Clinton v Trump - The Stretch Run Thread

[tim314]

@enipla

This election has not divided the US. What I am surprised to learn is that the United States was already SO divided. And is full of so many Racist, misogynic asses.

I try to comfort myself by remembering that not all Trump supporters are necessarily racists and misogynists. For instance, some of them are just willing to work with racist misogynists if that’s what it takes to turn America into the theocracy they want it to be.

This is . . . perhaps not as comforting as I would have hoped.

[LSLGuy]

Theocracy, free-fire zone for corporate power, tax-free Libertarian paradise, authoritarian police state.

It doesn’t matter which Glorious goal any given voter wants. Getting the racist misogynists on board can only speed the day when their Paradise comes to pass.

[running_coach]

Eric Trump and the campaigngets trolled bigly.

So taking a marker to a white T-shirt, Annie Cardelle wrote “Latina Contra Trump” — or “Latina Against Trump.” In case you’re not up on your high-school Spanish, “contra,” like “contrary” in English, does not imply an affinity for something. Then, off she and her sister went.

Although she initially wore a sweater over her homemade statement tee, Annie Cardelle nervously removed the sweater halfway through Eric Trump’s speech — but no one seemed to notice the message her shirt was putting out there.

At the end of the event, though, the sisters were shocked when Eric and his wife, Lara, beckoned the two forward and let them snap a picture.

“I couldn’t wrap my brain around it,” Ceci Cardelle told BuzzFeed News, “so I just stood there and smiled.”

Added Ceci to BuzzFeed News, “We were kind of in disbelief that no one understood this protest. It really goes to show the lack of diversity in their team.”

[elucidator]

Que lastima! Dos chicas esta en las t-shirts contra pendejo!

[Colibri]

@elucidator

Que lastima! Dos chicas esta en las t-shirts contra pendejo!

Don’t try to fool us. We know that pendejo means “my real good friend.”

[octopus]

Oh my goodness. The hysterical hyperbole doesn’t stop even if the ol Harpy has it all sewn up.

[Colibri]

@octopus

Oh my goodness. The hysterical hyperbole doesn’t stop even if the ol Harpy has it all sewn up.

If you’re against hysterical hyperbole, maybe you shouldn’t refer to Clinton as an “ol Harpy.” But it appears you’re only against hysterical hyperbole from one side.

[octopus]

@Colibri

If you’re against hysterical hyperbole, maybe you shouldn’t refer to Clinton as an “ol Harpy.” But it appears you’re only against hysterical hyperbole from one side.

Ol Harpy is the disparaging comment that gets your attention? What about the non-stop disparaging comments made about Trump’s appearance, his mannerisms, and his supporters? Why say nothing about that?

I don’t like the lack of decorum from either side. But this board seems to have no problem tolerating jackassery directed towards Republicans or their nominees.

[Colibri]

@octopus

Ol Harpy is the disparaging comment that gets your attention? What about the non-stop disparaging comments made about Trump’s appearance, his mannerisms, and his supporters? Why say nothing about that?

I don’t like the lack of decorum from either side. But this board seems to have no problem tolerating jackassery directed towards Republicans or their nominees.

So your answer to that is to do the same thing.

I’m not complaining about you calling her an “ol Harpy.” I’m calling you on complaining about hysterical hyperbole and then calling her an “ol Harpy.”

[octopus]

@Colibri

So your answer to that is to do the same thing.

I’m not complaining about you calling her an “ol Harpy.” I’m calling you on complaining about hysterical hyperbole and then calling her an “ol Harpy.”

Fair enough.

[adaher]

@Colibri

Ok, then the demographic is “ignorant white men.”

Actually, non college educated white women are going for Trump too, by a 9 point margin. So non college educated whites in general are pro-Trump.

Another interesting tidbit, although solely of academic significance, is that yet another poll shows Gary Johnson doing better among Hispanics than any other group. Given how much that demographic is growing, the LP would be wise to make note of their appeal among Latino voters.

[raventhief]

Er, I am sure that this has already been noted, but…

http://www.trump.tv/

[CarnalK]

@raventhief

Er, I am sure that this has already been noted, but…

http://www.trump.tv/

So?

