Re: US Election 2016
 

Regardless of what the headlines say I don't think it's a given at all that Trump even wins the nomination. Until Trump gets above the delegate threshold he hasn't won it and the Republican party will do anything to stop him. If they reach the convention without him having secured enough delegates then they're only obliged to stick with him on the first ballot, after that it's a free for all in which case they'll rally around the most electable candidate still left in the race.

Re: US Election 2016
 

If I ban you, you won't be able to come on here and admit you were wrong ... ;)

Re: US Election 2016
 

Interesting article at fivethirtyeight, a well respected US polling site.

Re: US Election 2016
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35706377

"How do I move to Canada"
That made me laugh.

Re: US Election 2016
 

http://news.sky.com/story/1668076/tr...ot-safe-places

And yet the largest ever terrorist attack took place in the the US..and US citizens get shot by their children and pets each week.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Not sure if anyone has been keeping up but in the last couple of weeks Trump polls have plummeted after many, many mishaps including the way he responded to a Muslim who spoke against him at the Democratic convention and a whole other list of things that I've forgotten so quickly do they happen.

Anyway now he is 10 points down in polls and he's gone and say the '2nd amendment people' could 'do something' about Clinton: http://www.latimes.com/nation/politi...htmlstory.html

I honestly wonder if he is throwing his own campaign...

Re: US Election 2016
 

He'll still win, look at all the polls that said Miliband would win in 2015. I'm confident that Trump will be the next POTUS.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Interesting result either way, an absolute outsider which will show that American Citizens must really be fed up of the same old BS enough to vote in someone like Trump. Or a First Female president.

Re: US Election 2016
 

No he won't ,even some Republican leaders are backing Clinton and i really think that Trump knows he's way over his head and is deliberately sabotaging
his own campaign

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yes he will, if Clinton wins ban me from here until January 1 2017.

Re: US Election 2016
 

He won't as when it comes down to it America will not vote such a idiot into the White House.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Well let's see. It seems unlikely at the moment given the chaos in his own campaign, his own words and the desertion of many Republicans. It's more unlikely than Brexit was but Brexit still won and there is a long time to go in his election.

I do think he might be tanking his own campaign though.

Re: US Election 2016
 

It is a mistake to compare polling methods in the UK with those in the USA. The data on registered voters goes right down to local polling districts in the US, thanks to the primary elections system. They can determine which way things are going with a far higher degree of confidence. If Clinton has a 10 point lead then quite apart from it being well outside the margin of error for a British poll, you can be confident that the lead is real.

Re: US Election 2016
 

National polls weight against the census. I doubt they pull the registered voter records per district. I think state polls do go against the state's registered voters though.

I think what makes the US different, aside from their better polling, is also a much larger amount of minorities. This is what cost Romney 4 years ago and these groups hate Trump more. A poll came out with Trump at 1.5% among black people. He is falling even further with women too. His whole strategy seems to be to turn out white men to unprecedented levels and pray but even there support is dropping.

All the stuff he said is catching up with him.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Trump may be an idiot but trying to get the 2nd amendment lot voting for him is a smart move as most gun supporters fear clinton getting in and there are a lot of them. Trouble is it's the only smart thing he has done lately and despite their numbers I'm not sure they will compensate for all those he has alienated. Plus come next week who knows he might well turn round and offend that group as well as that seems to have been his thing say something that gets a group on side then later come out with something that offends.

If i had to put money down I'd put it on him having early stage alzheimer's and i cannot see him making it to the whitehouse not sure at the minute if that's better or worse for the US and the world.

Re: US Election 2016
 

He reminds me very much of Ross Perot and his campaign

Re: US Election 2016
 

The NRA were always going to be against Clinton. It's a solid demographic for the Republicans.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Be careful what you wish for. ;)

Re: US Election 2016
 

The news networks certainly go that deep on election night - the whole business of "calling" the result during the count relies on knowing which districts haven't declared yet and how many registered voters on each side there are.

There must by now be polls in many of the states - what are they saying?

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yes but there the individual precincts are reporting their results for real. They're very good at calling elections based off that, in fact they have a good idea very early on the night based on the East Coast states but the polling doesn't go that in-depth.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...llege_map.html

Trump is having a hard time putting away heavy red states such as North Carolina which is typically Republican but currently has Clinton ahead and Arizona which is a toss-up.

Clinton is ahead in Ohio, Florida and +9 in Pennsylvania. :erm:

If this were election day Clinton could afford to lose Flordia and Ohio and still win comfortably.

Re: US Election 2016
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...7324&tid=ss_tw

Trump used money donated to his charitable foundations to settle legal bills.

Bet this still doesn't hurt him.

Re: US Election 2016
 

All whilst Clinton faces another barrage off the Email scandal crowd that could be very serious if its proven she ordered Paul Combetta to tamper with them in any way.


https://amp.ibtimes.co.uk/hillary-cl...t-tips-1582223

Someone made a failed attempt to scrub the account in question. Unaware that Reddit submissions can be archived.

So both Trump and Clinton are dodgy, there's no winning. AFAIK Obama pardoned Combetta before he was even trialed. So there's another corrupt one to add to that list.

Re: US Election 2016
 

What a choice eh? :spin:

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Trump were to win and God only knows what sort of mess he'll make of the job. Mind you, maybe there are powerful people behind the scenes in the likes of the CIA and NSA who'd rather like to have someone they can manipulate at the helm of good ship America... :shrug:

Re: US Election 2016
 

Clinton is just as bent and has used her foundation for equally if not more dodgy dealings.

But of course Trump is much worse..................

http://observer.com/2016/08/the-six-...needs-to-know/

Re: US Election 2016
 

Remember the last president to say no to the CIA? He took the open top limo.

I wish stuff like that was still just conspiracy. We'll find out in 50 more years what they've been doing post 2000. We're past shooting presidents, trying to blow up your own buildings and kidnapping your own citizens for experimentation so what could possibly be worse? It's crap like this that fuels '911Truthers' basically built them a stage to stand on.

A lot of power still resides with Congress, a lot of Americans and others are exaggerating way too many things. Trump will do this/that/the other and the same for Clinton. Knowing fine well that the POTUS doesn't hold such powers. The same people making ludicrous claims that Obama would bring Sharia Law to the US last time round. The same folks that go straight for Bush when it comes to Iraq and conveniently miss out the guy that spent years trying to get a conflict in the middle east, Dick Cheney.

Re: US Election 2016
 

That's a bit weak. The Washington Post story is saying he used the money for other means which would be illegal. Some of those 'scandals' are just inferences the writer chooses to make without substance:

I mean all of them suggest some sort that people that donated to the charity also donated to Clinton. That is different to what Trump is being accused of. The money to Clinton's campaign was separate to that of the charity. She didn't use charitable funds for her campaign. The main one problem there is people who had meetings with Clinton who also donated to her charity. Which is bad but rather typical of politics. Even in the UK the biggest contributors to the political parties will get dinners/access to their leaders.

---------- Post added at 20:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------

It makes you nostalgic for the days of Romney and McCain. I didn't agree with them on pretty much anything, obviously, but they were within the scope of normal political discourse. Neither of them were like Trump. He isn't even conservative. Just a campaign fueled on hate. No policies on anything other than building a war, keeping out Muslims and touring the families of suspected terrorists.

Re: US Election 2016
 

It's all weak, both candidates are weak.

But I don't think Trump is any worse than Clinton.

He's said a many stupid thing, but he's also batted straight on a lot of things too.

This election is either going to be really quite exciting and very close, or Clinton will just batter Trump in a landslide.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I can't believe that those two are the best the US has to offer

Re: US Election 2016
 

I think Trump is a lot worse than Clinton. I think it's a dangerous man. He said Obama wasn't born in the states, as I previously said he has suggested America go after the families of suspected terrorists, he said Mexican immigrants were raping people, he has frequently gone after women with comments about their appearance be it the wives of rival candidates, rival candidates themselves or people interviewing him and wanted to punish woman who have abortions which not even pro-life campaigners want.

That's without his long list of business deals behind him.

Clinton isn't perfect, she would be lose massively to pretty much any other of the Republicans who stood in the Primary, but Trump is a internet comment section turned real. He would rather be bulling some group of people that talk about policy. His answers to foreign policy is usually 'we'll go in there and sort it out'.

What is he actually going to do when he is President? No one seems to know. We have an idea with Clinton, it's slightly left of Obama but still rather centrist.

What is he going to do abroad? What if his commanders refuse to kill the family of a terrorist? Why is that even a discussion point?

Re: US Election 2016
 

Then nothing. There's no requirement. As per the constitution: Just the same rules that stop the POTUS shooting your face off in public.

But commanders wouldn't refuse that order, they have no issue dropping missiles on civilians elsewhere so why would this make a difference? See the problem there... Obama has had no issue with the civilian death toll caused by chasing terrorists abroad. Killing their families and even some completely unrelated to terrorism at all. It becomes an issue when a madman talks about it though. A country that knows full well that they're racking up collateral damage each time they target a terrorist suddenly have an issue when someone openly says they'll do what Obama is doing. Must be the way he never used the terms 'Incorrect Intelligence or accident'

Re: US Election 2016
 

Where is that in the constitution? I assume it's a recent amendment.

Well they do have an issue with it. America and Britain have pretty strict rules of engagement when conducting military operations in civilian areas.

