What's new

US Politics

If he's not a 'real republican' nor a 'democrat', I'm not so sure why that's such a bad thing according to you ....That is what America needs, an independent. The current 'republican' establishment is a nothing more than a neocon, bought out, fanatically pro-Israel sewer organization. I wish it a slow and painful death, it doesn't represent anything remotely similar to Republican values of distant past.

Its the lack of a stupid superdelegate system that the GOP were able to finally see just how fed up their base is with them and that Trump is a manifestation of a real sourness that has developed for the GOP largely being just another side of the democrats.

Its why Trump wiped the floor with all the traditional GOP twits like Jeb and Marco. Cruz was the only real opposition and he's not even a core GOP sort of guy.

Now Trump is going to make real mincemeat out of Hillary once the conventions are both over. The Dems just shot themselves in the foot really badly over emailgate and letting her avoid prosecution purely based on "lack of criminal intent"....while prosecuting and sentencing dozens of plebs daily on charges like manslaughter. Sanders was the only real hope for the dems to stand a chance....just watch the polls over the next few weeks to see what I mean. The trends are already starting.

Trump will follow a Emailgate + Benghazi + Clinton sexual assault (specifically Hillary's attacking of the victims which have been a no go zone for GOP regulars) pretty much nonstop on top of the issues he is already known for during his campaigning.

Crooked Hillary....has a catchphrase ever been so severe in US election history and actually had the strong basis for it during the campaign?
 
579016a6d7367.image.jpg


These Prominent Republicans Won’t Show Up At The RNC

Can you blame them?

"Four of the last five men nominated for president by the Republican party ― George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, John McCain and Mitt Romney ― will skip the event. (Bob Dole, the party’s nominee in 1996, will attend.)"

"Traditionally, politicians scramble to earn speaking slots at their party’sconvention, which puts them in front of a national audience and can introduce rising stars to the country."

"But this year, with a toxic nominee who seems more interested in himself than the GOP, many high-profile Republicans are running away from the convention and from Trump."

"As of Wednesday, 32 Senate Republicans planned to attend, while 18 planned to skip, according to a count by The Hill. Four ― Sens. Thad Cochran (Miss.), Rand Paul (Ky.), Jim Risch (Idaho) and John Thune (S.D.) ― are undecided.

Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse doesn’t plan on attending and hasn’t exactly been discreet about his disdain for Trump.

“Sen. Sasse will not be attending the convention and will instead take his kids to watch some dumpster fires across the state, all of which enjoy more popularity than the current front-runners,” his spokesman told The Hill.

Sheldon Adelson, a GOP megadonor, won’t be at the convention either.

Some aren’t attending because they’re locked in close re-election battles and would rather spend the time campaigning. In that group are Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.), Kelly Ayotte (N.H), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Mark Kirk (Ill.). Kirk has also rescinded his endorsement of Trump and run ads against him.

Sen. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), another Trump holdout and vocal Trump critic, didn’t even try to come up with a good excuse for why he wouldn’t attend.

“I’ve got to mow my lawn,” Flake told the AP." Read the complete article



Bty, Trump’s wife (gold digger), Melania not only plagiarized speech from Obama’s wife Michelle, but she also lied that she has a degree from the University of Slovenia. Link


cg578f00b1ed2fb.jpg







If he's not a 'real republican' nor a 'democrat', I'm not so sure why that's such a bad thing according to you ....That is what America needs, an independent. The current 'republican' establishment is a nothing more than a neocon, bought out, fanatically pro-Israel sewer organization. I wish it a slow and painful death, it doesn't represent anything remotely similar to Republican values of distant past.
I do not have a problem with an independent (I’m registered as an independent) but then, one should not pretend that they are Democrat/Republican to use their parties for their own agendas.

He hardly supports Republican platform on, foreign policy, free trade, and family values.

