2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Okay, so I admit I have just kinda been watching this election cycle. What is the deal with this Ken Bone dude? Why all of this attention and fuss? What happened?
It's a mystery to me also. I saw the debate and his appearance as well but I don't know what the hubbub is about.
 

Rev

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
19,333
A Joe the Plumber thing?
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,713
Just one of those Twitter things. He asked a question as part of the town hall, and his name is a vague pun, and he's a chubby guy with a mustache and a red sweater.
Gotcha. Just couldn't figure out what the big deal was.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Conversely I think whoever wins will be trotted back out in 2020. Although I think both sides would wish they could run someone else.
On this we agree. The republicans get a decent consolation because they can reload with Paul Ryan in 2020. I doubt Hillary makes it to a 2nd term.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I doubt anyone challenges Hillary in the next Primary. She had so much political clout that the only real competition she had in the primary was from an independent. Imagine that power magnified by the office of the presidency. Unless Bernie himself tries to resurrect his revolution, I don't see any legitimate democrat candidates opposing her in 2020.
Depends on how she governs but I could easily see Warren or some young hispanic Dem giving her a run.

Maybe even Cory Booker.

Everybody sees how flawed she is and that Berny base is going to keep her accountable IMO if not they revolt.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
To me, "unwilling to commit ground troops" does not equate to hands off. The Administration is out there sticking up for Saudi Arabia after they blatantly targeted a funeral party in Yemen. That sounds a lot like a Bush II move to me. Time will tell if Democratic voters will rise up in the way the Republicans have with Trump, but I think party leadership is going to test its limits.
I don't see how that would be issue with Trump voters instead of ignoring Saudi they would just ignore Russia.

Like Trump Berny tapped into a real groundswell and his backers will be older a wiser to how things work in the real world when it comes to party politics.

I se no way Hillary can get anywhere close to regime building which is what has been the cornerstone of neoconservative foreign relations.

I don't see anyway that could take root with democrats
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I think that if Trump loses, he and Roger Ailes and the Breitbart guy running his PR start an alt right cable news network.
That has to be the plan they want some of that Sweet Sweet fox money.

But something tells me Trump will not be able to stay credible long enough for it to gain real traction.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/08/politics/trump-on-howard-stern/

In October 2006, Stern told Trump that his daughter Ivanka “looks more voluptuous than ever” but he corrected him: “She’s actually always been very voluptuous.” And then Stern basically baits Trump into giving him the OK to call his daughter “a piece of ass.”

Trump: “My daughter is beautiful.”
Stern: “By the way, your daughter…”
Trump: “She’s beautiful.”
Stern: “Can I say this? A piece of ass.”
Trump: “Yeah.”
So I would love to hear how this is nothing more than locker room talk or that everybody does it.

L.T.?
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
THE SCOOP
DEAR DONALD TRUMP AND VLADIMIR PUTIN, I AM NOT SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL
BY KURT EICHENWALD ON 10/10/16 AT 7:45 PM

Kurt Eichenwald: How A Russian News Agency & Trump Wrongly Attributed One Of The Lines From His

Updated | I am Sidney Blumenthal. At least, that is what Vladimir Putin—and, somehow, Donald Trump—seem to believe. And that should raise concerns about not only Moscow’s attempts to manipulate this election but also how Trump came to push Russian disinformation to American voters.

An email from Blumenthal—a confidant of Hillary Clinton and a man, second only to George Soros, at the center of conservative conspiracy theories—turned up in the recent document dump by WikiLeaks. At a time when American intelligence believes Russian hackers are trying to interfere with the presidential election, records have been fed recently to WikiLeaks out of multiple organizations of the Democratic Party, raising concerns that the self-proclaimed whistleblower group has become a tool of Putin’s government. But now that I have been brought into the whole mess—and transformed into Blumenthal—there is even more proof that the Russians are not only orchestrating this act of cyberwar but also really, really dumb.

The evidence emerged thanks to the incompetence of Sputnik, the Russian online news and radio service established by the government-controlled news agency, Rossiya Segodnya.



The documents that WikiLeaks has unloaded recently have been emails out of the account of John Podesta, the chairman of Clinton’s election campaign. Almost as soon as the pilfered documents emerged, Sputnik was all over them and rapidly found (or probably already knew about before the WikiLeaks dump) a purportedly incriminating email from Blumenthal.

The email was amazing—it linked Boogie Man Blumenthal, Podesta and the topic of conservative political fever dreams, Benghazi. This, it seemed, was the smoking gun finally proving Clinton bore total responsibility for the attack on the American outpost in Libya in 2012. Sputnik even declared that the email might be the “October surprise” that could undermine Clinton’s campaign.



To understand the full importance of the story—and how much Putin and his Kremlin cronies must have been dancing with delight—I have to quote the top few paragraphs:

In a major revelation from the second batch of WikiLeaks emails from Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta it was learned that Hillary's top confidante Sidney Blumenthal believed that the investigation into Benghazi was legitimate because it was "preventable" and the result of State Department negligence.
In an email titled "The Truth" from Hillary's top confidante Sidney Blumenthal, the adviser writing to undisclosed recipients said that "one important point that has been universally acknowledged by nine previous reports about Benghazi: The attack was almost certainly preventable" in what may turn out to be the big October surprise from the WikiLeaks released of emails hacked from the account of Clinton Campaign Chair John Podesta.