There is a a big difference between civilians dying in military operations targeting an enemy and civilians being intentionally targeted. If you have evidence of the Americans intentionally setting out to kill civilians, i.e not as a result of a botched operation, then that's different. However if the Americans wanted to kill civilians they could do so easily and level whole cities in moments.

Trump has suggested intentionally killing them. It's a huge difference and it's a measure of how screwed up this situation has become that instead of it automatically disqualifying him we're debating if the constitution allows it.

Re: US Election 2016
 

many people took that position after Obama won, and as I recall Obama was very very slow to produce evidence. It was a stupid position to take, but he wasn't a politician at the time nor was he running for president, he has since retracted the allegation.

I don't know if it was 'suspected' terrorists but his point was that terrorists don't care about themselves, but if they thought their actions might have repercussions upon their family they may think twice about it. Also in many cases the families of terrorists know or suspect that something may be going on but do nothing. A fair point, poorly executed. But when it comes to terrorism nothing should be off the table.

Obviously not all but there are many illegal immigrants in the US that commit felonies in the US, are deported, and then come back to commit more crime, the Kate Steinle case, being the example of the moment.

Not smart, good job that nobody in politics or the media have taken the **** out if him and his appearance though isn't it.

no defence for that one. He immediately retracted it, he just not skilful or experienced enough to check his own wondering mind.

The debates are going to be really interesting. He could very possibly self destruct. It will be very interesting to see what a seasoned politician like Clinton can do. She should by rights take him to the cleaners.

She's not left of Obama. You get 4 more years of Obama with Clinton. Which is not very exciting. Obama has been a very mediocre president. He's done very little to better the lives of African Americans.

Does " go after" mean kill?

I don't think he'll do too much but he has stated that he'll declare war on ISIS, which would be interesting.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I don't think there's just laws inside the US stopping him, what does the Geneva Convention offer?

As for evidence the US targets civilians, there isn't any in that sense, I'm just saying they know they will kill civilians. If they launch a hellfire missile into a street then there's just no way you're not going to cause collateral damage. That in a sense is knowing? Example being, although this was completely botched and they ended up killing 80 odd civilians and no suspects, coalition aircraft hitting a cluster of houses in the village of Tokkhar, Syria. They leveled the entire place and there's just no way they didn't know it housed civilians. It's a great success when you take down a lunatic terrorist but it doesn't feel that right when you've wiped out a village to do so. Kunduz Hospital incident is a similar situation, they knowingly fired upon a building inhabited with Civilians under the pretense the Taliban had raided the place and had human shields and hostages, Their solution to a situation like that was to accept Afghan calls for a bombing run.

Guess the point I'm getting at is, whether it's via the accidental methods or via trump deliberately doing it, the outcomes are the same, countless people die for no reason and it's my opinion that neither are acceptable. I get Trump as a person saying it is worse and insane. Just think the loss of life should be more important.

But yes, I accept Trump's version would undoubtedly set that death toll higher and allow him to target at will.

---------- Post added at 21:58 ---------- Previous post was at 21:56 ----------

IIRC he changed his tone on that 'Kill' thing too, downright denied it at one point.

Here: Changes from kill to go after: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b065e2e3d4d82d

Here is the direct quote from December though Do any of us assume 'Take out' means anything other than kill?

South Park weighed in on this with their returning episode for season 20. The character Mr Garrison is blatantly being portrayed as Trump, it's an interesting watch, suggesting now he's actually up head to head he has no clue what to do if he wins.

Quote Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/po...ists-families/

So it's evident people do actually consider this could have been a massive backfire in Trump not actually expecting to be this far into it.

That quote though, Politicians playbook isn't it? Said it but didn't say it 6 months later.

Re: US Election 2016
 

He retracted it last week. Also why should Obama provide his birth certificate? He was a citizen of the United States. It is not normal for Presidential candidates to release their birth certificate or for any citizen to be required to do so to prove their nationality.

We all know why a few people requested it of Obama and not of any other candidate.

Yes it should. Killing their families is off the table to any decent human being. If you kill the wives/children/brothers/sisters of people because they're terrorists then you are a common murderer and nothing more.

The Democratic platform, of which she is the lead campaigner as the leader of the party, is to the left of Obama. It's been heavily influenced by Sanders as part of the Democratic convention.

We'll see in history where Obama will come out. I don't think he'll go done as mediocre though. Looking back I suspect this handling of the 2008 crash will go down well. The United States recovered far quicker than most other economies after the crash and the stimulus, opposed by a minority Republicans at the time, was a success. I don't believe he has been at the wheel for a recession either (other than 2008 obviously). The medical system took a step forward in having pre-existing conditions covered and younger people covered throughout their University years on their parents coverage. Other than that there are two appointments to the Supreme Court, America has massively increased the amount of their energy supplies that originate within the United States, he repealed 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'. Really his domestic record is likely to go down very well.

His foreign record isn't so great. Good: Cuba, Iran and Osama and maybe moving towards Asia more. Bad: Syria. Syria will probably go down as his biggest failing.

I think he'll go down as one of the 'good' Presidents but these things always depend on history. How Obamacare fares will be a key issue. Either way though being the first black President, winning two-terms, and killing Osama is likely to always place him in the ones people talk about.

There is a good article from many months ago actually: http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...vements-213487

Re: US Election 2016
 

Because we'll know that building walls to keep out illegal immigrants makes you a racist, facist *******.

http://news.sky.com/story/great-wall...rants-10586233

---------- Post added at 22:57 ---------- Previous post was at 22:28 ----------

Rightly or wrongly it was questioned, and it could have been sorted out in minutes, but IIRC it dragged out for months, further fuelling the speculation and birther conspirators.

I wasn't referring to the 'killing' of, and I'm not sure if he ever said ' killing'. But ' going after' whatever that means, I wouldn't take off the table

The circumstances and outlook for African Americans, ethnic minorities, blue collar workers have not improved under Obama in fa t they have declined. the USA's influence and respect on the world stage has declined. Obama has been a poor president for the US with no good option in sight.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Its a requirement (to prove eligability) in some states apparently, and many others have tried to introduce it in the last few years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ty_legislation

Re: US Election 2016
 

I tend to see things in black and white.

Obama gets asked to show BC - he shows, instantly any question is killed - just like that, great way to stop all that dead in the water. The alternative to fudge and divert and not do anything for a time only fuels speculation - that could have been avoided.

Same goes for Hilary and her health - you don't need to be a rocket scientist to see she's not firing on all eight, produce an affidavit doctors report -sorted - although I'm not so sure in her case that's possible, but same principle.

Re: US Election 2016
 

House investigating latest Clinton email scandal as major news outlets start running with it. :erm:

Not looking great. Having looked through it myself, everything there points to Paul Combetta, the username, the dates, questions asked and the fact a 2 year inactive account was suddenly wiped when the story broke.

This guy made one mistake after the other. The last as stated before was that Reddit posts could be archived, which they were before he got the chance to strip it all.

If it can be proven without a doubt that it was him, he's then supplied evidence that Clinton attempted to tamper and delete emails whilst under Federal investigation. Thus committing what I believe would be a Federal offence.

Two corrupt numptys up, one of them wins. Nobody else wins.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Well as I said I think history will disagree with you on that for the reasons I mentioned. Either way I think it's too early to make declarations on his legacy.

---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:40 ----------

It seems they attempted to introduce it with varying degrees of success in the wake of the Obama case. It wasn't a requirement before him.

---------- Post added at 12:44 ---------- Previous post was at 12:41 ----------

I don't think you should legitimatise and pander to these people conspiratorial prejudices or that Obama should have to submit to an additional test of his citizenship than that of other candidates. Eventually he did have to do it but it's shameful that it was brought to that and the people who forced it should be admonished.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I would agree but didn't Obama himself bring his place of birth into question, he wrote some stuff before he came into politics indicating he was born in Kenya or some such place.

If that's true, surely it's not unreasonable to ask for some proof?

Re: US Election 2016
 

Obama never wrote anything. It was an article from the 90's that included the error that he was born in Kenya. Something later corrected with statements indicating the people in charge had always assumed he was born in Hawaii and was a simple mistake. Given his father was a known figure and Kenyan whilst Obama was relatively low key, it's not an impossible mistake to make.

It then led to this, which people believe Clinton fueled when going head to head.


All in all the people that lit this fire achieved the reaction they wanted but failed to get the result they wanted with Obama serving 2 terms comfortably.

Funnily enough, part of the Clinton email scandals and their handover were set to reveal that they were fueling the Obama citizenship debate by junpstarting reporters with stories to circulate. Naturally as seen above, its clear someone deleted or tampered with those emails so we'll never know.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Wasn't it e-mails at the state department we're talking about here? That's the issue with the whole thing. Nothing wrong with deleting campaign e-mails.

---------- Post added at 13:51 ---------- Previous post was at 13:48 ----------

Interestingly as an aside one of the Republican candidates in the Primaries, Ted Cruz, was born outside the United States and would likely have been fine to run had he got the nomination.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Bring back Ronnie Raygun...

