charge. Users could schedule the pickup with their smartphone or a phone call. That way there will be as few barriers as possible to those who want to vote and are capable of obtaining a valid ID, but cannot due to transportation concerns (a reason often given by those who claim voter ID laws hurt minorities).

So let us not believe false claims that voter fraud doesn?t exist. It?s real, and we must work to stop it, while making sure those who are eligible to vote but without proper ID are accommodated fairly.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/13/voter-fraud-real-heres-proof/

This is, entirely, an opinion piece phrased as an editorial. I"d argue THIS is whats wrong with journalism.

There have been about 30 documened cases of voter fraud since 1975.  Thats out of literally thousands of cases that have been investigated.  No matter how much the trump train wants it to be. Its not a thing. The conservatives play this card every election, because the demographics of the country continue to work against them. Every election its debunked. There are literally snopes level disproven "examples" in this article. There are far more cases of voter intimidation, by those "election watchers" than there are voter fraud.

This is a disgusting attempt to undermine election outcomes...and nothing else.

If trump loses, it has nothing to do with voter fraud. It has everything to do with trump.

To me a much bigger issue is Republicans gerrymandering their districts to fix their elections.

[pilferk]

Ok guys...i'll be mostly m.i.a the next couple weeks. Big stuff gong on at work on nov 1st and 2nd, and the next 2 weeks will be nuts with prep. Try not to miss me too much!

[tim_m]

just to expand on the Texas poll by WFAA here in Texas a few days ago, today the Houston Chronicle released a poll showing Tump's lead here is only at 3%.

[D-GenerationX]

Complete disaster for Trump last night.

Even if every other other part of the debate was a complete grand slam for him (spoiler : it wasn't) the answer about "keeping us in suspense" as to whether he'd accept the election results was a total disqualifier.

The GOP, already backpedaling away from him at warp speed, will, as Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said, "drop him like a hot rock."

[pilferk]

Complete disaster for Trump last night.

Even if every other other part of the debate was a complete grand slam for him (spoiler : it wasn't) the answer about "keeping us in suspense" as to whether he'd accept the election results was a total disqualifier.

The GOP, already backpedaling away from him at warp speed, will, as Sen Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said, "drop him like a hot rock."

Quick fly by.

I agree with you.

I thought he was generally competitive on most other topics, giving as good as he got, but 3 things killed him:

1) The "I'll keep you in suspense", as you mentioned.  That was the definition of political suicide, right there.

2) The whole Putin exchange, his unwillingness to condemn Russian hacking, and his unwillingness to accept the conclusions of the intelligence community.  AND...that's the thing that got under his skin at the 30 minute mark, and sent him spiraling the rest of the debate. He looked pretty reserved, and stuck to his message, for the first 30. Best 30 minutes for him of the entire campaign.  And then she punched him in the mouth, and it sent him right back into his status quo.

3) The "such a nasty woman" snark at the end.  Just.....talk about tone deaf. It basically sold the world on exactly what the dems have been saying for the past 5 months.

It was BOTH of their best debate performances, but the difference was that he walked into trap after trap set by Clinton....and she had a coherent answer for almost everything he served up (and she avoided a few land mines where she likely didn't, with "Chinese Steel").

He was so pissed off by the end of that debate...you could see the steam coming from his ears.

And with that...I'll see you guys on November 3rd!!

[tim_m]

And his reasoning for keeping us in suspense. Well Gore didn't concede! Well Gore won the popular vote you dumb shit! Trump isn't going to win the popular vote or the electoral college vote.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Another self inflicted wound by Trump. All he had to say was that he would accept the outcome of the election once all the votes have been counted and verified. Not a good move.

We're going to have a corrupt liar as our next President. The cake is baked.

3rd party will fail again at reaching double digits due to the 2 party system making all the rules.

Hold on tight folks. 

[westcoast_junkie]

Just watched this last debate. Way better than the two before. And here where I live, the political commentators focus much on what you guys are sayin, especially Trump not answering if he'll accept the result. That, and of course a lot of other allegations of undemocratic circumstances in this election is just tragic. USA once inspired the rest of the democratic world. Now the racism, inequality, greedy NGOs, imperialism, violence, crazy gun-laws, the double moral and Trump overshadows the good things about this country. And I almost can't believe the massive amount og people who seems to believe om crazy conspiracy theories. What's wrong with the education-system? At least it's good Clinton wanna give more people proper education.

[tim_m]

Another self inflicted wound by Trump. All he had to say was that he would accept the outcome of the election once all the votes have been counted and verified. Not a good move.

We're going to have a corrupt liar as our next President. The cake is baked.

3rd party will fail again at reaching double digits due to the 2 party system making all the rules.

Hold on tight folks. 

He literally can't get out of his own way.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

Every 4 years people complain about all the issues with voting in the election, then when it is over we dont do anything about it, only to deal with the same problems 4 years later....

Going to exclusively paper ballots and requiring ID would go a long way in solving voting irregularities.

Texas County Switches to Paper Ballots after Electronic Voting Glitches
Problems with election software spring up in East Texas
http://www.infowars.com/texas-county-switches-to-paper-ballots-after-electronic-voting-glitches/

More Reports of Votes Flipping From Trump to Clinton in Texas
Election officials dismiss concerns
http://www.infowars.com/more-reports-of-votes-flipping-from-trump-to-clinton-in-texas/


Colorado - CBS4 Investigation Finds People Voting Twice
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/10/25/cbs4-investigation-finds-people-voting-twice/

[ice cream sand pig]

I couldnt vote for either of them. I voted for gary.

[tim_m]

I'd like to not vote for either but in Texas Trump is up only 3 points. So i gotta weigh that a vote for Johnson or Stein could give him the state win and possibly the presidency. Not a position i care to be in but it is what it is.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I'm going to wait till Nov 8th. More research to do still.

 I know I am not voting for Hillary, that is all I am certain of. Can't cast my vote for a criminal that got away with it and I disagree with her on many policy positions. My vote for President will be a ballot day decision.  There are a total of six choices. I am not planning on a write in.

We have some state level / local amendments and judges that I need to do more research on as well.