The General Election

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

Well if that's the way it's seen, then it's no worse than status quo, right? All he did at the very worst is point out the flaws in our system. may sound crazy, but to me it's and upside vs typical type of thing. None of the ridiculous extreme measures that folks get out of his stuff is gonna really happen, so I wanna see whats possible by going non-career politician in this thing, where his non-political correctness can be looked past to see what he can actually do behind the desk. he's a frickin bazzillionaire. he's not stupid. for all the criticism he gets on his finances, the numbers dont lie. He must know the loopholes. he must be smart about it. so why not? he cant be bought. What lobbyist is gonna buy off him? He's obviously a hard ass. I like that. you know i cant stand nicey nice for the sake of nicey nice. he's made the moneybanged all the womenMaybe he genuinely wants to fix the country and die? That's the last part of his legacy.But isnt it possible that his behavior to get there in order to get certain support necessary isnt necessarily what he's all about? i wanna put him in the chair to see what he'll actually do. i dont care how he says it. This all goes back to me saying, at the end of the day, probably not much will change. maybe some things for better. Some for worse. Depending who you are and your principles. If he winds up not being fit, we'll go again in 4 years. If he is, (which i think) he'll get 8. So i vote for him. Possible upside vs status quo. And i look past his extreme comments as blowing smoke. Like any other.

1. Actually, we have no idea if Trump is really a "bazzillionaire". He refused to release his tax records and most of his financial statements. We DO know he has LOST a billion dollars, much of which was money he accumulated from his father directly or indirectly. In fact, his lack of transparency points to just the opposite.2. Where is the proof he's intelligent? His claims alone? Because there is no evidence he's some kind of genius.3. Numbers don't lie - if you can actually get the numbers. Again, Trump refused.4. What proof is there he can't be bought? We don't know his worth, but we do know that he has not even come close to providing his own campaign with the self-funding he claimed he would make; that he has not contributed to charities at anywhere close to the amounts he has claimed; that he has funded worthy causes at anywhere near the rates he's claimed.5. He CLAIMS to be a hard-ass, but in the one instance in which he had an opportunity to prove it - the meeting with the Mexican president - he chickened out. But more importantly, hard asses don't get things done. They make enemies. To do anything, he needs both chambers of Congress to agree. He's pissed off both parties, and has no chance of passing anything of substance. And he can claim he'll build a wall or renegotiate trade deals - but again, without Congress' approval, he doesn't get anything done. He's pissed off almost every demographic that he needs to push an agenda.

AR HF;

 

One thing that can be stated for sure, is that he has the ability to surround himself with successful people who make things happen. Everything you mentioned above may be disputable but you can't dispute his success. You might be able to question what one considered success, but I believe most would agree he has it better than the majority on many different fronts!

 

I can. I can dispute his success. We don't know how he has done in anything other than the legal files we can find publicly on his bankruptcy filings, court cases where he's refused to pay employees and vendors etc. Does he have his name on lots of buildings? Yes. Does he have money or has he been the one responsible for the supposedly good ventures? We don't know. We know he tells us he's worth a lot and we also know he exaggerates that by a ridiculous amount (by not subtracting out expenses, mortgage costs of properties etc) We know he is a master at avoiding taxes and playing the IRS. We know that he's figured out a way to claim to be benevolent when he is actually shuffling other people's money into his name and giving it away.

 

As far as surrounding himself with successful people - that too is a matter of opinion. When we're looking at Christie, Guliani, Gingrich at the top of lists for those he would put in cabinet positions I question his choices. As to the others he has mentioned getting highly coveted positions? His 3 kids. Who have zero real world experience, and no work experience other than turning up to their daddy's building in dress clothes every once and awhile.

 

He's not a man we can take at his word - he's proven over and over again that it's worth ZERO. And his judgement and who he surrounds himself with? Matter of opinion I guess.

 

EDIT: AR Husker - you said all this and more far better than I did. I started to respond then walked away for a bit and obviously didn't scroll back. Sorry to duplicate.

 

not really. he hasnt proven anything. It's just a matter of opinion. Which is why we all have a vote and they campaign. that's something i dont get. He's proven. Well what about the other choice? has she not proven over and over again of her total lack of judgement and ability?

 

We know what we get from Clinton in this deal. She's already in a leadership role. not good.

 

That's the intrige of Trump. Again. the idea. the concept. not just the man.

 

That is not a matter of opinion. It has been proven through out this campaign the guy flat out makes stuff up...KNOWINGLY. But....many people are basing their votes on that same make up crap that spews from his mouth.

 

As to the other option, I totally agree. She is a pile of crap too.

[NM11046]

 

 

I would bet all the stuff trump does in that regard is nothing out of the norm. But in this case, he made noise when he didnt answer the question of supporting the results of the election, and his constant accusations of rigging, so now everything he does from here on out will be heavily scrutinized, when it's probably the norm. Wasnt there stuff like this with Gore/Bush? i was in high school so i dont recall the details. didnt Gore challenge results of florida and not immediately accept election results?