As they say, one should put their money where their mouth is (support something that they believe in), Trump has been donating to Democrats and Democratic causes for years, he made a donation to Hillary in 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007 and also donated $100,000 to the Clinton foundation.

He has also indirectly donated to permanent Democrats like, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Rahm Emanuel (a former aide to Pres. Obama) to name a few.

---------------------------------------

Meanwhile, Hillary is very close to picking up her VP, I hope it’s going to be Sen. Tim Kaine.
 
Last edited:
Jewish Republicans Slip Into Crisis Mode as Donald Trump’s Convention Looms

For some, the solution has been to turn away from the presidential race altogether. “A lot of us are focusing our efforts on House and Senate races,” an RJC board member said. “If we don’t win the White House, it’s important to at least keep the House and maybe also the Senate.”

http://forward.com/news/344893/jewi...risis-mode-as-donald-trumps-convention-looms/
............

Republican Jewish Coalition openly alluding to having control over the White House, Senate and House, now fear losing the White House, but 'keeping' the House and Senate, implying they have control over them currently. So I guess it's anti-Semitic and conspiratorial if anyone else says it??

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
hillary-lies-scandal-cover-up.jpg


Clinton Foundation Ignored All ‘Best Practices’ For Good Governance


Clinton Foundation officials have ignored virtually all of the “best practices” urged by good governance organizations for public charities, according to an investigation by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Most glaringly, for example, the foundation’s insular board of directors is unusually small, ranging from only two to no more than five members, all of whom are among President Bill and Hillary Clinton’s closest and richest friends.

The “good governance” movement in the nonprofit field has been gathering strength for two decades, but it clearly has yet to reach the Clinton Foundation. Most foundation boards have on average 15 members, according to a 2015 survey by Boardsource, a national organization working to strengthen nonprofit board leadership.

Good governance groups also encourage well-managed non-profits to create dedicated oversight committees for audits, donations, governance, executive compensation and whistle-blower policy. The Clinton Foundation has none of those committees, according to its Internal Revenue Service 990 tax filings.


Term-limits are also recommended for board members to encourage fresh thinking in non-profit management. Seventy-one percent of all public foundations today have term limits, according to Boardsource.

Most of the Clinton Foundation’s board members have occupied the same board seats for most of the controversial non-profit’s life.


Arms-length, independent boards also are considered the essential first step in good governance.



The Independent Sector, a non-partisan good governance organization for nonprofits and foundations urge the creation of independent boards and said they should be in the majority.

“A substantial majority of the board of a public charity, usually meaning at least two-thirds of its members, should be independent,” the group recommended.

That is not the case with the Clinton Foundation. The board consists of Bill Clinton’s tightest inner circle, including Democratic mega-fundraiser and now Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, former Arkansas Democratic Sen. David Pryor and the senator’s former aide, J.L. “Skip Rutherford.

McAuliffe was the top fundraiser for Bill and Hillary’s Clinton’s presidential campaigns. He also put up $1.35 million of his own cash to pay for the Clinton’s first 11-room mansion in Chappaqua, New York.

The gift infuriated liberal activist Fred Wertheimer who at the time said, “It’s just plain wrong. It’s dangerous. It’s inappropriate,” adding, “This is a financial favor worth over a million dollars to the president.”

Charles Ortel, a Wall Street analyst and twice a trustee of public foundations, argued the gift should have been disclosed in the foundation’s tax returns.

“Terry McAuliffe made it possible for the Clinton’s to buy their house in Chappaqua. That’s a significant financial relationship that should have been disclosed in the 990’s (tax return) and was not. And has never been corrected,” he said in an interview.

TheDCNF asked Gov. McAuliffe’s office to provide details of the terms of the cash payment and if the Clinton’s had paid it back. The governor’s office did not reply.

Sen. Pryor established a second legal defense fund for Bill Clinton after it was discovered that the first defense committee accepted $600,000 in illegal contributions raised by his longtime friend Charlie Trie. Reportedly, Trie delivered the money in two thick envelopes. He was convicted of election law violations.