Re: US Election 2016
 

Trump or Clinton will bring equal problems although in different area's and how those problems are handled will decide the legacy of that president. Pretty poor showing that these are the presidential candidates as neither are exactly shining lights of what's good and i predict whoever gets the job in the end will carry with them the stench of corruption.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yeah, sorry mixed up with the other email leaks showing Clinton's apparent issue with Obama (Powell leaks). But yeah Canadian born Cruz faced no opposition then and would seemingly be allowed to run but I bet the opposing side would have taken digs at it had he got the nomination much like Obama.

Its said they suspected for some time though that Clinton was essentially slagging him off, a white house admin having being 'concerned' about the nature of these emaills. I just wonder what Obama makes of Clinton in regards to all this nonsense and whether we'll see the Reddit uncovering blow up even further.

You're not a Clinton without a good old Scandal, you're not a Trump with out being a massive *hole.

Re: US Election 2016
 

i agree ,they only did it because of his skin colour

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yeah, they didn't wait long to give that away, claiming he was Muslim and would bring Sharia Law to the US.

Re: US Election 2016
 

HOC orders Reddit to preserve 'Technician posts' for investigation.

What kind of damage can this cause to Clinton? I know its a federal offence but would she really be charged with anything? Could it be campaign ending, or is that a bit far?

https://www.rt.com/usa/360255-hillar...emails-reddit/

Also can Combetta's immunity now be reversed? Even if he was ordered to do it, he's still the button pusher, so should be facing it alongside her.

Looks like they're going to go through the old IP trail and see if they make a further link with Combetta. If he makes Reddiy posts like that I wonder what the odds on a VPN are.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Doubt it. They would have to first prove he made the posts, then if he did he already has immunity and has exercise his right not to talk which would probably end the trail stone dead. Even then you would need to prove she ordered it and that is happened against e-mails relevant to the investigation.

Unless new evidence is uncovered it's currently a story that won't get anywhere.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Meeting results

Clinton still ahead in polls, Trump needs this to blow up imo. There's surely nothing else she could faff up in the space of a month and a bit.

Some Trump humour though, NFSW comedy (South Park) but pretty relevant to Trump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1xiAXMqJIQ (A Parody of Trump's taking them all out swerve)

Re: US Election 2016
 

That refers to an existing House investigation into the e-mails. It's largely partisan because they've already given him immunity, rather foolish of him not to turn up but he could sit there in silence if he did.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I believe in London yesterday. There was anti Trump Bus going round.

Re: US Election 2016
 

In London we believe :D

No but seriously, there should be Anti-Election 2016 campaigns. You've got a choice of a crook or a crook.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Trumps going to win; its the maddest most twisted, racist, divided, ignorant and bigotted country in the World. Beginning to think we'd be better looking to Russia to provide security.

Re: US Election 2016
 

its quite sad that out of all the millions of people in the USA this pair is the best they have to offer .

Re: US Election 2016
 

You also just described Putin and Russia.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Personally l would not trust Russia as far as one could throw them.

Re: US Election 2016
 

But do you trust Trump more? The combination of him and Putin is a nightmare.

Re: US Election 2016
 

No l certainly don't trust Trump either Mr K but sadly there could be enough idiots to put the numbskull into the oval office given voters past history of electing nincompoops.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I'd trust Trump over Putin any day. Totally different kind of animal. Ever seen anyone run properly in an election against Putin? He's changed up the system, he's had people imprisoned and even killed, bouncing back between Prime Minister and President, changing the rules as he goes.

People like Erdogan and Putin are way more dangerous than a Donald Trump. Trump can come and go, Putin and Erdogan are building a throne to sit on till death.

That's not saying Trump's anything good, it's just there really is worse. Russia's current bombing runs in Syria are despicable. There's 'Accidentally' killing civilians but deliberately targeting aid and relief trucks is a disgrace, a surefire war crime. Putin's response will be, the US created ISIS. Trying to pass off anything they do as 'Well the US do worse'

The problem with Hilldog and Trump and is they're typical crooked politicians (If you can even consider Trump a Politician), both liars, both controversial, both useless. Can't really compare them to war criminals..

Despite what people will have you believe, Trump won't be killing families around the world, he won't be bombing aid convoys, he won't be annexing part of Canada and invading Mexico.

Clinton or Trump will come, they'll have the US' mandatory conflict somewhere overseas. They'll have the usual in country Police brutality arguments. They'll both surely go after one term.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Trump can become president but that doesn't actually give him a lot of power congress and the senate hold the real power and the dislike for trump from both sides will keep him in check. As for turning towards Russia never going to happen the russians are the last lot to involve in the wider world and that will continue as long as vlad is any part of things.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Pretty much it, said this before countless times, Anti-Obama supporters before his first term made ludicrous claims he was a Muslim and could enforce Sharia Law upon America :erm:

There's never a middle ground to be had with Russia. Putin says a lot of correct things, then quickly in the next breath he's marching men into a foreign country illegally. ISIS could've been a middle ground but again, blames the US for ISIS, then bombs a civilian aid convoy in what some would consider no different to a terrorist attack. Absolute madman.

Source for Russia attack on convoy: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7324841.html

Re: US Election 2016
 

False equivalence - Obama is really a right of centre moderate, who understands the limits of the Presidential Office, having worked his way through local politics as a civil rights lawyer, State Senator, then in the US Senate, so understands the checks and balances of the US system.

Trump is a megalomaniac blow-hard who thinks he's right, no matter what, and has no practical experience in local or national government (which is a completely different world from American business, where if it goes wrong, you just declare bankruptcy) and doesn't understand checks and balances - it's his way or the highway...

Re: US Election 2016
 

Wow you know Trump really well, you must have interviewed him or spoken to him at length.

Or is it really your assessment based on news reports that we can all get, which means diddly squat really?


Obama is a lawyer that practised little, and is more of a career politician.

And Trump is a business man, he been up and down but has a record.

Amyway Amy comparison of trump,and Obama is pointless, they're not up against each other

Re: US Election 2016
 

His record is of serial bankruptcy and litigation...

Re: US Election 2016
 

Who would the rest of the world vote for?

https://worldwide.vote/hillary-vs-trump/#/

Re: US Election 2016
 

That's exactly what I expected from an online Poll. Can comfortably say the majority are just nodding Trump for the troll.

Re: US Election 2016
 

If I lived in America, I would probably vote for trump. I probably wouldn't vote. But if I had to.

Reason being, I don't thing the Obama and the democrats have been a good government for the USA. A vote for Clinton is basically another term for Obama policies so I would want something different. And in 4 years if it's a shitstorm then get rid.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I'd vote for trump over clinton because he will quickly find out how really powerless the position of president is and there is just something about clinton i don't trust. Like a growing number of americans i don't rate obama that highly i think he promised much and delivered little. I think when the time comes majority will vote clinton but I'm not convinced it would be the best thing for the US.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Historically speaking, at this time in his term, he is popular amongst Americans: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...nt-presidents/

Re: US Election 2016
 

First debate tonight and given the expectation game it's almost certainly going to go to Trump. As long as he doesn't lose his temper and sounds 'normal' he will be perceived to have won. Clinton is already seen as a policy wonk and rather boring so she can't win by being detailed or calm, her best chance is to rattle Trump whose shown his temper quite often so far.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Even if he loses his rag, people will lap that up and love it. There's nothing good that can come from this race. I'm still quite lost for words that one of these goons will be the next POTUS. :erm:

Re: US Election 2016
 

Washington Post continuing to dig into Trump's charities: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...495_story.html

Re: US Election 2016
 

Same two stories each day now. Clinton emails (Which made a pretty poor attempt at implicating Obama) The newest ones call the FBI investigation a sham, which is a pretty fair observation but isn't really anything we didn't know. Handing out immunity to the two key witnesses that could implicate Clinton when they clearly failed to submit everything they new, that's a botch right there. Printing it everyday doesn't make it fresh though.

Then there's the Trump ones, he's a dodgy businessman etc. Again nothing really new there, the blokes as dodgy with money as they come, the stereotypical example of rich man dodging tax. He's always come off as arrogant arse. He'll go through a whole term with more scandals along the way.

Just Anti-Trump, Anti-Clinton reporting from both sides. Ideally they'd both face proper investigations and get nowhere near the White House. Clinton's too well protected and connected for the FBI to have made any actual effort and Trump has too much money for anyone to even bother trying. I love statements like 'No one is above the law' Sometimes the justice system in the US says quite the opposite. Change it all. Obama third term. Not sure where the Obama hate has come from lately. Who'd want him out for these two?

Roll on, starts soon anyway, awaiting the Clinton coughs and her trying to be a Politician, then waiting to see Trump trying not to be a Politician, waving his arms about yelling random tripe... Basically doing what South Park targeted him for.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Did he really say happy camper in the debate or did I dream that. Can't believe he has got this far to not bother in the debate at all.

Re: US Election 2016
 

After the debate IMO Hilary Clinton just came one step closer to being president of America in November.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yup glad to be wrong. It seems like Trump didn't even cover the basics for it. You would at least think he would have some training or soundbites for some of the possible questions but he doesn't seem to care. He didn't have rebuttals or answers for some of the most basic questions. He is treating the whole thing like a joke.

People laughed at Bush but at least he had a grasp of the issues.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I've just watched the whole debate.

Trump was not as polished as Clinton.

There were at least 3 (that I counted) WTF moments from Trump.

Clinton didn't particularly shine either. She talked well, as you would expect, but didn't say much.