 

My question is, what if it comes out there is legit fraud in favor of Hillary? What if. is it really crazy to wonder that? or even the other way? With all the technology involved, is not a possiblity? wouldnt that be the sh#ts.

So late that night the news stations called FL (early - maybe at 7 or 8) in favor of Gore. Then as they started counting it came down to a very close race around 10pm and Bush got hopeful. About 2 they declared him the winner of FL and at that time Gore conceded. By 3 am when he was headed to talk to his staff and do the taped "I congratulate Bush - America is great" tv interview his folks were saying that FL was too close to call, and he retracted his concession.

 

FL rules state that in close races ballots have to be recounted (initially they do this by machine again) so that initial recount wasn't requested by either - it had to be done according to the rules of the state. After the second count was close Gore then asked for a manual recount in the counties were there was known confusion and issues. Days go by with lots of bs ... Gore asks for manual recounts in more counties etc. and his supreme court case was actually to have the Dade County FL manual recount restarted (Katherine Harris had them stopped early).

 

Anybody can correct me where I'm wrong - agree or disagree with the outcome it sure made for an exciting election and week or two after!

 

A major part of this issue was also that there were lots of ballots that were very confusing as to who was actually voted for. Remember the "Hanging chad" issue? So, there was a major fight as to if these ballots should be thrown out. Personally, I think if it's not clear who was voted for, the ballot should be invalid and not counted.

 

If I remember right, it was ruled these ballots were to be excluded (which in my opinion was correct ruling) and that threw up a huge stink claiming Bush stole the election by throwing out ballots.

 

I'm sorry, if the ballot can not be verified by looking at it this close, throw it out.

 

 

 

 

Yes, and some of the voters thought they were voting for (Gore I think) but it was lined up for Buchanan. AND, let's not forget how Nader impacted the Dem totals. It was a cluster.

[zoogs]

If we want to talk solely about success of people surrounding them, look at Hillary Clinton. She ran a poor '08 campaign, but she changed. She won people over, including most of Obama's team (which was *truly* impressive and one of the biggest reasons, IMO, for confidence for the lightly-seasoned upstart). Hillary has run a highly competent campaign, and competency has likewise flocked to her.

 

Count, you've made a good, cogent case for why there are Trump supporters, I think. Thank you for taking the time to bear with us in this discussion when reasonably one might've assumed, in your position, they were just being attacked -- and lashed back. Really speaks a lot about you, in my opinion.

 

Regarding your arguments, I'm most impressed with the idea that he's speaking, however imprecisely, to general (and valid) concerns. This is a legitimate way in which politics should work. I think you're showing that -- the best side of politics, the system-is-working part.

 

On the other hand, I think it also shows the startling power of generic buy-in cynicism. Broadly speaking, some things are bad and there exist threats -- but what's the standard for embracing a promised remedy? There are many criticisms of the status quo, but what sorts of shake-ups are healthy and what are dangerous?

 

I don't know that there is an exact, objective answer to those questions. I'd simply suggest it's well in keeping with the American spirit to harshly scrutinize anyone riding in on a white horse, shouting "Those things are the enemy and I am your lone hope at salvation."

[NM11046]

If we want to talk solely about success of people surrounding them, look at Hillary Clinton. She ran a poor '08 campaign, but she changed. She won people over, including most of Obama's team (which was *truly* impressive and one of the biggest reasons, IMO, for confidence for the lightly-seasoned upstart). Hillary has run a highly competent campaign, and competency has likewise flocked to her.

 

Count, you've made a good, cogent case for why there are Trump supporters, I think. Thank you for taking the time to bear with us in this discussion when reasonably one might've assumed, in your position, they were just being attacked -- and lashed back. Really speaks a lot about you, in my opinion.

 

Regarding your arguments, I'm most impressed with the idea that he's speaking, however imprecisely, to general (and valid) concerns. This is a legitimate way in which politics should work. I think you're showing that -- the best side of politics, the system-is-working part.

 

On the other hand, I think it also shows the startling power of generic buy-in cynicism. Broadly speaking, some things are bad and there exist threats -- but what's the standard for embracing a promised remedy? There are many criticisms of the status quo, but what sorts of shake-ups are healthy and what are dangerous?

 

I don't know that there is an exact, objective answer to those questions. I'd simply suggest it's well in keeping with the American spirit to harshly scrutinize anyone riding in on a white horse, shouting "Those things are the enemy and I am your lone hope at salvation."

THIS.