Both defense funds were trying to raise money for Clinton’s legal fees generated by the Whitewater scandal and the President’s reported affairs with Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones.

Rotating on and off the board were other two women. One is Cheryl Mills who served as White House counsel to Bill Clinton and chief of staff for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Mills got into trouble when it was revealed she was double dipping and taking a salary from both the foundation and the State Department.

The other long-time board member was Ann Jordan, wife of one of Bill’s closest advisors, Vernon Jordan.

“When there too many insiders, it certainly does raise red flags,” said Vernetta Walker, the vice president and chief governance officer at Boardsource in an interview with TheDCNF.

You want a board that can say ‘no,’ adds Leslie Lenkowsky, a founding member of Bill Clinton’s Corporation for National and Community Service and an expert on philanthropy.

“It’s kind of hard to imagine those people will say no very easily to something the Clinton’s want to do,” he told TheDCNF. Lenkowsky later directed the Corporation under President George W. Bush.

McAuliffe, Pryor, Mills and Jordan serve as board members from 2000 to 2005. Pryor jumped off to become the Dean of the Clinton School of Public Service at the University of Arkansas. Rutherford would join the school after his stint at the foundation.

In 2006 McAuliffe and Mills were the only ones on the board. That year its net assets spiked from $80 million two years earlier to more than $200 million.

It’s also the year that the Clinton Foundation spent $12.6 million on Bill Clinton’s 60th birthday party. The foundation recorded the expense as “fundraising expenses.”

In 2005 Skip Rutherford became the foundation’s president. McAuliffe, Mills and Rutherford would serve as directors until 2009 when Mills left to work full time for Hillary as her chief of staff.

2009 was also Hillary’s first year as Secretary of State. That year was the high water mark for the foundation’s overseas operations. It then supported 70 offices and had 704 employees working overseas.

In 2010 it appears that McAuliffe and Rutherford were the only directors at the foundation. That year its net assets were reported to be $181 million.

“I rarely see only two directors,” Walker of Boardsource told TheDCNF. “Quite honestly I can’t remember when I’ve only seen two.”

“Usually in a public charity, the organization is much more cognizant of not having a lot of insiders or interested directors,” Walker told TheDCNF. “That reassures the public that the organization is operating as it should and in best interests of the mission.”

In May 2011 Chelsea Clinton joined the board as vice chair.

A year later the foundation was renamed from the William J. Clinton Foundation to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation. McAuliffe appears to be the only director that year, according to tax returns.

In 2013, however, dramatic changes were in play at the foundation. Press reports suggest that the changes were initiated by Chelsea, who wanted to reform the foundation and modernize it.

Also that year the foundation dumped the tiny and relatively limited accounting firm called BKD and hired international accounting powerhouse PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

In 2013, the foundation expanded the board to 12 people. But virtually all of them remained insiders.

They included Bill, Hillary and Chelsea, along with McAuliffe, Cheryl Mills and Frank Giustra. Giustra is a Canadian mining billionaire who donated $100 million to the Clinton Foundation to create the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership.

The mining mogul also benefited from the U.S. Government’s approval of a Russian state-run company’s effort to gain a controlling interest in his uranium mines in the Western U.S. Hillary, as Secretary of State, had to approve the transaction.

Another State Department alumni to join the board was U.S. Ambassador Richard Verma, who served as an Assistant Secretary of State while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Lisa Jackson, Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency chief joined the foundation that year. One of her claims to fame was using a phony email while at EPA under the pseudonym “Richard Windsor.”

Cheryl Saban joined the board too. Her billionaire husband currently is the third biggest donor to her super PAC. He is just behind Tom Steyer and George Soros in contributions to super PACs.

Saban’s 2016 super PAC contribution is a whopping $11 million. The Saban’s additionally donated between $10 to $25 million to the Clinton Foundation.

