US Presidential Candidates

The E wrote:Trump is such a gift. It's literally impossible to make up bullshit when it comes to things he says that won't be trumped (hah) by actual stuff he says. Asked about women he would nominate for a cabinet position, he seriously said:

"Well there are so many different ones to choose, I can tell you everybody would say -- 'Put Ivanka in! Put Ivanka in!' You know that, right?" Trump said.
"She's very popular, she's done very well. And you know Ivanka very well. But there really are so many that are talented people, like you," he said to Savage, "You're so talented, I don't know if your viewers know that." The GOP nominee proceeded to joke about naming Savage to his cabinet.

So tell me more about how he's not going to fill his cabinet through nepotism and how he's less corrupt than HRC.


(Yes, I know trump very likely meant this as a lighthearted joke of some sort. However, the question is, should this be a topic he should be joking about at this stage in the campaign?)

What is truly scary about that is that he said absolutely nothing of substance, and then proceeded to divert the conversation away from the question so that he doesn't have to answer. And this is not an isolated incident; it's his modus operandi.

He has as yet not given any substantive details on a single policy issue or problem beyond 'I'll be so good, so good at solving that problem', 'I'll be the best, absolutely the best at doing that'.

Beyond his charisma and his willingness to tap into the anger and fear of a substantial portion of the American electorate, he has nothing to offer. No policy proposals, no substance, no integrity, no dignity and no hope.

Nico wrote:What is truly scary about that is that he said absolutely nothing of substance, and then proceeded to divert the conversation away from the question so that he doesn't have to answer. And this is not an isolated incident; it's his modus operandi.

He has as yet not given any substantive details on a single policy issue or problem beyond 'I'll be so good, so good at solving that problem', 'I'll be the best, absolutely the best at doing that'.

Beyond his charisma and his willingness to tap into the anger and fear of a substantial portion of the American electorate, he has nothing to offer. No policy proposals, no substance, no integrity, no dignity and no hope.

Hear, hear! The man is one long ShamWow infomercial. Worse, because with ShamWow you at least get something moderately useful. If Trump is elected, his cluelessness means that he'll just be a front man and lightning rod for behind-the-scenes manipulators.

Of course, once his spin doctors get hold of him, he'll recite whatever list of cabinet possibilities they give him and brush off the idea of Ivanka as a joke. He's followed this pattern before, "speaking his mind" and then backing up a few days later.

A friend who supports Johnson posted this comparison on Facebook [on the stands I know it is accurate] so here is a look at the Stands on various issues of the three leading candidates:



While I like Johnson's slogan, "Why choose one of the nuts when you can have the Johnson," I find Trump more in line with my stand on the issues. We have no response from Trump on congressional term limits, and I think they are needed to weed out the fossils in congress.

For you non Americans, or undecided Americans you can look at the three candidates with the highest poll numbers stand on the issues presented.

FYI Poker

Remember how Trump said he was completely independent of anyone's donations because of his personal wealth?

Yeah, about that:

—Stephen Feinberg, co-founder and CEO of Cerberus Capital Management, who contributed $339,400 and his wife gave another $339,400 to Trump Victory, the Republican’s nominee joint fundraising account with the national and state Republican parties.

—Andy Beal, a billionaire investor and poker player, who contributed $449,400, the largest legal sum that Trump Victory can receive from an individual. Beal also gave $100,000 to a pro-Trump super PAC last summer, the Make America Great Again PAC, which has since ceased its activities. Beal has also been publicly linked with another Trump super PAC, the Great America PAC, but federal records do not yet show that he has donated.

—Tom Barrack, a longtime Trump friend, who gave more than $399,000 to Trump Victory. Barrack, who also spoke at the Republican National Convention last month, spent more than $15,000 on in-kind contributions hosting Trump’s first big fundraiser in southern California, including $4,872 on beverages, in late May.

—Howard Lorber, president and CEO of Vector Group, who contributed $100,000 to Trump Victory in mid-June.

So, please, PeterZ, tell me more about how Trump is better than Hillary because he doesn't trade positions for donations.

Not quite seeing the federal appointments for sale here. DNC emails listed the donors and the process of how those donors could get appointments.

Try again, E.

The E wrote:Remember how Trump said he was completely independent of anyone's donations because of his personal wealth?

Yeah, about that:

—Stephen Feinberg, co-founder and CEO of Cerberus Capital Management, who contributed $339,400 and his wife gave another $339,400 to Trump Victory, the Republican’s nominee joint fundraising account with the national and state Republican parties.

—Andy Beal, a billionaire investor and poker player, who contributed $449,400, the largest legal sum that Trump Victory can receive from an individual. Beal also gave $100,000 to a pro-Trump super PAC last summer, the Make America Great Again PAC, which has since ceased its activities. Beal has also been publicly linked with another Trump super PAC, the Great America PAC, but federal records do not yet show that he has donated.

—Tom Barrack, a longtime Trump friend, who gave more than $399,000 to Trump Victory. Barrack, who also spoke at the Republican National Convention last month, spent more than $15,000 on in-kind contributions hosting Trump’s first big fundraiser in southern California, including $4,872 on beverages, in late May.