[Count 'Bility]

 

 

 

 

 

Well if that's the way it's seen, then it's no worse than status quo, right? All he did at the very worst is point out the flaws in our system. may sound crazy, but to me it's and upside vs typical type of thing. None of the ridiculous extreme measures that folks get out of his stuff is gonna really happen, so I wanna see whats possible by going non-career politician in this thing, where his non-political correctness can be looked past to see what he can actually do behind the desk. he's a frickin bazzillionaire. he's not stupid. for all the criticism he gets on his finances, the numbers dont lie. He must know the loopholes. he must be smart about it. so why not? he cant be bought. What lobbyist is gonna buy off him? He's obviously a hard ass. I like that. you know i cant stand nicey nice for the sake of nicey nice. he's made the moneybanged all the womenMaybe he genuinely wants to fix the country and die? That's the last part of his legacy.But isnt it possible that his behavior to get there in order to get certain support necessary isnt necessarily what he's all about? i wanna put him in the chair to see what he'll actually do. i dont care how he says it. This all goes back to me saying, at the end of the day, probably not much will change. maybe some things for better. Some for worse. Depending who you are and your principles. If he winds up not being fit, we'll go again in 4 years. If he is, (which i think) he'll get 8. So i vote for him. Possible upside vs status quo. And i look past his extreme comments as blowing smoke. Like any other.

1. Actually, we have no idea if Trump is really a "bazzillionaire". He refused to release his tax records and most of his financial statements. We DO know he has LOST a billion dollars, much of which was money he accumulated from his father directly or indirectly. In fact, his lack of transparency points to just the opposite.2. Where is the proof he's intelligent? His claims alone? Because there is no evidence he's some kind of genius.3. Numbers don't lie - if you can actually get the numbers. Again, Trump refused.4. What proof is there he can't be bought? We don't know his worth, but we do know that he has not even come close to providing his own campaign with the self-funding he claimed he would make; that he has not contributed to charities at anywhere close to the amounts he has claimed; that he has funded worthy causes at anywhere near the rates he's claimed.5. He CLAIMS to be a hard-ass, but in the one instance in which he had an opportunity to prove it - the meeting with the Mexican president - he chickened out. But more importantly, hard asses don't get things done. They make enemies. To do anything, he needs both chambers of Congress to agree. He's pissed off both parties, and has no chance of passing anything of substance. And he can claim he'll build a wall or renegotiate trade deals - but again, without Congress' approval, he doesn't get anything done. He's pissed off almost every demographic that he needs to push an agenda.

AR HF;

 

One thing that can be stated for sure, is that he has the ability to surround himself with successful people who make things happen. Everything you mentioned above may be disputable but you can't dispute his success. You might be able to question what one considered success, but I believe most would agree he has it better than the majority on many different fronts!

 

I can. I can dispute his success. We don't know how he has done in anything other than the legal files we can find publicly on his bankruptcy filings, court cases where he's refused to pay employees and vendors etc. Does he have his name on lots of buildings? Yes. Does he have money or has he been the one responsible for the supposedly good ventures? We don't know. We know he tells us he's worth a lot and we also know he exaggerates that by a ridiculous amount (by not subtracting out expenses, mortgage costs of properties etc) We know he is a master at avoiding taxes and playing the IRS. We know that he's figured out a way to claim to be benevolent when he is actually shuffling other people's money into his name and giving it away.

 

As far as surrounding himself with successful people - that too is a matter of opinion. When we're looking at Christie, Guliani, Gingrich at the top of lists for those he would put in cabinet positions I question his choices. As to the others he has mentioned getting highly coveted positions? His 3 kids. Who have zero real world experience, and no work experience other than turning up to their daddy's building in dress clothes every once and awhile.

 

He's not a man we can take at his word - he's proven over and over again that it's worth ZERO. And his judgement and who he surrounds himself with? Matter of opinion I guess.

 

EDIT: AR Husker - you said all this and more far better than I did. I started to respond then walked away for a bit and obviously didn't scroll back. Sorry to duplicate.

 

not really. he hasnt proven anything. It's just a matter of opinion. Which is why we all have a vote and they campaign. that's something i dont get. He's proven. Well what about the other choice? has she not proven over and over again of her total lack of judgement and ability?

 

We know what we get from Clinton in this deal. She's already in a leadership role. not good.

 

That's the intrige of Trump. Again. the idea. the concept. not just the man.

 

That is not a matter of opinion. It has been proven through out this campaign the guy flat out makes stuff up...KNOWINGLY. But....many people are basing their votes on that same make up crap that spews from his mouth.

 

As to the other option, I totally agree. She is a pile of crap too.

 

my bad. i didnt read your comment correctly. you were addressing his truth. for some reason (i was listening to something on the radio while i was reading) i htought you were talking about him already proving he's unfit to be president. That's what gets me. He hasnt. that's just a matter of opinion until he's actually done the job. Technically. Niether one has proven anything in regards to their presidential abilities. And that's why I stated what i did?