Eric Goosby is on the board too. He headed up PEPFAR, a UN health organization that partnered with the Clinton Foundation while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Hadeel Ibrahim joined that year. Her father is Mo Ibrahim, a Sudanese-British telecom billionaire. Hadeel runs her father’s foundation.

Rounding out the board was Rolando Gonzalez Bunster, a solar energy enthusiast who received $100 million from a World Bank unit in the last month of Hillary’s term at the State Department.

In July 2013 Chelsea reportedly tried to initiate many reforms at the Clinton Foundation and recruited Eric Braverman to become the new CEO.

Clinton loyalist Bruce Lindsey had served as CEO for nearly all of the foundation’s life.

In December 2014 the board approved a $395,000 pay package for Braverman to become the new CEO. But the next month he abruptly resigned.

Politico reported that Clinton’s insular staff were appalled at Braverman’s attempts at reforms.

Braverman never explained the reasons for his departure. But Politico believes it was a backlash from Bill and Hillary’s hardened loyalists and “mega-donors” who chafed at the notion of more openness and transparency.

Bruce Lindsey now is back as CEO at the foundation.

TheDCNF submitted questions about the board to the Clinton Foundation, but they did not respond



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/18/c...-practices-for-good-governance/#ixzz4FAnuPF4K
 
172952_600.jpg


DONALD TRUMP’S DARK, DARK CONVENTION SPEECH

By John Cassidy 7/22/2016

In the history of democracies, there are numerous instances of authoritarian “strongmen” rising to power, and virtually all have based their appeal on a promise to restore order. Donald Trump clearly aspires to join this list, and, in one sense, his apocalyptic speech accepting the Republican nomination for President, on Thursday night in Cleveland, merely confirmed what we already know.

By the time Trump took the stage at the Quicken Loans Arena, at about 10:20 p.m., there was little mystery about what he would say. The speech had been leaked to Politico and other news organizations hours earlier, and it made for grim reading. “Our Convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation,” Trump was slated to say in his opening. “The attacks on our police, and the terrorism in our cities, threaten our very way of life. Any politician who does not grasp this danger is not fit to lead our country.” As a cure-all for these ills, and the many others he detailed in the draft, he was to present a simple and straightforward solution: his election to the Oval Office. “I have a message for all of you,” the text read. “The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon come to an end. Beginning on January 20, 2017, safety will be restored.”

But it is one thing to read a blatant appeal to fear and nationalism coupled with a self-directed exegesis of the “great man” theory of history; it is another to see it delivered in person by a skilled communicator, standing among a crowd of elected delegates chanting “U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!”

Trump set forth with a lengthy indictment of the status quo, starting out with crime. “Decades of progress made in bringing down crime are now being reversed by this Administration’s rollback of criminal enforcement,” he said, citing rising (but cherry-picked) homicide rates in such cities as Baltimore, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. Then it was on to the illegal immigrants purportedly flooding the streets of America. Nearly a hundred and eighty thousand, Trump said, “with criminal records, ordered deported from our country, are tonight roaming free to threaten peaceful citizens.” Read more





177326_600.jpg





That Was A Very Scary Speech Donald Trump Just Gave

Fear and loathing in Cleveland.

Jonathan Cohn 07/22/2016

CLEVELAND ― Be afraid. Be very afraid.

That was the essential message of the Republican National Convention this week and it was the same essential message that Donald Trump conveyed to the American people on Thursday evening, when he formally accepted his party’s nomination for president.

Maybe it isn’t surprising. From the day Trump announced his candidacy, warning about mythical rapists that Mexico was sending across the border, the real estate mogul has been telling people that they and their livelihoods were under siege ― from undocumented immigrants, global corporations, Muslim terrorists, elitist liberals, and criminals shooting cops.

He hit all of those themes in his speech Thursday and he hit them hard ― so hard, in fact, that he barely had time for anything else. The speech was long, even by convention speech standards. According to C-Span, it was the longest since 1972, eclipsing even Bill Clinton’s marathon in 1996.