—Howard Lorber, president and CEO of Vector Group, who contributed $100,000 to Trump Victory in mid-June.

So, please, PeterZ, tell me more about how Trump is better than Hillary because he doesn't trade positions for donations.

PeterZ wrote:Not quite seeing the federal appointments for sale here. DNC emails listed the donors and the process of how those donors could get appointments.

Try again, E.

At this point, I'm just trying to figure out how much flip-flopping and hypocrisy you're willing to accept.

Like, look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSE-XoVKaXg

I mean, words do fail me to describe how much of bad idea Trump is.

Which reminds me.

pokermind wrote:

Poker, is that picture continuously updated to reflect Trump's habit of doing 180s on issues?

Let's speculate on how Trump will react when he loses. He's unlikely to just shrug his shoulders and go away. Will he:

1. Push conspiracy theories about the election being rigged and threaten to sue?

2. Get his own show on Fox, or maybe buy the network?

3. Move to Russia?

4. Declare bankruptcy after spending all his money on his campaign, and file for welfare?

5. Call for an armed uprising?

6. Produce "proof" that Hillary Clinton was born in Uzbekistan?

7. Publish a book (ghostwritten, of course) about his struggle?

8. Start a new hashtag, #TrumpLivesMatter?

Point 1 is already happening, and there will be lawsuits aplenty (Isn't it strange that Trump just gets to proclaim that he thinks the election's going to be rigged without anyone asking him whether or not he has credible evidence?).

Point 5 will almost certainly happen, if only because that seems to be a constant in US politics these days (Difference being, the Trumpetteers are probably the first group actually willing to go through with it).

You haven't even tried to understand my posts, have you?

Hillary Clinton already exceeds to amount of hypocracy I can tolerate. She also exceeds the amount of corruption I can tolerate. She as the complicity of the press protecting her excesses and a network of rich, politically connected elites funding her. She has all the tools to establish a true oligarchy in the US and has displayed the desire to do so.

Even if Trump exceeded Clinton's vile attributes, he does not have the capacity to usher in an oligarchy. The Press will attack any effort on Trump's part to do that because they will protect their own interests and their place in the existing elite structure. That makes Trump infinitely superior to Clinton.

To reiterate, this election is not whether we elect Trump or not; it is about retaining as much of our representative republic as we can. Electing Hillary allows oligarchy entrench deeply enough that it may never be pushed out again.

The E wrote:
At this point, I'm just trying to figure out how much flip-flopping and hypocrisy you're willing to accept.

Like, look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSE-XoVKaXg

I mean, words do fail me to describe how much of bad idea Trump is.

Which reminds me.

pokermind wrote:

Poker, is that picture continuously updated to reflect Trump's habit of doing 180s on issues?

PeterZ wrote:You haven't even tried to understand my posts, have you?

Hillary Clinton already exceeds to amount of hypocracy I can tolerate. She also exceeds the amount of corruption I can tolerate. She as the complicity of the press protecting her excesses and a network of rich, politically connected elites funding her. She has all the tools to establish a true oligarchy in the US and has displayed the desire to do so.

Okay, so if Hillary is the baseline bad politician you can not stomach, then the question still is how much worse Trump can get before you abandon him as well.

I mean, from my point of view I have difficulty figuring out how Trump isn't an oligarch or worse.

Even if Trump exceeded Clinton's vile attributes, he does not have the capacity to usher in an oligarchy. The Press will attack any effort on Trump's part to do that because they will protect their own interests and their place in the existing elite structure. That makes Trump infinitely superior to Clinton.

You have no idea how weird that sounds. So Trump's main selling point is that he's not a member of the establishment, in fact, he uses the fact that the establishment hates him as a point in his favour (something you're apparently eating up completely). He promises to achieve whatever it is he wants to achieve (I think "win so much, you guys" is probably the one constant point in there?) despite that, and his entire campaign is positioning him as the one guy who can fix it all by putting "the best people" in the right place.

The press, it has to be said, is no longer the extraparliamentary force it once was. Proper political journalism isn't paying bills anymore, and it certainly doesn't get readers these days (not enough to matter, anyway).

Trump's supporters, like you, do not care about the press or are actively hostile to it. There are no exposes that can be run that could actually damage him in the eyes of his supporters. The only thing that can reign him in is the rest of the political establishment, the Supreme Court, Senate and House of Representatives, but the latter two institutions will both be under pressure from their constituents to "let Trump fix it".

Trump's desire to be the center of attention, to be the one critical point everyone relies on, makes him not just a natural oligarch, it makes him a natural dictator. The unquestioning support he is getting makes him a potentially liked dictator (At least until the consequences of his plans become apparent 6 years down the line), and those are the worst kind.

To reiterate, this election is not whether we elect Trump or not;

The ballot sheets say differently.

it is about retaining as much of our representative republic as we can. Electing Hillary allows oligarchy entrench deeply enough that it may never be pushed out again.

I think electing an actual oligarch to prevent the US from becoming an oligarchy (never mind that that particular train has left the station quite some time ago already) is the kind of weirdness completely unexplainable to outsiders that seems to crop up in every large nation.