Then came the money quote: "Clinton was in charge of the State Department, and it failed to protect U.S. personnel at an American consulate in Libya. If the GOP wants to raise that as a talking point against her, it is legitimate," said Blumenthal, putting to rest the Democratic Party talking point that the investigation into Clinton's management of the State Department at the time of the attack was nothing more than a partisan witch hunt.
Those words sounded really, really familiar. Really familiar. Like, so familiar they struck me as something I wrote. Because they were something I wrote.

The Russians were quoting two sentences from a 10,000-word piece I wrote for Newsweek, which Blumenthal had emailed to Podesta. There was no mistaking that Blumenthal was citing Newsweek—the magazine’s name and citations for photographs appeared throughout the attached article. The Russians had carefully selected the “of course” paragraph, which mentions there were legitimate points of criticism regarding Clinton and Benghazi, all of which had been acknowledged in nine reports about the attack and by the former secretary of state herself. But that was hardly the point of the story, “Benghazi Biopsy: A Comprehensive Guide to One of America’s Worst Political Outrages.” The piece is about the obscene politicization of the assault that killed four Americans, and the article slammed the Republican Benghazi committee, which was engaged in a political show trial disguised as a congressional investigation—the 10th inquiry into the tragedy.

Here is the real summation of my article, which the Russians failed to quote:

The historical significance of this moment can hardly be overstated, and it seems many Republicans, Democrats and members of the media don’t fully understand the magnitude of what is taking place. The awesome power of government—one that allows officials to pore through almost anything they demand and compel anyone to talk or suffer the shame of taking the Fifth Amendment—has been unleashed for purely political purposes. It is impossible to review what the Benghazi committee has done as anything other than taxpayer-funded political research of the opposing party’s leading candidate for president. Comparisons from America’s past are rare. Richard Nixon’s attempts to use the IRS to investigate his perceived enemies come to mind. So does Senator Joseph McCarthy’s red-baiting during the 1950s, with reckless accusations of treason leveled at members of the State Department, military generals and even the secretary of the Army.... The consequences, however, are worse than the manipulation of the electoral process. By using Benghazi for political advantage, the Republicans have communicated to global militants that, through even limited attacks involving relatively few casualties, they can potentially influence the direction of American elections.
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!”

This is not funny. It is terrifying. The Russians engage in a sloppy disinformation effort and, before the day is out, the Republican nominee for president is standing on a stage reciting the manufactured story as truth. How did this happen? Who in the Trump campaign was feeding him falsehoods straight from the Kremlin? (The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

Related Stories
Benghazi: Guide to a Fake Scandal
Podcast Special: Inside Trump Inc. With Kurt Eichenwald
The Russians have been obtaining American emails and now are presenting complete misrepresentations of them—falsifying them—in hopes of setting off a cascade of events that might change the outcome of the presidential election. The big question, of course, is why are the Russians working so hard to damage Clinton and, in the process, aid Donald Trump? That is a topic for another time.

For now, though, Americans should be outraged. This totalitarian regime, engaged in what are arguably war crimes in Syria to protect its government puppet, is working to upend a democracy to the benefit of an American candidate who uttered positive comments just Sunday about the Kremlin's campaign on behalf of Bashar al-Assad. Trump’s arguments were an incomprehensible explication of the complex Syrian situation, which put him right on the side of the Iranians and Syrians, who are fighting to preserve the government that is the primary conduit of weapons used against Israel.

So no, Mr. Putin, I’m not Sidney Blumenthal. And now that you have been exposed once again, get the hell out of our election. And, Mr. Trump, you have some explaining to do.

This story has been updated to include information about Donald Trump's speech in Pennsylvania and a request for comment from the Trump campaign.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
No, dumber.


:tippytoe
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
And then there was this guy.

 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
It's a little too much when you hear Ken Bone's interview. Apparently he was wearing that red sweater as a backup because he split the seat of his pants. Apparently he only had 7 Twitter followers, and 2 of them were his grandmother, who forgot the password to her first account. The internet needs to back off this guy, he seems way too nice for the Harambe treatment.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
It's a little too much when you hear Ken Bone's interview. Apparently he was wearing that red sweater as a backup because he split the seat of his pants. Apparently he only had 7 Twitter followers, and 2 of them were his grandmother, who forgot the password to her first account. The internet needs to back off this guy, he seems way too nice for the Harambe treatment.
From most of what I have seen he is coming out ahead in all of this, most seem to think he was the only positive to come out of the debate.

But I have to admit he has a most meme worthy face.:lol
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
From most of what I have seen he is coming out ahead in all of this, most seem to think he was the only positive to come out of the debate.

But I have to admit he has a most meme worthy face.:lol
The best meme I saw had a caption "How will you protect my job as a card in Guess Who?"
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,919
HIDDEN CAMERA: NYC Democratic Election Commissioner “I Think There Is A lot of Voter Fraud”


In a video released by Project Veritas, James O’Keefe exposes what everyone except the Democrats have known to be true; there is a lot of voter fraud.

In the video, NYC Democratic Commissioner of the Board of Elections Alan Schulkin is caught on hidden camera at a United Federation of Teachers holiday party admitting that there is widespread voter fraud in New York City.

“Yeah, they should ask for your ID. I think there is a lot of voter fraud,” said Schulkin, who elaborated on the types of voter fraud that are taking place in New York.

Voter fraud has been labeled as a right-wing myth by the left, but Schulkin, a Democrat, confirmed everyone’s worst fears, going against the grain of his own party.

“You know, I don’t think it’s too much to ask somebody to show some kind of an ID…Like I say, people don’t realize, certain neighborhoods in particular they bus people around to vote,” said Schulkin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom