The General American Politics Thread

[Kevin]

My thoughts on the 2nd debate:

Two things stood out to me:

-Trump throwing Pence under the bus
-Trump threatening to jail his opponent

The second point is especially very chilling. This is the United States, not some third world country with a dictatorship!

Personally, I was floored when Trump threw his running mate under the bus! It now wouldn't surprise me if Pence dropped out of the ticket entirely, and I personally wouldn't blame him for doing so.

With all that being said, a new NBC/WSJ poll has Clinton up by double digits now. Keep in mind that no candidate in history has ever come back from beng that far behind in the polls. It'll take an outright miracle for Trump to win now.

[Patticus]

51 minutes ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

Well, you know how that old saying goes: Pride cometh before a Fall.

The question is, how big is that fall going to be?

Speaker Ryan knows that the race for the White House is probably over at this point, barring some great catastrophe for Clinton's side, and that now it's all about mitigating as much collateral damage as possible. With that in mind, he abandoned Trump today - following on the heels of dozens of other Republicans over the weekend. Trump and co, in response, have turned their fire on them, and will be getting nastier and nastier to both them and the Clintons as progressively worse polling results come in. That is, assuming they keep coming.

There's no telling how low he's going to go, or how bad his numbers could get (particularly if the reporters now fanning out on the hunt for juicy new Trump scandals strike gold, or if those Apprentice tapes make it into circulation), but Ryan and co are obviously his scapegoat at this point, and to them, he is their worst nightmare.
 

34 minutes ago, Kevin said:

With all that being said, a new NBC/WSJ poll has Clinton up by double digits now. Keep in mind that no candidate in history has ever come back from beng that far behind in the polls. It'll take an outright miracle for Trump to win now.

No candidate in the history of modern polling has come back from a polling deficit of over 4 points in October. Reagan managed to take a 4 point deficit and turn it into a win versus Carter, as did Truman when he battled Dewey.

If this NBC/WSJ poll isn't simply an outlier, but is rather a harbinger for the rest of the race (soon to be corroborated by more polling in the coming week or two), we could be looking at an almighty reversal of fortunes for the Democratic party, which has been stymied by relentless partisan obstructionism for the last 6 years, and before that was deadlocked by concerns over just how progressive they wanted to be.

 

Another thing to consider is this: How long will the stench of Trump's campaign thus far, and what must surely be much worse to come, stick? Is it going to hurt them in the mid-terms? Is it going to hurt them in the 2020 general?

[Tani Coyote]

The chances of the House flipping are low, even with a good Clinton majority; of the 435 seats, only about 34 are competitive. I guess one small Democrat advantage is there are a net 6 GOP Representatives not running for reelection. 3 of them are in heavily Republican areas. If the Democrats take those 3 seats, plus all the tossups, so they will have a majority. The GOP is doing its best to limit the coattail effect of a Clinton victory, though.

Either way, though, Speaker Ryan's likely going to walk away from this with a much weaker bargaining position.

2020 will be where we really see some change, though. A Presidential election combined with reapportionment of House seats will most likely shake things up. I can only assume that state legislatures that come to power in the 2016 cycle will lean Democrat, and use their gerrymandering to favor Democrats.

[-Robin-]

Ohio starts early voting tomorrow, and Trump has spent the day going after Paul Ryan for not supporting him, berating the Republican Party for abandoning him, embracing the alt-right in its entirety and going after the "establishment".

Meanwhile the Ohio RNC Party Chairman says that Ohio is a longshot for Trump to win now.

Dawn of the Final Day.

 

[Mad Convoy]

Apparently the reason those Apprentice tapes never got out is because the people behind the show would be violating their (very thorough) NDAs by releasing them or talking about them. The NDAs charge $5 million dollars to anybody who is caught leaking footage-- there's currently a GoFundMe seeking to raise enough money to give any whistleblower willing to publish the tapes, if any of you are interested. Trump is serious about NDAs and makes everybody who works with or for him, including his ex-wife, sign them-- and he's not afraid to sue if somebody violates them.