Trump didn't go after her as much as he should have done. She has a record to go after
, Trump hasn't and he didn't use that to his advantage

Clinton got off lightly and in regards to the debates is Clinton 1 Trump 0.

We'll see what happens in the next two.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Trump hasn't got a record?

What about his
- bankruptcies (because he says he can be a great President because he is a great businessman)
- non-payment of suppliers, and then litigates (lack of trust and lack of honesty)
- casual sexism and racism (calls women slobs and pigs)
- lack of rational judgement, as he says he likes to react rather than think things over
- dishonesty (he campaigns on keeping jobs in the USA, but offshores most of his business, and employed immigrant labout to build his buildings and golf course)
- lack of empathy (he thought the 2008 crash was a good thing, because it meant he could buy property cheaply, because 'it's just business'
- consistently lies, flip-flops on policies, then denies changing his mind even when it's recorded on TV
- is not reality based (he thinks just because he says something, it's true, and denies there are other valid opinions than his)

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

Here is a list of his lies and exaggerations from just one week...

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...T.nav=top-news

Re: US Election 2016
 

Before the debate the Trump campaign said, in contrast to Clinton, that he was preparing for the debate by playing golf and eating cheeseburgers. Most thought this was expectations management and he would appeal calm and have a few talking points. It appears it may have been right.

It's not clear what his strategy was. They knew Clinton would be well prepared because for all her faults work ethic isn't among them. The pundits assumed he would seek to appear calm and authoritative and that contrast with his media image would win it but he didn't do that. He struggled to even be his showbiz self frequently tripping over his words.

I still wonder if deep down he doesn't want the job. Every time he is doing well in the polls he seems do something stupid. We don't know if this will harm him of course but it won't help him.

Anything he'll probably find some minority group to blame and take the focus of his performance.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Not in government no.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Seems like South Park will continue firing at both

NSFW Humour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlqKFlU7YAs

Brilliant.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Trump went on a Tweet spree last night (3am in the morning) telling people to check out a sex tape of a woman who Clinton brought up in the debate as an example of one of the many other women Trump has previously insulted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.3d2a3b8ec33e

Re: US Election 2016
 

I am now utterly convinced that Trump is trying to sabotage his own campaign because he knows he has not the first clue how to be president of the USA should he win

Re: US Election 2016
 

Either that or he really is unbalanced.

Re: US Election 2016
 

His campaign manager must cringe everytime Trump picks up a phone or goes on TV :D

Re: US Election 2016
 

Then of course here she is caught lying.

https://youtu.be/LdkHDSp-xlk

Botched that one horribly.

How to botch another: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GB7_uhAcDk

So believe it or not, said woman does have a past and her interviews literally stink of just anything Anti-Trump. She's literally there for no other reason and with stuff like the above she's helping Trump...

Trump clearly hasn't just tweeted out his thoughts. This was calculated. He knew she was dodgy and he knew his supporters would further back him on it. Evidence of that is a support page is flooded with countless dodgy things this woman has been involved in since the tweets.

The sex tape that never existed is now being spammed on Reddit. My missus would batter me so can't verify :D

So yeah,calculated. The odds on Hillary using this woman again?

Re: US Election 2016
 

But she is ultimately a nobody. The story this morning in America won't be that she doesn't like trump or lied about a eating disorder but that Trump has tweeted out a string of stuff attacking her and mentioning a sex tape. If it's calculated then it's a miscalculation because nobody is voting for her but many will think it's bizarre at best for a Presidential candidate to be referring to women as "Miss Piggy" and ranting about a sex tape.

Incidentally it's not a surprise she is anti-Trump after what he said about her.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Lets not forget that Trumps wife is a playmate and could end up being first lady of the USA .There's some rather naughty images out there

Re: US Election 2016
 

But he doesn't deny that. So its not that much of a scoop. That being the same woman Cruz attacked and flew under the radar though.

Trump is a guy that would post his own sex tape online.

I'm patiently waiting for Monica Lewinsky to appear in a Trump campaign video.

The outcome of this entire election is cack. So you may as well enjoy the storm.

Re: US Election 2016
 

You just know that is going happen ,probably during his victory celebrations:D

Re: US Election 2016
 

Remember Trump also 'calculated' his rant at the parents of the US Army solider who was Muslim and that harmed him badly.

It may well be that he is just off his rocker.

Re: US Election 2016
 

He strikes me as a bloke that would literally have more sex scandals as POTUS than Bill Clinton. I'm still bewildered by the whole Trump immigration thing whilst his wife sits on a 'Born in Slovenia' birth certificate.

This is what I mean, it's priceless entertainment. You literally have the two worst candidates in history going head to head and someone has to actually win.

