[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[killerjimbag]

Because he's thinking in terms of a whole country that's been affected, rather than in terms of a single city within that country? Wow, that's a small thing for you to be so angry about. There has been fighting elsewhere in Syria - I can only assume that you're aware of that.

How on earth did you manage to interpret my post to mean that Johnson was not aware of the Syrian situation, since I was pretty much saying the exact opposite?

Not directed at you,sorry. Directed at the ultra dumbass Johnson.Yes I am aware,he is not. He actually asked what is Aleppo? The guy has a snowballs chance in hell. The 2 fighting it out are billionaires,lying, deceitful,imbeciles. One of these 2 idiots is going to govern the most powerful, debt ridden countries in the world.Think about this for a minute. Yes as the US and NATO move armies closer to the Russian border as we write. 🤬 brilliant isn't it. More idiots in charge that don't have a clue.

 

[Dotini]

One of these 2 idiots is going to govern the most powerful, debt ridden countries in the world.Think about this for a minute. Yes as the US and NATO move armies closer to the Russian border as we write. 🤬 brilliant isn't it. More idiots in charge that don't have a clue.

Sharply said!

 

[huskeR32]

Don't be daft, they both have rape accusations against them.

So does Trump. Since apparently you're on a quest to just post pictures of any person who's been accused of rape, can I assume you'll add the Donald to your post?

--

Greg Abbott
on Tuesday
TEXANS: On a voting machine, check your confirmation screen before casting your vote. If you select a straight-party vote but then highlight the name of a candidate and press ENTER, you could remove the selection for that candidate. Make sure all of your selections are correct before hitting the button to cast a ballot. You can test your county’s voting system here before voting: http://www.votetexas.gov/voting/how

Abbot is describing user error and confusion about how the machine works, which is regrettable for sure. But it's a far cry from voter fraud, and he's not even coming close to saying that it is.

 

[Duke]

Not directed at you,sorry. Directed at the ultra dumbass Johnson.Yes I am aware,he is not. He actually asked what is Aleppo? The guy has a snowballs chance in hell. The 2 fighting it out are billionaires,lying, deceitful,imbeciles. One of these 2 idiots is going to govern the most powerful, debt ridden countries in the world.Think about this for a minute. Yes as the US and NATO move armies closer to the Russian border as we write. 🤬 brilliant isn't it. More idiots in charge that don't have a clue.

And my point is that for whatever reason, because of the phrasing of the question, Johnson's brain initially parsed it as "ALEPO", some unknown acronym, rather than "Aleppo", the name of a city. He is and was well aware of the Syrian issues. Was it a brain fart? Yes. Is it proof that he's comprehensively out of touch with world politics? Only if you're drastically overreaching for anything you can find to discredit him.

 

[DDastardly00]

Pointing to a random blog that itself offers no evidence of its claims, is probably the worst possible way you could have made this point.

Nothing is 100% accurate. Nothing. You may not like the source, but the basic facts of who started it, what they are and who runs it are accurate in the blog post. Snope's main function is a debunker of tall tales and urban legends, and they really should stick to that and not dabble in politics.

The reality is, there are far better political fact checkers available to use instead of snopes. Their main researcher used to work for the inquisitor, and that is a fact, look it up yourself, her name is Kim Lacapria. Yeah, they should stick to urban legends and stay out of politics entirely.

So does Trump. Since apparently you're on a quest to just post pictures of any person who's been accused of rape, can I assume you'll add the Donald to your post?

--



Abbot is describing user error and confusion about how the machine works, which is regrettable for sure. But it's a far cry from voter fraud, and he's not even coming close to saying that it is.

That would be a valid counter argument if it wasn't complete bogus and the main source wasn't from Rolling Stone Magazine, get out of here with that trash. Show me the accuser. You know can't because they don't exist. There is no victim, just like Julian Assange. These rumors are put out their to counter act Bill's past transgressions against women, how many times have we seen this before, too many. Just another attempt by Hillary's campaign to sling garbage and hope the image sticks and covers up their own rotting stench.