But some transcripts containing content that was edited out of the show proper were released. So far, we have Donald Trump being hypercritical of musician Emily West's skin. No, not skin color, skin. He really, really dislikes her skin. When a staff member pointed out that he seems to dislike her makeup more than her skin, he rebuffs her. He later claims that a contestant who questioned his reasoning isn't a skin man like he is, and only a skin man apparently would notice and care about this. He even claimed that his observation was going to destroy her career if the producers allowed it to air. So not only is he uncomfortably obsessed with women's appearances, but he thinks the general public is as obsessed with their appearances as he is, at least enough to think that him telling somebody that her skin sucks will prove enough of an earth shattering revelation that she'll lose her chance at fame and fortune. He also seems uncomfortably obsessed with the quality of a person's skin, which might explain why he's such a racist.

He also says that he's not a gay man, but country singer Luke Bryan is totally more attractive than Emily as far as he's concerned. And there are rumors of tapes where Trump says the N-word, but as of now that's only a rumor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-apprentice-transcript_us_57fbc511e4b0e655eab65823

[KHCast]

I mean, I'll give him the Luke Bryan thing lol. As much as I dislike country and trump, I'll give them both Luke. Fuck trump on the rest though.

[Patticus]

17 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

Apparently the reason those Apprentice tapes never got out is because the people behind the show would be violating their (very thorough) NDAs by releasing them or talking about them. The NDAs charge $5 million dollars to anybody who is caught leaking footage-- there's currently a GoFundMe seeking to raise enough money to give any whistleblower willing to publish the tapes, if any of you are interested. Trump is serious about NDAs and makes everybody who works with or for him, including his ex-wife, sign them-- and he's not afraid to sue if somebody violates them.

Apparently, David Brock, a wealthy Clinton ally, has pledged to pay off all the attendant fees for anyone willing to leak the tapes. I hope that somebody takes him up on the offer!
 

Trump's has now started repeating false claims published by a Russian site (and weren't published anywhere else) before being taken down again:

Quote

Of course, this might be seen as just an opportunity to laugh at the incompetence of the Russian hackers and government press—once they realized their error, Sputnik took the article down. But then things got even more bizarre.

This false story was reported only by the Russian-controlled agency (a reference appeared in a Turkish publication, but it was nothing but a link to the Sputnik article). So how did Donald Trump end up advancing the same falsehood put out by Putin’s mouthpiece?

At a rally in Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania, Trump spoke while holding a document in his hand. He told the assembled crowd that it was an email from Blumenthal, whom he called “sleazy Sidney.”

“This just came out a little while ago,’’ Trump said. “I have to tell you this.” And then he read the words from my article. 

“He’s now admitting they could have done something about Benghazi,’’ Trump said, dropping the document to the floor. “This just came out a little while ago.”

The crowd booed and chanted, “Lock her up!”

http://europe.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635?rm=eu

Is Trump, or are any of his advisers, in direct contact with Russia? Are they telling him what he should say, or is this the work of the fevered minds of Bannon and co?


Well known demagogue Glenn Beck has, in a round-about way, endorsed Clinton for President:

Quote

Every person, each of us must decide what is a bridge too far.

Mike Lee has obviously reached that point, where the moral compromise his party is asking him to make is simply beyond what is acceptable.

It is not acceptable to ask a moral, dignified man to cast his vote to help elect an immoral man who is absent decency or dignity.

If the consequence of standing against Trump and for principles is indeed the election of Hillary Clinton, so be it. At least it is a moral, ethical choice.

If she is elected, the world does not end…. Once elected, Hillary can be fought. Her tactics are blatant and juvenile, and battling her by means of political and procedural maneuvering or through the media , through public marches and online articles, all of that will be moral, worthy of man of principal.

Her nominees can be blocked, her proposed laws voted down.

The alternative does not offer a moral person the same opportunity. If one helps to elect an immoral man to the highest office, then one is merely validating his immorality, lewdness, and depravity.

But it’s OK, at least it is not her! Right??

No.

Lee’s call for Trump to step down and withdraw from the race is respectful to him and to the process.

Trump stepping down does not guarantee a Clinton win, but it does guarantee that the Republican party still stands for something, still allows its members to maintain thier [sic] own self respect and that it still has a future.