Despite all that time, Trump gave almost no attention to other issues.

School choice and Obamacare each got just one line, while abortion got none. He spent a few minutes on the economy, but nearly all of it was about trade ― and how he intended to protect American jobs by ripping up old trade agreements and imposing tariffs on countries that don’t compete fairly.

The economy section also included one comically vague line ― “I will outline reforms to add millions of new jobs and trillions in new wealth” ― followed by a warning that his efforts “will be opposed by some of our nation’s most powerful special interests. That is because these interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit.”

The section on immigration, naturally, dwelled on the stories of people murdered by undocumented immigrants ― and some highly questionable statistics on how immigration has affected the economy. Even in those few moments when Trump was trying to appeal to idealism, he did so by portraying stories of people or communities under assault.

Maybe nobody should be surprised. Trump delivered his speech from a teleprompter, sticking mostly to the prepared text that had leaked hours before. But it was not much different from the extemporaneous riffs he’s been delivering at campaign stops for months ― or from what previous convention speakers, particularly former New York Mayor Rudy Guiliani and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, had said on previous nights.

Still, many political professionals had long assumed, and many Republican strategists had desperately hoped, that Trump would use this convention speech to “pivot” to a more positive, more inclusive America. It wouldn’t have been that difficult, if Trump had been even slightly interested in doing so. Read more



 
download (5).png



Is the U.S. economy as horrible as Donald Trump says it is?

By ALAIN SHERTER MONEYWATCH July 22, 2016

Donald Trump sure paints a dire picture of the U.S. economy. In accepting the Republican party's nomination for the presidency on Thursday, he described a country burdened by searing poverty, downward mobility and crushing national debt.

The real estate mogul is hardly the first candidate gunning for the White House to spotlight the nation's economic problems to score political points. The difference with Trump is that his downbeat assessment is part of a broader -- and darker -- vision of America that describes crime-ridden streets, terrorism in our cities and other woes that, as he said in his acceptance speech in Cleveland, "threaten our very way of life."

How close does this grim picture match up with reality? It's a critical question, especially given that a core narrative in Trump's campaign is aimed at lower-income Americans who are struggling to get by. Here's what the evidence shows about how the economy is really faring.

Hiring. At 4.9 percent, the jobless rate is near what most economists technically call the "non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment" -- in other words, the level below which wages and prices start to rise. That attests to the vigorous job growth since the economy collapsed in 2008. But the unemployment rate is only one gauge of the job market, and an incomplete one at that. The Federal Reserve's Labor Market Conditions Index, which factors in 19 different indicators, has fallen for six straight months, suggesting that employment growth is losing momentum. That could be because the economy is nearing full employment, which should lead to the kind of wage growth that puts more money in people's pockets; alternatively, that slowdown could suggest the U.S. is starting to cool, chilled by a broader decline in the global economy.

Layoffs. Far fewer Americans are filing for unemployment benefits these days -- in fact, the level of claims are at the lowest level since the early 1970s. Coupled with the decent job growth this year, along with data showing that more people are quitting their jobs because they're confident they can find a new one, the decline in layoffs is another sign the labor market remains in good shape.

Wages. Consumers account for nearly 70 percent of economic activity in the U.S., so how fast workers' pay is rising is among the most important benchmarks of economic performance. In June, median average annual wage growth reached 3.6 percent, up sharply from 1.6 percent when the economy was bottoming out in early 2010. Other measures suggest wage growth is less robust, but economists generally expect it to pick up in the second half of the year, driven by healthy employment gains.