 

[Danoff]

I disagree,

Switch from "Worldwide" to "US".

 

[McLaren]

That woman is Barbara. Barbara and David Mikkelson have run snopes as an online urban legend debunking operation since 1995. They appear to do all their own research which, for two people answering thousands of questions, is pretty thorough.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

It's not. The woman's name is Kim LaCapria. She is listed on just about every single politically-related article.

 

[huskeR32]

Show me the accuser. You know can't because they don't exist.

They filed as a Jane Doe, and if you knew half as much about the incident as your bluster would suggest, you'd know that already.

Is that your strategy? Demanding information that you know isn't available?

 

[killerjimbag]

And my point is that for whatever reason, because of the phrasing of the question, Johnson's brain initially parsed it as "ALEPO", some unknown acronym, rather than "Aleppo", the name of a city. He is and was well aware of the Syrian issues. Was it a brain fart? Yes. Is it proof that he's comprehensively out of touch with world politics? Only if you're drastically overreaching for anything you can find to discredit him.

Discredit,brain fart? Ok I'll play the game.
Your running for POTUS, you have a moment on a national TV program. Your asked the same question twice and look like a deer in the headlights?You have no money to run a campaign to even have a chance. We're did he campaign last night or last week? Are you seeing my point now? Is it an ego trip? What are his policies on immigration? Decreasing national debt? Creating jobs? Should I go on?

 

[Duke]

Not to initiate an ad hominem here, but speaking generically: If you're citing Rolling Stone as a source, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Danoff]

Discredit,brain fart? Ok I'll play the game.
Your running for POTUS, you have a moment on a national TV program. Your asked the same question twice and look like a deer in the headlights?You have no money to run a campaign to even have a chance. We're did he campaign last night or last week? Are you seeing my point now? Is it an ego trip? What are his policies on immigration? Decreasing national debt? Creating jobs? Should I go on?

It's really hard to take you seriously about calling him dumb for not knowing the name of a city in Syria that few people in the US knew (again, he was aware of the actual issue) when you don't get basic grammar correct. "Your" and "you're" (which you botched twice), or "where" and "we're".

I know that seems like an ad hominem attack, but to be perfectly honest, your post is actually pretty unintelligible. I'm not sure what the point you're (not your) making is. I don't really know what question you're asking. What I do know is that you're being absurdly critical over a non-issue.

Edit: Wow, tree'd by Duke.

 

[DDastardly00]

They filed as a Jane Doe, and if you knew half as much about the incident as your bluster would suggest, you'd know that already.

Is that your strategy? Demanding information that you know isn't available?

Better than your strategy of posting complete trash. It's filed as a Jane do because there is NO victim. It's a complete snake oil sham that libs like you keep peddling as some bizarre defense strategy of the Clinton's past transgressions against women.


"A Guardian investigation this summer found that the lawsuit appeared to have been coordinated by a former producer on the Jerry Springer TV show who has been associated in the past with a range of disputed claims involving celebrities including OJ Simpson and Kurt Cobain. A publicist acting for “Jane Doe” also attempted to sell a video in which the woman describes her allegations against Trump to media outlets at a $1m price tag."

Trash is trash.

 

[huskeR32]

Better than your strategy of posting complete trash. It's filed as a Jane do because there is NO victim. It's a complete snake oil sham that libs like you keep peddling as some bizarre defense strategy of the Clinton's past transgression against women.

I'm not defending anything, especially not Bill Clinton.

You'll notice that what I originally asked was why in the world you included a picture of Bill Cosby in a conversation about the presidential election.

When you answered that they're connected by both being accused of rape, I pointed out that Trump has been as well. Which is true.

I made no comment as to the veracity of the accusations, as I don't fancy myself judge and jury like you would seem to.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Nothing is 100% accurate. Nothing.

True, you just have to look in this very thread to see how uninterested certain people are in accuracy.

You may not like the source, but the basic facts of who started it, what they are and who runs it are accurate in the blog post.

None of these things are evidence that supports your original claim.