Source.

You know things are bad when even the lunatic wing of your support base is losing its ability to stomach you.

[Tani Coyote]

I'm kind of disappointed the GOP doesn't dump Trump.

I'd love to see a repeat of the 2010 Alaska midterms, where the GOP split down the middle between the Old Guard and the Tea Party, but nationwide. I can only assume removing him from the position would alienate a lot of voters, and cause more than a few split tickets. This would quite possibly give the Democrats the edge they need to take back tons of traditionally Republican seats.

Though that's probably just one reason why the RNC didn't do it (compare how the superdelegates have always been in love with Clinton, but were happy to abandon her when it became apparent Obama was more popular with the masses).

[Nepenthe]

Hasn't early voting begun and thus the ballots are set? Trump is basically locked in, is he not?

Even assuming he wasn't, you have to remember that a good 40% of the country are backing him, most of them in earnest. You see what happened at Fall Fest and the attempts of Ryan and co. to pull the event towards philosophical discussion and how they got jeered for not backing Trump fully. The GOP are dealing with a quagmire where a large portion of their electorate are just completely bonkers. The more moderate people can't really disavow Trump and subsequently this part of the electorate without severe short-term losses.

[-Robin-]

Voting began so early that 450,000 votes were locked in before the Access Hollywood tape was leaked. Trump's on the ballot. The question now is whether to continue to support him, or to redirect attention to down-ballot House races.

 

Make no mistake, that 2012 GOP autopsy will be nothing compared to what will come out if/when Trump loses. The GOP is forever divided between philosophical conservatives with demonstrably valid conservative policies, and the borderline-rabid enthusiasts that successfully tricked themselves into believing a narrative that they are the lone heroes, while the "establishment", whatever that means these twenty minutes, the media, and everyone else are threatening to perpetuate a tyranny for the purpose of destroying a country that only existed in their fantasies.  

 

Right now, this can only help Democrats. The GOP thinks they can co-opt these people, and have thought they could do so when the Tea Party arrived. They won't. But right now, the Democratic Party has a much stronger coalition in their electorate that the GOP just can't crack yet.

 

Conservatives are dreading that this election will be the end of the Republican Party. And if push comes to shove, it will. But what will replace it is a much more fortified conservative base with a clear message, and that can only benefit all but the TPers still angry that what they thought they would get never happened.

[Tani Coyote]

3 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

Hasn't early voting begun and thus the ballots are set? Trump is basically locked in, is he not?

Even assuming he wasn't, you have to remember that a good 40% of the country are backing him, most of them in earnest. You see what happened at Fall Fest and the attempts of Ryan and co. to pull the event towards philosophical discussion and how they got jeered for not backing Trump fully. The GOP are dealing with a quagmire where a large portion of their electorate are just completely bonkers. The more moderate people can't really disavow Trump and subsequently this part of the electorate without severe short-term losses.

Oh, I know it would make zero sense to disown him, but I can always dream. Anything that makes the "Party of Lincoln" divide on itself so it cannot stand any longer will make me happy.

2 hours ago, -Robin- said:

Voting began so early that 450,000 votes were locked in before the Access Hollywood tape was leaked. Trump's on the ballot. The question now is whether to continue to support him, or to redirect attention to down-ballot House races.

Isn't that question solved, given the RNC redirected all funding to the other races?

Quote

The GOP is forever divided between philosophical conservatives with demonstrably valid conservative policies,

...which ones are these?

The vast majority of the GOP's ideas are just that, ideas. They're garbage when put into practice.

I'd wager the GOP wins as well as it does because it's a lot better at getting people on board. It doesn't need to have any factual basis, so long as it appeals to people's face value reasoning. You can look at most GOP policy ideas and be like "of course, it all makes sense!" but... then the data absolutely sinks most of them.

Quote

Right now, this can only help Democrats. The GOP thinks they can co-opt these people, and have thought they could do so when the Tea Party arrived. They won't. But right now, the Democratic Party has a much stronger coalition in their electorate that the GOP just can't crack yet.

Give it a decade or two. Once the GOP comes around to Civil Rights, they're going to return to prominence because they'll have a lot of conservative minority voters to court.