[raventhief]

@CarnalK

So?

So the owner of the domain that Trump neglected to purchase has allegedly been threatened with legal action.

[Mighty_Girl]

Dear lord, this is internet 101.

What’s wrong with that team?

[running_coach]

@Mighty_Girl

Dear lord, this is internet 101.

What’s wrong with that team?

He hires the best.

[eschereal]

@adaher

Actually, non college educated white women are going for Trump too, by a 9 point margin. So non college educated whites in general are pro-Trump.

Which, obviously, highlights republican opposition to education in general and college loan subsidies in particular.

Another interesting tidbit, although solely of academic significance, is that yet another poll shows Gary Johnson doing better among Hispanics than any other group. Given how much that demographic is growing, the LP would be wise to make note of their appeal among Latino voters.

This page suggests that that assertion may be problematic, as a large segment of the Hispanic/Latino demographic tends to reject those labels in the first place.

More amusing, from that page,

The percentage of Libertarians who believe that corporations are making too much profit today: 46%

I am not clear how that can mesh. The basic libertarian ethos is Hands Off, let the market police itself. To do something to curb corporate profits would be very difficult while hewing to the mantra of freedom.

[gaffa]

@running_coach

He hires the best.

One would think that anyone competent at running a major political web campaign knows how to use Google and find out if the person wanting to hire them pays their bills.

[adaher]

@eschereal

I am not clear how that can mesh. The basic libertarian ethos is Hands Off, let the market police itself. To do something to curb corporate profits would be very difficult while hewing to the mantra of freedom.

It’s kinda like abortion, you can disapprove of it without supporting laws against it. Although being a libertarian doesn’t mean opposing all regulation or taxation, it just indicates a great deal of skepticism towards such things.

[JohnT]

So, the Telegraph decided to play a sting operation on both the Trump and Clinton campaigns and PACS: Posing as representatives of a Chinese investor, they approach both campaigns with an open desire to funnel $2 million Chinese dollars into the Presidential election.

Which is against the law.

All of the Clinton organizations didn’t bother to return the calls/messages.

The Great America PAC, a pro-Trump PAC which has spent over $10 million in advertising, did:

Senior figures involved with the Great America PAC, one of the leading “independent” groups organising television advertisements and grassroots support for the Republican nominee, sought to channel $2 million from a Chinese donor into the campaign to elect the billionaire despite laws prohibiting donations from foreigners.

In return, undercover reporters purporting to represent the fictitious donor were assured that he would obtain “influence” if Mr Trump made it to the White House.

Last week Eric Beach, the PAC’s co-chairman, confirmed to the reporters at an event in Las Vegas that their client’s support would be “remembered” if Mr Trump became president.

…

In an initial call on October 4 the reporter explained that the benefactor wanted to donate to support Mr Trump’s campaign, “but he’s not a US national.”

Mr Beach (PAC co-chair) agreed that making such a donation to the PAC could be difficult. But he did, however, have a suggestion involving a 501(c)(4) – a tax-exempt “social welfare organisation” – which he described as a “non-disclose entity” through which the client could make a contribution for a “specific purpose”.

…

A PAC with a “sister” 501(c)(4) could therefore encourage donors to give to that body. The 501(c)(4) could then contribute to the PAC, or simply spend the money on a project that the group would otherwise have funded.

…

Discussing how the money would be spent on pro-Trump grassroots campaigning as well as television advertising, (Jesse Benton, sr. exec at PAC until last May) warned: “You shouldn’t put any of this on paper.”

He suggested that the $2 million paid to his firm could be billed simply as “a large retainer” for consulting work. He then sent a $2 million invoice, for the sake of “appearances”, for his services providing “analysis of the American political and business landscape”.

In one of a series of telephone conversations over a two-week period, he explained that the work, which “doesn’t cost any money” apart from a “couple hours of my time” would be reports on the spending of the 501(c)(4)s and PAC.

This has nothing to do with the Trump campaign - the PAC is independent. But remember all those emails to foreign leaders that were “oops!” sent last June? Looks like a few of them landed some whales.