Snope's main function is a debunker of tall tales

Like the tall tales in the snopes article @huskeR32 posted on the previous page?

Yes, I agree their main function should be debunking stuff like that.

The reality is, there are far better political fact checkers available to use instead of snopes.

Maybe my earlier post wasn't clear enough.

You're criticising a fact-checking website by using and making claims that themselves show no evidence of fact-checking. Again, just about the worst possible way you could make this point.

It's not. The woman's name is Kim LaCapria. She is listed on just about every single politically-related article.

Going through just a couple of pages on snopes alone I count at least seven different authors of political fact-check stories, and Kim is nowhere near listed on just about all of them (why that would matter anyway I don't know).

 

[BobK]

I'm not defending anything, especially not Bill Clinton.

You'll notice that what I originally asked was why in the world you included a picture of Bill Cosby in a conversation about the presidential election.

When you answered that they're connected by both being accused of rape, I pointed out that Trump has been as well. Which is true.

I made no comment as to the veracity of the accusations, as I don't fancy myself judge and jury like you would seem to.

Meh, I thought it was funny. At a guess, I'd say that's probably why he posted it.

 

[DDastardly00]

I'm not defending anything, especially not Bill Clinton.

You'll notice that what I originally asked was why in the world you included a picture of Bill Cosby in a conversation about the presidential election.

When you answered that they're connected by both being accused of rape, I pointed out that Trump has been as well. Which is true.

I made no comment as to the veracity of the accusations, as I don't fancy myself judge and jury like you would seem to.

Cute response, but it doesn't excuse posting a reference to a bogus claim from a bogus source (asking for a million dollars for the story no less) who has been caught in the past peddling complete junk.

By the way, Hillary's campaign worried about the Bill Cosby-Bill Clinton comparison and that is the main reason why I posted it.

Wikileaks Podesta email release 10/27/2016:

 

[TenEightyOne]

Switch from "Worldwide" to "US".

That's kind of the point though; the pro-Johnson argument would be that he was well aware of Syrian issues but didn't directly connect with "Aleppo" in the question, the anti-Johnson argument could equally be that his knowledge of foreign affairs was limited to the US news coverage rather than world news feeds that had been reporting Aleppo in detail for at least 6 months prior.

Still, it's very small beer compared to the other candidates

 

[huskeR32]

Cute response, but it doesn't excuse posting a reference to a bogus claim from a bogus source

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were in charge of determining the acceptability of posts on this site.

It's really not that hard to understand - Trump has been accused of rape. That's the only thing I've said, and it's a simple fact. I'm not going to argue with you over how plausible you feel those accusations are.

Now, if you want to keep responding to me as if I claimed that Trump is guilty, go ahead, but you'll be having that conversation with yourself.

As far as that Podesta email there, it's a little disingenuous to say that the Clinton campaign was worried about Cosby comparisons when that email was sent to the campaign from somebody who is not on their staff.

 

[McLaren]

Going through just a couple of pages on snopes alone I count at least seven different authors of political fact-check stories, and Kim is nowhere near listed on just about all of them (why that would matter anyway I don't know).

Kim is listed on a large portion of them (mostly recent ones), Dan Evon right behind her. Her questioning comes from her coincidental, heavy defense of Hillary articles.

Claim: Sen. Bernie Sanders said the election was "rigged" and "unendorsed" Hillary Clinton

Mostly False

WHAT'S TRUE: Bernie Sanders made a Facebook post in which he criticized a "political system in which a handful of very wealthy people and special interests will determine who gets elected."

WHAT'S FALSE: Sanders did not rescind his endorsement of Hillary Clinton and has continued urging his supporters to vote for her.

Sanders wasn't suggesting that elections are "rigged" (i.e., that voters are suppressed, that votes are cast fraudulently, that votes are not counted accurately); rather, he was decrying the pervasive role money plays in shaping the political process and influencing which candidates are elected, a major plank of his platform as a presidential candidate

That's not mostly false, that is in fact both ways. He did not end his support for her, but Kim choosing to take Bernie's words in a different, literal context because he doesn't refer to changing votes or influencing votes, still does not change the fact he is indeed claiming that the outcome will be determined by select individuals & not the American public.