Quote

Conservatives are dreading that this election will be the end of the Republican Party. And if push comes to shove, it will. But what will replace it is a much more fortified conservative base with a clear message, and that can only benefit all but the TPers still angry that what they thought they would get never happened.

The GOP should, strangely enough, be the Party most supportive of preference voting and proportional representation. If they backed that, it would put them in a position to limit the influence of the South, which continues to drag them down with objectively racist policies that are colorblind on their surface (let's remember the South pioneered a ton of ways to suppress the black vote without technically targeting blacks). Yes, folks from other parts of the country have racist opinions too, but when you look at policy maps from the past to present, it's clear the South leads the way in racially oppressive policy to a point it's hard to deny principled racism is still influencing much of what goes on there (it appears racism is tragically inherited, as well, as racism is concentrated among Southerners who live where slavery was concentrated over a century and a half ago).

By limiting the role of the less racially progressive parts of the South, the GOP could re-energize itself because it could start taking on some Democratic policies (as the GOP did through the New Deal era) and return to how it was prior to Nixon's Southern Strategy. It could embrace racial justice and court an increasingly larger minority population that has many conservatives in its ranks. It might even be able to steal some more of the Libertarian vote once it gets rid of a lot of its statist policies on crime. The Democrats cut the South loose when it became a liability, and the GOP should consider the same as a long-term strategy.

Race has a central role in American history and continues to have an important role in modern politics. Finding ways to adjust the GOP's policies on race will go a long way towards helping them.

[Kevin]

As if things couldn't get any worse for Trump, the New York Story just ran a story about 2 woman who claim that he touched them inappropriately. If that wasn't enough more footage has come out. Basically Trump asks a 10 year old girl if she's going up the escalator at Trump tower, she replies "Yeah", and Trump then says "In 10 years I'm going to be dating her". This was back in 1992. 

Now I've heard of an "October Surprise", but this is the first time I've seen an "October Surprise every single day" come out.

It just gets worse and worse for Trump. One can say "there are two sides to every story", which is true, but unfortunately for Trump, the recent tapes seem to give the accusations towards him more weight.

[Johnny Boy]

At this rate I'm starting to wonder if the number of accusers against Trump will start to outnumber Bill Cosby.

[Mad Convoy]

38 minutes ago, Johnny Boy said:

At this rate I'm starting to wonder if the number of accusers against Trump will start to outnumber Bill Cosby.

Quite honestly, I hope it doesn't. Because one women being the victim of sexual assault is one too many-- its even worse when there's a whole crowd of women who have been the victim of one greedy, egotistical, deplorable man.

2 hours ago, Raccoonatic Ogilvie said:

The GOP should, strangely enough, be the Party most supportive of preference voting and proportional representation. If they backed that, it would put them in a position to limit the influence of the South, which continues to drag them down with objectively racist policies that are colorblind on their surface (let's remember the South pioneered a ton of ways to suppress the black vote without technically targeting blacks). Yes, folks from other parts of the country have racist opinions too, but when you look at policy maps from the past to present, it's clear the South leads the way in racially oppressive policy to a point it's hard to deny principled racism is still influencing much of what goes on there (it appears racism is tragically inherited, as well, as racism is concentrated among Southerners who live where slavery was concentrated over a century and a half ago).

By limiting the role of the less racially progressive parts of the South, the GOP could re-energize itself because it could start taking on some Democratic policies (as the GOP did through the New Deal era) and return to how it was prior to Nixon's Southern Strategy. It could embrace racial justice and court an increasingly larger minority population that has many conservatives in its ranks. It might even be able to steal some more of the Libertarian vote once it gets rid of a lot of its statist policies on crime. The Democrats cut the South loose when it became a liability, and the GOP should consider the same as a long-term strategy.

Race has a central role in American history and continues to have an important role in modern politics. Finding ways to adjust the GOP's policies on race will go a long way towards helping them.