[BigRedBuster]

I'd simply suggest it's well in keeping with the American spirit to harshly scrutinize anyone riding in on a white horse, shouting "Those things are the enemy and I am your lone hope at salvation."

Many very horrible things have happened in history with large numbers of people jumping on board with someone saying those words.

[Count 'Bility]

Again. Above is taking campaign talk far to literal. Of course he says that. he's campaigning. Trying to garner the support needed to win. There are enemies out there and he's claiming to be the solution. he's the ONE running for pres. not a bunch of other ppl together. what other pres candidate hasnt run on the premise of "i will do this. I will do that. I have this plan. I have that plan" What i think it is is that dislike or bitterness for the guy for other reasons-some understandable and some not- have clouded judgement to the point that everything he say is taken so literal and so extreme.

[TAKODA]

 

AR HF;One thing that can be stated for sure, is that he has the ability to surround himself with successful people who make things happen. Everything you mentioned above may be disputable but you can't dispute his success. You might be able to question what one considered success, but I believe most would agree he has it better than the majority on many different fronts!

Again, based on what? Who, exactly, are these people? And as for being better than the majority on many different fronts - again, know one knows that because he refused to be transparent. For all anyone knows, he's leveraged to his eyeballs, and one bad quarter could bring it crashing down and leave him a pauper. We don't KNOW.

Do we not have doubts, reservations and concerns about HC, her and her family's ethics, values, and so forth. AR, I am not in the HC camp or DT camp, just an fyi, but they both severely lack in their own ways. You and I and ∞ of others could banter back and forth over which candidate is best, for whom and why. However, I do not subscribe to the lesser of two evils voting system.

 

I will just be happy that when I go home after work tonight knowing we are just about done.

 

I am hoping in the next election, we have candidates that will tell us why we should vote for them, rather than why I shouldn't vote for the other candidate.

[FrankWheeler]

Again. Above is taking campaign talk far to literal. Of course he says that. he's campaigning. Trying to garner the support needed to win. There are enemies out there and he's claiming to be the solution. he's the ONE running for pres. not a bunch of other ppl together. what other pres candidate hasnt run on the premise of "i will do this. I will do that. I have this plan. I have that plan" What i think it is is that dislike or bitterness for the guy for other reasons-some understandable and some not- have clouded judgement to the point that everything he say is taken so literal and so extreme.

 

Maybe its because the things he says are crazy?

 

Edit: And on additional thought, why wouldn't we take a presidential candidate serious? The things he says should be taken literal, he's running for President!

[BigRedBuster]

Lost Cause Seeing America Through the Losing Candidates’ Map

 

Very interesting web site that shows all the counties in each election that went to losing candidates and how it's changed over the years and from election to election. Pretty interesting study of our history and society.

[zoogs]

"Is taken"? He takes it there.

 

I think it's quite legitimate to worry about the forces he is unleashing. If he wins, those forces are empowered. Even if he loses, they have been emboldened. I cannot imagine a President Trump reigning them in on those issues. Supposing he tries, I expect they will abandon him. Once empowered sufficiently, they can take it from there.

 

I wouldn't have a care in the world to give about this man, were he not at the head of this kind of rhetoric. There's more angry racism in this country than I would've believed without seeing this election cycle, and to me, this is very much a contest where the fundamental question is whether decency is affirmed, or we go back to a world where such anger is the norm.

 

I don't think it's particularly fair to try to equate what we've seen from Trump and his supporters with any ol' political campaign. As is quite clear, I think, this is "change". Not the status quo. Not business as usual. And as you yourself have mentioned, you believe that he is a change agent. I think that is hard to dispute. It is extraordinary.

[teachercd]

So, anyone still planning on leaving the country?

 

O/V on Clinton EC votes as of right now is 307

[Landlord]

So, anyone still planning on leaving the country?

 

O/V on Clinton EC votes as of right now is 307

 

 

I've got a couch lined up in Toronto if needed.

[NM11046]

So, anyone still planning on leaving the country?

 

O/V on Clinton EC votes as of right now is 307

If that's the case, I'm good.

[Moiraine]

 

 

A little levity from Dolly Parton on this Election Day:

 

 

https://twitter.com/DollyParton/status/796072679992393732

Good one.

 

So how long do you think it will take us to know the projected winner? 10 eastern or will this drag out like Ohio did between Kerry/GWB and hopefully not a Florida in 2000. I'm thinking 10 eastern - Iowa & Nevada will be closed at that time and those are both important states. Granted it takes a while to tally the vote but someone may try to be first to announce based on exit polls. Now if Clinton takes NC, Florida it will be over much sooner. Reality is Trump needs both of those states.

 

As fate would have it, I teach a class tonight so I won't be watching the returns as they come in. So enjoy the show

 

Will depend a lot on how close New Hampshire is. If NH is decided early and Clinton doesn't lose any of her other leads, it might not take long.