We are talking about a rapid movement in this country toward a political system in which a handful of very wealthy people and special interests will determine who gets elected or who does not get elected. That is not what this country is supposed to be about.

It's not out right being declared as "rigged", but it pushes the same message; the candidate is not being chosen fairly. And Bernie would know as the biggest victim of it this election.

 

[DDastardly00]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were in charge of determining the acceptability of posts on this site.

Another cute response, keep back-peddling. You made a reference to a bogus claim from a bogus source and I called you out for it. Deal with it.

It's really not that hard to understand - Trump has been accused of rape. That's the only thing I've said, and it's a simple fact. I'm not going to argue with you over how plausible you feel those accusations are.

What's really not hard to understand is that you tossed out a complete garbage accusation against Trump in defense of Bill Clinton. You claim otherwise now, in other words, more back-peddling, you can try to obfuscate it all you like but that doesn't change anything. The difference is that Bill Clinton has real accusers that have gone on record with their accusations when the accusation against Trump has no evidence, no victim, filed by a very suspect source with a history of similar bogus claims against celebrities.

As far as that Podesta email there, it's a little disingenuous to say that the Clinton campaign was worried about Cosby comparisons when that email was sent to the campaign from somebody who is not on their staff.

It's not disingenuous to say that all, and you have no idea who's on their payroll or not.

 

[huskeR32]

It's not disingenuous to say that all, and you have no idea who's on their payroll or not.

And you do?

 

[Danoff]

That's kind of the point though; the pro-Johnson argument would be that he was well aware of Syrian issues but didn't directly connect with "Aleppo" in the question, the anti-Johnson argument could equally be that his knowledge of foreign affairs was limited to the US news coverage rather than world news feeds that had been reporting Aleppo in detail for at least 6 months prior.

Still, it's very small beer compared to the other candidates

The way the news is reported and discussed will definitely affect which terms people are familiar with. The pro-Johnson argument is that he knew about the issue and that's all that matters (though I'm not even sure how much that matters). The anti-Johnson argument is that his lack recognition of the name of the city is evidence that he didn't understand the issue - which isn't even remotely correct.

I don't expect the POTUS to immerse themselves in various news feeds from around the world. This person is not running for POTW (don't tell US voters that though). To the extend that they want the US to be involved, sure.

You could grill all 3 candidates over the names of various US cities that they wouldn't know. Ask them all where "Lucky Boy" is. Nobody will know. The question is not whether we can play name the cities and countries, the question is whether the person knows the issue.

Ok, I'm done with this. It's really not an interesting topic. It's obviously a crutch for discrediting the 3rd party to keep voters holding their noses at the poles picking from people who are far less qualified and reputable.

 

[DDastardly00]

And you do?

Ron Klain (who sent that email to John Podesta) is a lawyer who currently works for the Clinton campaign. He also helped her prepare for the debates which you can read about at Politico:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/hillary-clinton-debate-prep-228558

Got anything else, or were you done here?

 

[TenEightyOne]

Ok, I'm done with this. It's really not an interesting topic. It's obviously a crutch for discrediting the 3rd party to keep voters holding their noses at the poles picking from people who are far less qualified and reputable.

Fair enough. The only reason that I saw interest in the topic is that it seems to be the only "gaffe" being held against Johnson, I can't believe that I've come to think he's the best candidate but then I can't believe Trump is the Republican nominee.

It's obviously a crutch for discrediting the 3rd party to keep voters holding their noses at the poles picking from people who are far less qualified and reputable.

Agreed.

 

[huskeR32]

Ron Klain (who sent that email to John Podesta) is a lawyer who currently works for the Clinton campaign. He also helped her prepare for the debates which you can read about at Politico:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/hillary-clinton-debate-prep-228558

Got anything else, or were you done here?

He's advising the campaign during debate prep, that's not the same as being on staff (which was what I said).