I agree with the principle of this, however, the Republican Party offering less regressive policies on racism won't make its racist supporters cease to exist (especially if they're concentrated in one region of the country) nor make the victims of their racist policies forget the transgressions of the past. Unfortunately, the GOP has grown dependent on pleasing the racist supporters in order to get positions in the government. While exploiting the fact that they'll vote for literally anybody who seems to support their ideas did work for a long time, its come back to bite the GOP now that they've alienated all the other demographics that the racist supporters have decreasing influence/power over. I am aware that more conservative minorities exist, but thanks to people in the Democrat Party having the sense to help them, sympathize with them or least pretend they care about race issues, nowadays they're more likely to vote for conservatives/moderates in the Democrat Party. Or a third party, but that's pretty rare in the US.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that a more progressive Republican party is possible. But its going to take a long time for the progressive ideas to catch on and for the sins of the past to be fully forgiven and moved on from.

[Patticus]

1 hour ago, Mad Convoy said:

[...] the Republican Party offering less regressive policies on racism won't make its racist supporters cease to exist (especially if they're concentrated in one region of the country) nor make the victims of their racist policies forget the transgressions of the past.

The goal is ultimately to sideline the racist support base of the GOP, condemning it to the societal fringes it was so recently ensconced within, where it can resume the process of fading away into history that was so rudely interrupted by the 2008 election. Then, work can be done to rid us of all remaining Jim Crow laws across the country, end the practice of racist (and every other kind of) gerrymandering, and so on.

Those minority groups that Republican legislatures and supporters have routinely targeted, directly or indirectly, have every right to remember the hateful things done to them, and to pass that memory down to their children.

If the Republican Party is ever going to deserve to win another national election, it's going to have to embark upon a long-term process of introspection, internal changes (including the membership of the party in some instances) and reconciliation; merely adopting more inclusive and sensitive platform policies (while a step in the right direction) won't be enough. It's going to have to do the hard work of marginalizing its sizable racist base itself, face some hard truths and in time move past them.

If it can handle the whole thing in a determined, unflinching, honest and sensitive manner, maybe someday it'll be a party worth supporting again, but it has to earn that mantle.

[Tani Coyote]

8 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

I am aware that more conservative minorities exist, but thanks to people in the Democrat Party having the sense to help them, sympathize with them or least pretend they care about race issues, nowadays they're more likely to vote for conservatives/moderates in the Democrat Party.

Indeed, and this is one thing that helped Clinton enormously over Sanders.

Realignments have happened several times in American history, though, and it's entirely possible minority voters would start to leave the Democratic Party in droves if the GOP revisited some of its racial and economic policies. A lot of the conservative Democrat energy stems from strong Protestant or Catholic sentiments on topics like abortion, marriage, etc. The GOP's courting of the religious right gives it a lot of appeal.

Unfortunately, as Democrats move away from the War on Crime, the GOP continues to hold on tight. As Democrats move away from voter ID laws, the GOP holds on to those too. The GOP appears clearly out of touch with issues facing minorities, and its vote suffers accordingly. Most minority members can perceive how they're adversely affected by these laws, so vote against them accordingly.

The GOP doesn't have to move too leftward in economic terms. We've seen how quickly a lot of minorities can internalize the idea success is entirely based on personal work ethic. Many poor (non-Hispanic) whites dislike extensive social programs, so I see no reason why poor non-whites would feel an attachment to it. I know Catholics are generally more open to left-wing economic policy, but a lot of that stems from their faith, where there's a large, concentrated institution doling out assistance anyway. So long as economic policies have a little more meat to them than laissez-faire and there's some basic social programs, they could probably win a lot of minorities over.

The cult of capitalism is a lot more pervasive than the cult of "racism doesn't exist." Many minorities will recognize they are unfairly disadvantaged in law, suffrage, etc. but stop short of a call to move away from capitalism.

Which is strange, given capitalism is the reason racism (and nearly every other form of bigotry) is so pervasive in the first place. Some bigotry comes naturally as a result of the brain's tendency to make associations, but elites are the ones who seize upon such sentiments to divide the masses and build up a support base.

8 hours ago, Mad Convoy said:

Or a third party, but that's pretty rare in the US.

That's one reason I was saying the GOP should back preference voting and proportional representation. They could pass it as averting another Trump... but in reality, the leadership could be setting things up to formally limit the power of the South.