Income. Trump's claim that median household income in the U.S. is $4,000 lower than in 2000 are misleading. Indeed, Americans have regained much of the financial ground they lost during the recession. The median annual household income (adjusted for inflation) as of June was $57,206, up 2.5 percent from last year's figure, according to an analysis of Census data by Sentier Research. What is true, by contrast, is that income growth during the recovery has been negligible. After hitting a low in 2011, family income is essentially at the same level as in December 2007 ($57,147), when the recession officially started; it's up a meager 2 percent since the downturn ended in June 2009 ($56,101). For most people, that feels like a treadmill.

Growth. During the recovery, gross domestic product -- the broadest measure of how the economy is doing -- has been stuck between 2 percent and 2.5 percent. That's not great. Historically, U.S. GDP growth has averaged around 3 percent, and at times it has surged above 4 percent, most recently during the 1990s technology boom. The reasons for the historically weak growth are complex and not fully understood, although many experts point to slowing productivity, a sign the economy is less dynamic than it was in past. Is there a way to turn things around? Yes, but that will likely require concerted fiscal and monetary policy action, a tall order when our political leaders are so divided.

Misery.
The so-called Misery Index combines the nation's unemployment and inflation rates, rising as jobs vanish and prices spike. The index peaked in 1980, at 20.76, under President Jimmy Carter, as the country wrestled with both high unemployment and surging inflation. With inflation muted and the jobless rate low, the index today is at 5.4, below even where it stood when the economy was growing fast in the late '90s.

Poverty. As of the late 1950s, more than 22 percent of Americans lived in poverty. That figure declined to roughly 11 percent in 1973, as the government pumped billions of dollars into alleviating a range of economic and social ills. Since 1980, though, the poverty rate has been on the rise, and the five official U.S. recessions since then have only accelerated it. As of 2014, nearly 15 percent of Americans, or roughly 47 million people, lived below the poverty line. Children have it worse, with more than 1 in 5 living in poverty.

The data above suggest that the economy isn't as bleak as Trump maintains. But things also aren't as rosy as some of his Democratic critics contend. More important, these numbers don't tell the whole story, offering only an approximation of what life is like for those who have fallen through the statistical cracks or who, while drawing a paycheck, grapple with financial insecurity. Nor do they capture the corrosive economic toll of rising inequality in the U.S.

One recent trend that reveals the contours of this "other economy": For the first time in more than a century, millions of Americans have seen their life expectancy slip in recent years, largely because of a rise in suicides and substance abuse. The cause? A growing sense of despair, some experts think.

The economy may not be the abject failure Trump insists it is, but by some measures the picture certainly isn't pretty.



 
Meanwhile, Hillary is very close to picking up her VP, I hope it’s going to be Sen. Tim Kaine.
Hooray, finally, Hillary selects Sen. Tim Kaine, a well respected centrist senator from a battleground state of Virginia, an excellent choice.

He has an impressive resume, is a graduate of Harvard law school, started his career as a civil rights attorney, was mayor of Richmond, governor of Virginia, chairman of the Democratic National Committee and was elected to the U.S. Senate from Virginia. He serves on the powerful Armed Service, Foreign Relations and Budget committees.

According to his official website, he is one of 20 Americans to have been a mayor, governor and US Senator and has never lost an election.

What really impresses me about him is that he has attended a black church for the last 30 years, speaks fluent Spanish and has been a civil right attorney, has traveled a lot as a senator and has tremendous knowledge of important foreign affairs issues and he’s truly a great American who represents the best of us.


Here is more about Sen. Tim:

Sen. Tim Kaine


-0f0a211b2a2bb06f.JPG
 

Attachments

  • -0f0a211b2a2bb06f.JPG
    -0f0a211b2a2bb06f.JPG
    81.3 KB · Views: 12
Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy

By Editorial Board July 22 2016

DONALD J. TRUMP, until now a Republican problem, this week became a challenge the nation must confront and overcome. The real estate tycoon is uniquely unqualified to serve as president, in experience and temperament. He is mounting a campaign of snarl and sneer, not substance. To the extent he has views, they are wrong in their diagnosis of America’s problems and dangerous in their proposed solutions. Mr. Trump’s politics of denigration and division could strain the bonds that have held a diverse nation together. His contempt for constitutional norms might reveal the nation’s two-century-old experiment in checks and balances to be more fragile than we knew.