---------- Post added at 19:26 ---------- Previous post was at 19:04 ----------

What rant? He made typical Trump comments. He was being interviewed and made a clear anti-muslim jibe at the wife in relation to womens rights in Islam. If he said anything worse after that then I haven't seen it yet. It was hardly a series of tweets in caps. But yes, people exorcised their right to be offended and Trump further pandered to the ******* racist redneck. Being Politically correct doesn't apply to the entire US and the cack from his mouth is like a message from God to the same ******* redneck above. No one disputes it's wrong, but it's not the suicidal move people make out.

I feel like Farage did this for Brexit. Can call me wrong of course it's just an opinion but he drummed up support from 'Chav culture' just by uttering the word Immigration. Sunderland was a landslide in Brexit. Without fact checking and meaning to offend anyone but Sunderland is likely the most populated with these idiots. They were already Muslim bashers before Farage but as soon as he mentions immigration, he's sealed their vote. They jumped the bandwagon when the BNP fell apart and started following Farage, the PC racist :erm: He also used the NHS a lot too in appeal to others but yeah I think the above point has validity.

* Second Bold, he is off his rocker, that's what makes him unique. He appeals to the madmen. The fact he's got this far is evidence enough. He literally has no problem just saying what's in his peanut brain. He's like a walking advert for South Park. His mouth opens and stuff just falls out.

- in regards to Machado (Trump name calling)

This is stuff shows use as comedy. So you could say it isn't even original.

It's never a serious question, it's a taunt. He knows fine well she didn't and this is literally him poking her with a stick whilst grinning.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yep. 300 million people to choose from and it's down to these two.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I think the whole twitter generation thing has really made some of the attacks on clinton completely extreme. Like every person is tweeting exaggerated falsehoods and people are swarming all over it and retweeting etc.

Twitter wasnt a big thing in 2008 during the last election cycle. It does a lot of good but its also quite a poisonous world where people join in together to attack and berate people.

Clinton is part of the establishment thats a fact. But who isnt part of the establishment? All the bush's were. Reagan was. Nixon was.

Clinton and the whole email drama. Yes it was stupid but what do we imagine she was hiding? A lot of former secretary of states used private email devices. None of that is repeated in the twitter era as it would harm the message that "clinton is corrupt"

The fact is clinton is part of the establishment and backed by big businesses. Thats a fact. But again a lot of presidents were in the past.

At least she has experience and is worthy of the job unlike Obama who had little to no experience but got put into the white house due to oprah winfrey's backing (who surprisingly had influence over about 60% of african americans).

Re: US Election 2016
 

Yet everyone would undoubtedly take Obama over both. That's politics now though. Have a look at Donald Trump and Clinton's respected sub's on Reddit. Enjoy the users posting completely unverified nonsense on both.

I get it though. One of these tools is the future and a lot would prefer Clinton over the madman.

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/

That's what I mean. You'll find plenty of stupid stuff there.

Re: US Election 2016
 

He tanked in the polls after that. The type of people who would welcome having a go at a soliders family if they're Muslim are not likely to be moderate or Democratic voters.

He keeps doing things like this. Turning off moderate voters who don't like Clinton but can't bring themselves to vote for him.

Clinton is an experienced politician. She'll cut this together into an ad and highlight the part about the sex tape. Again people on Reddit might think 'what a legend' but they're in his demographic anyway. Everyone else is going to think he is a nut job.

You keep making out as if this is wise from Trump. Every time he pulls a stunt like this he suffers in the polls and the closer we get to the election the more it matters if he loses voters.

If he knows what he is doing then he is trying to throw the election, if he doesn't then he is off his head.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Sorry if I come out that way. I don't mean calculated in intentions to winning. I mean literally succeeding in stirring the pot. He isnt posting without thinking, theres an intention behind it. I think he's trying to throw it whilst looking like a winner or someone that is trying. If he isn't then I swear he's just pandering to rednecks in the hope they'll come out an vote. Probably less votes than Clinton but how does he honestly change his tone now? Far too deep.

Throwing the election or pandering to racists.. What other reason could there be? So if I'm wrong and he is actually posting with intention to actually win this can anyone think of a reasonable alternative to literally looking for the casual racist or redneck for reasoning behind comments he makes. Like looking for those on the anti-muslim wagon. I only say it because I believe Brexit did exactly this in places like Sunderland, literally seen it firsthand. There's also the speaks his mind element which will rally some troops behind him. Again that'll cost him votes too but who really knows until Election day.

What gets me most is he has vocal ethic minority supporters.

On another note, I do seriously question Hillary's health though, that Telegraph piece of her appearing to faint did it for me.

All of this makes me eternally grateful to be British, I used to think JC was the madman.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I'd rather have a sick Clinton than a cockwomble..

Re: US Election 2016
 

I rather fancy a cockwomble.