They have to keep the South under First Past the Post, barring a huge demographic shift, because the South has enough electoral votes to make abandoning it guaranteeing Democratic victory in any future election.

[Johnny Boy]

For those of you that have a Twitter, the newest trend is now "Next fake Trump victim". Gee, I wonder how these people would react if the trend was calling the Cosby victims fake.

[Tani Coyote]

At least a lot of the people Tweeting that hashtag are saying how stupid it is, fortunately.

A lot are pointing out THIS is why a lot of a victims of sexual harassment/assault never come forward... they're worried they'll get laughed out of the room as much as reprisal.

Historically, there were three ways to discredit sexual assault when the allegation was made by a woman: 1) the Lucretia idea, the principle that no woman would admit the dishonor and would prefer death, based on the example of Lucretia of Rome (ironically, I would say this is much more true for men if anything); 2) the idea women were not fully in control of their faculties and so were rarely truly non-consensual, and 3) the idea women were more evil than men, and only brought up sexual assault to discredit a good man's reputation. Cases like the Scottsboro trial in 1931 only served to reinforce the idea women falsely accuse men of sexual assault; Scottsboro is particularly interesting because it shows both sexist and racist constructions of the world (people automatically believed the men were guilty because they were black, but when most of them were found innocent, contemporary people instead defaulted to "of course the women lied.")

Overall though, it's disgusting to see something like this happen. People often say "rape culture" isn't a thing, but look at this. Rape culture isn't so much about sexual assault being around every corner (although sexual assault rates are still relatively high for women) as it is there's very thin protection for those who are victims. When a woman comes forward, she's unlikely to see justice from the courts, or people will accuse her of being a liar. When a man comes forward, he's looked down on as weak and a failure of a male. It's no surprise so few people of both sexes will admit to being victims. Society objectively turns the cold shoulder to sexual assault victims; if that's not a "rape culture," I don't know what the hell is.

 

[Nepenthe]

Trump is apparently pulling out of Virginia and going to focus on Pennsylvania (lol), North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio (lol) to try and win. Someone stick a fork in this campaign.

[Mad Convoy]

9 hours ago, Johnny Boy said:

For those of you that have a Twitter, the newest trend is now "Next fake Trump victim". Gee, I wonder how these people would react if the trend was calling the Cosby victims fake.

Incidentally, a lot of people are actually comparing this to Cosby. Like Cosby...

1. Trump has exploited his power, money, and influence, as well as the social stigmas against being a victim of sexual assault, to prevent victims from speaking out. This didn't work forever however, and it only took one incident (in this case, a tape where he admits to sexual assault) to finally motivate the victims to break the silence and publicly admit what happened.

2. Trump has claimed that he didn't do any of those things and those women are just trying to smear him. Though he has shown less consistency than Cosby-- Trump started out not denying the tapes until he saw that he couldn't magically recover in the polls this time, then he suddenly changed his views.

3. The incident has severely damaged, if not outright destroyed, any credibility Trump had at this point for people who aren't sex crime apologists. There's a good chance this will be the incident that gets him locked up, especially since he's threatening to get litigious which would force his victims into court and likely motivate them to try to countersue or press charges. Its also likely to destroy his legacy rapidly.

The problem is that now Trump is changing his tactics. He's threatening to sue the Times now for reporting on this. His supporters are doing everything they can to degrade and discredit the victims-- and they've been getting increasingly vicious in their attacks. In other words, they're trying to turn the tide by pressuring the media to turn a blind eye to Trump's crimes, to stop the victims from speaking up on the matter, and to force people to vote for Trump in their area or face the consequences from the deplorables. Indeed, Trump is being accused of encouraging this by denying allegations and playing along with the aggression. The problem is that its not working. The Times says that its ready for a fight if Trump wants to go there, the victims aren't turning back on their statements now, and Trump is still declining in the polls on a level where there is no historical precedent for full recovery. Of course, Clinton is still factoring in the deplorables' ability to influence the elections-- she's dispatched a bunch of lawyers around the country to protect voters from being pressured into voting Trump. But I think the fact that Trump's only shot at winning at this point is basically to either have a miracle the likes of which US history has never seen before or to rely on his fanboys to cheat the election says a lot. His campaign has lost the fire that allowed it to be so successful before-- or as some had suspected, was fated to lose that fire since he appeals to such a narrow demographic and was bound to hit the ceiling eventually-- and all that remains now is smoldering embers, the likes of which will not be put out for years but lost the ability to impact US politics outside of this election.