But yes, I'm beyond done with this inanity.

 

[ryzno]

So now Georgia is following the rigged polling machines trend.
http://www.wsbradio.com/news/news/g...residen/nsyW2/?ecmp=wsbam_social_facebook_sfp
I'm honestly surprised South GA has digital voting machines. Which have been claimed as outdated in the state.
http://www.myajc.com/news/news/stat...ing-machines-could-be-at-risk-from-age/nn4nt/
If anything the screen was probably not calibrated. Of course the media is not talking about Trump votes being changed to Clinton. (I believe someone already posted that story, I'll provide a link if needed.)

Thing that kills me is I told a FB friend I had stories about Trumps votes being changed on my timeline. They were quickly dismissed till a link was provided. He then asked how come he doesn't see these stories. The only answer I have is he is following only one candidate. Even though I hate Hillary I still follow her to see what she has to say about the newest BS they come up with.

 

[Sanji Himura]

What's really not hard to understand is that you tossed out a complete garbage accusation against Trump in defense of Bill Clinton. You claim otherwise now, in other words, more back-peddling, you can try to obfuscate it all you like but that doesn't change anything. The difference is that Bill Clinton has real accusers that have gone on record with their accusations when the accusation against Trump has no evidence, no victim, filed by a very suspect source with a history of similar bogus claims against celebrities.

To further the point, the main difference between the three (Crosby, Clinton, and Trump) is that two out of three has been charged with a crime, while Trump has not [not then or now]. This attitude of "proving the victim right" that has plagued college campuses in recent years is now starting to affect national politics. It is disgusting and needs to be removed from the national mindset.

 

[Dotini]

I can't believe that I've come to think he's the best candidate but then I can't believe Trump is the Republican nominee.

Amen, brother. Trump handily defeated the field of 17, "the finest array of Republicans in 100 years." The entire MSM and political intelligentsia has got it completely wrong this time. There is a fire burning out in the boondocks, and the natives are restless tonight.

So now Georgia is following the rigged polling machines trend.
http://www.wsbradio.com/news/news/g...residen/nsyW2/?ecmp=wsbam_social_facebook_sfp
I'm honestly surprised South GA has digital voting machines. Which have been claimed as outdated in the state.
http://www.myajc.com/news/news/stat...ing-machines-could-be-at-risk-from-age/nn4nt/
If anything the screen was probably not calibrated. Of course the media is not talking about Trump votes being changed to Clinton. (I believe someone already posted that story, I'll provide a link if needed.)

Thing that kills me is I told a FB friend I had stories about Trumps votes being changed on my timeline. They were quickly dismissed till a link was provided. He then asked how come he doesn't see these stories. The only answer I have is he is following only one candidate. Even though I hate Hillary I still follow her to see what she has to say about the newest BS they come up with.

I'm prepared to acknowledge and accept that vote fraud and tampering is a past, present and future artifact of the US system. Strong and successful politicians - and military figures - all believe that the ends justify the means, that might makes right, and that politics is an extension of warfare. I've seen it up close. Laws and rules are for the small folk and the nice guys who finish last.

Edit: I'm even prepared to accept that Russia, having a stake in the outcome, may attempt to hack the election somehow. They are currently undertaking major troop movements and openly stated preparations for a nuclear war, WW3. So is China. Cyber warfare is part of their arsenal. With Obama sitting firmly on his hands, the Russians may risk a pro-Trump cyber caper in order to preempt WW3 with a potential neocon president high on power and weak in judgement.

 

[DDastardly00]

He's advising the campaign during debate prep, that's not the same as being on staff (which was what I said).

But yes, I'm beyond done with this inanity.

He is a lawyer for the campaign, you missed that part. He is on Hillary Clinton's campaign payroll. The Bill Cosby-Bill Clinton comparison was a topic brought up to the campaign and discussed by the campaign. What I said not is disingenuous at all.

 

[Dotini]

We are literally witnessing democracy in action - US style democracy. Who wants it most? Cui bono?