Any one of these characteristics would be disqualifying; together, they make Mr. Trump a peril. We recognize that this is not the usual moment to make such a statement. In an ordinary election year, we would acknowledge the Republican nominee, move on to the Democratic convention and spend the following months, like other voters, evaluating the candidates’ performance in debates, on the stump and in position papers. This year we will follow the campaign as always, offering honest views on all the candidates.
But we cannot salute the Republican nominee or pretend that we might endorse him this fall. A Trump presidency would be dangerous for the nation and the world.

Why are we so sure? Start with experience. It has been 64 years since a major party nominated anyone for president who did not have electoral experience. That experiment turned out pretty well — but Mr. Trump, to put it mildly, is no Dwight David Eisenhower. Leading the Allied campaign to liberate Europe from the Nazis required strategic and political skills of the first order, and Eisenhower — though he liked to emphasize his common touch as he faced the intellectual Democrat Adlai Stevenson — was shrewd, diligent, humble and thoughtful.


In contrast, there is nothing on Mr. Trump’s résumé to suggest he could function successfully in Washington. He was staked in the family business by a well-to-do father and has pursued a career marked by some real estate successes, some failures and repeated episodes of saving his own hide while harming people who trusted him. Given his continuing refusal to release his tax returns, breaking with a long bipartisan tradition, it is only reasonable to assume there are aspects of his record even more discreditable than what we know.

The lack of experience might be overcome if Mr. Trump saw it as a handicap worth overcoming. But he displays no curiosity,
reads no books and appears to believe he needs no advice. In fact, what makes Mr. Trump so unusual is his combination of extreme neediness and unbridled arrogance. He is desperate for affirmation but contemptuous of other views. He also is contemptuous of fact. Throughout the campaign, he has unspooled one lie after another — that Muslims in New Jersey celebrated after 9/11, that his tax-cut plan would not worsen the deficit, that he opposed the Iraq War before it started — and when confronted with contrary evidence, he simply repeats the lie. It is impossible to know whether he convinces himself of his own untruths or knows that he is wrong and does not care. It is also difficult to know which trait would be more frightening in a commander in chief.

Given his ignorance, it is perhaps not surprising that Mr. Trump offers no coherence when it comes to policy. In years past, he supported immigration reform, gun control and legal abortion; as candidate, he became a hard-line opponent of all three. Even in the course of the campaign, he has flip-flopped on issues such as whether Muslims should be banned from entering the United States and whether women who have abortions should be punished . Worse than the flip-flops is the absence of any substance in his agenda. Existing trade deals are “stupid,” but Mr. Trump does not say how they could be improved. The Islamic State must be destroyed, but the candidate offers no strategy for doing so. Eleven million undocumented immigrants must be deported, but Mr. Trump does not tell us how he would accomplish this legally or practically.

What the candidate does offer is a series of prejudices and gut feelings, most of them erroneous. Allies are taking advantage of the United States. Immigrants are committing crimes and stealing jobs. Muslims hate America. In fact, Japan and South Korea are major contributors to an alliance that has preserved a peace of enormous benefit to Americans. Immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans and take jobs that no one else will. Muslims are the primary victims of Islamist terrorism, and Muslim Americans, including thousands who have served in the military, are as patriotic as anyone else.

[Fareed Zakaria: America would be Trump’s banana republic]

The Trump litany of victimization has resonated with many Americans whose economic prospects have stagnated. They deserve a serious champion, and the challenges of inequality and slow wage growth deserve a serious response. But Mr. Trump has nothing positive to offer, only scapegoats and dark conspiracy theories. He launched his campaign by accusing Mexico of sending rapists across the border, and similar hatefulness has surfaced numerous times in the year since.