Bravo to the women, by the way. Its really brave of them to risk, if not guarantee, that the internet/IRL hate brigade would go after them, not to mention bringing back what must be some painful memories for the sake of justice. I do think its sad that they felt like they couldn't speak up about it for so long-- whether because of the culture of the time when the assault happened (apparently Trump got lots of mileage out of the widespread 1970s belief that women who were sexually assaulted did something to deserve it), the shame and shamings associated with being open about having been sexually assaulted, or because the police don't take these incidents seriously enough to investigate them properly in the first place, it isn't fair that victims be pressured into silence. Especially since the victims never asked for all this stress and trauma.

[Tani Coyote]

Jill Stein gave a passive endorsement to Donald Trump during an appearance on C-Span. She said that Clinton's policies in Syria run the risk of nuclear war, and cited the opinions of people like Gorbachev that we are closer to nuclear war than ever before.

For starters: Cuban Missile Crisis? Miss that little event, I suppose? What about the Doomsday Clock saying that's a load?

What about the fact the Cold War never turned hot?

Stein once again reveals how clueless she is.

1 hour ago, Nepenthe said:

Trump is apparently pulling out of Virginia and going to focus on Pennsylvania (lol), North Carolina, Florida, and Ohio (lol) to try and win. Someone stick a fork in this campaign.

It's pretty much a foregone conclusion at this point, I'd say.

A part of me thinks beneath the image he's projecting, Trump's actually sighing in relief. "My God, I was afraid they might actually vote me in as President..." What with his former aides saying he ran as a stunt, thinking it wouldn't get much farther than his last attempt.

...this is assuming there's no grounding to the idea he did all this just to help Clinton, too. It's not like capitalist elites colluding has never happened before.

If Clinton did arrange Trump to run against her, though, it would have been a brilliant move. She's able to get away with pretty much anything on the basis of not being Trump. Never mind Trump's likely caused lasting damage to the Republican Party, which might just help her maintain a good grip of Congress over the next 8 years.

[Nepenthe]

I stopped giving Trump the benefit of the doubt ages ago and have gone into full Occam's Razor mode. His character flaws have literally been a thing since he was a child, and in general it's clear he has an superiority complex due to his wealth and branding. Dude's not colluding with anyone or trying to sabotage anything; he really is as much of a bastard as he lets on, if not worse considering the sexual scandals coming out, and he more than likely destroyed the Republican Party simply because he got roasted by Obama at the correspondents' dinner and wanted to show everyone that the black man wouldn't get away with it. He genuinely wants to be in the driver's seat because he believes he can do no wrong. If it ever comes out that this isn't the case then I'll actually buy a Trump hat.

[Tani Coyote]

I mean... if Trump isn't a plant, then Clinton should absolutely start taking notes now on how to secure re-election in 2020.

Really, the possibility of a neo-fascist idiot with zero qualifications to be President having a serious possibility of winning is enough to send most people into your arms regardless of what your own personal flaws are. The "A or B" nature of the First Past the Post system means you don't have to be awesome, you just have to make your opponent look absolutely terrible.

[Johnny Boy]

Considering that Trump has blown nothing but dog whistles at his most recent rallies, I'm now bracing myself for the riots that'll probably happen when he loses next month. Hell, I don't even think he'll concede and probably blame his loss on the "crooked media".

[Tani Coyote]

21 hours ago, Johnny Boy said:

Considering that Trump has blown nothing but dog whistles at his most recent rallies, I'm now bracing myself for the riots that'll probably happen when he loses next month. Hell, I don't even think he'll concede and probably blame his loss on the "crooked media".

Oh, no doubt.

Hopefully he won't just fade away. I'd love to see him continue to drag the GOP through the dirt for years to come. We could use his insanity to help the Dems win in the 2018 midterms.