In a dangerous world, Mr. Trump speaks blithely of abandoning NATO, encouraging more nations to obtain nuclear weapons and cozying up to dictators who in fact wish the United States nothing but harm. For eight years, Republicans have criticized President Obama for “apologizing” for America and for weakening alliances. Now they put forward a candidate who mimics the vilest propaganda of authoritarian adversaries about how terrible the United States is and how unfit it is to lecture others. He has made clear that he would drop allies without a second thought. The consequences to global security could be disastrous.

Most alarming is Mr. Trump’s contempt for the Constitution and the unwritten democratic norms upon which our system depends. He doesn’t know what is in the nation’s founding document. When asked by a member of Congress about Article I, which enumerates congressional powers, the candidate responded, “I am going to abide by the Constitution whether it’s number 1, number 2, number 12, number 9.” The charter has seven articles.

Worse, he doesn’t seem to care about its limitations on executive power. He has threatened that those who criticize him will suffer when he is president. He has vowed to torture suspected terrorists and bomb their innocent relatives, no matter the illegality of either act. He has vowed to constrict the independent press. He went after a judge whose rulings angered him, exacerbating his contempt for the independence of the judiciary by insisting that the judge should be disqualified because of his Mexican heritage. Mr. Trump has encouraged and celebrated violence at his rallies. The U.S. democratic system is strong and has proved resilient when it has been tested before. We have faith in it. But to elect Mr. Trump would be to knowingly subject it to threat.

Mr. Trump campaigns by insult and denigration, insinuation and wild accusation: Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy; Hillary Clinton may be guilty of murder; Mr. Obama is a traitor who wants Muslims to attack. The Republican Party has moved the lunatic fringe onto center stage, with discourse that renders impossible the kind of substantive debate upon which any civil democracy depends.

Most responsible Republican leaders know all this to be true; that is why Mr. Trump had to rely so heavily on testimonials by relatives and employees during this week’s Republican convention. With one exception (Bob Dole), the living Republican presidents and presidential nominees of the past three decades all stayed away. But most current officeholders, even those who declared Mr. Trump to be an unthinkable choice only months ago, have lost the courage to speak out.

The party’s failure of judgment leaves the nation’s future where it belongs, in the hands of voters. Many Americans do not like either candidate this year . We have criticized the presumptive Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, in the past and will do so again when warranted. But we do not believe that she (or the Libertarian and Green party candidates, for that matter) represents a threat to the Constitution. Mr. Trump is a unique and present danger.


 
Obama lost several states in the 2012 election compared to the 2008 election. Democrats lose more states in the 2016 election and lose election when they lose Virginia, Ohio, Florida.
 
Look at this disgusting individual cracking a joke (and the disgusting media laughing along with him) when responding to a horrific incident that was unfolding:


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...talk-daughter-Malia-leaving-nest-college.html

Hillary will be Obama term 3 but with a PROVEN record of corruption and crime. Does anyone sensible want that?

@Desert Fox @Vergennes
@Desert Fox
Had Donald Trump done anything like that, the entire liberal MSM & liberal personalities across the USA & across the world (comedians,actors,companies etc) would have called him a shameless, disgusting, heartless ,monstrous creature at the very least.

The entire EU bureaucracy/leadership would have come out against him with Germans in the lead!!
Merkel or the German Cabinet Minister would have addressed a press conference lambasting him & that such a serious issue is nothing to laugh about. :angry:
-----
But now that Obama-the black liberal hero does it:-

" It's so "Coooollll" of him, so calm,so in control of the situation, so humorous & relaxing. What an amazing president we/those Americans have." :-) :agree:

You think this is disgusting?? You are a RACIST, you evil hate-filled bigot!! :mad:@Nilgiri

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I won't comment about that last line, HC & DT both are bad. DT has no experience of policy,is too mercurial. He seems to be a total dilettante when it comes to Foreign Policy & doesn't believe in Climate chance.

& HC... well we all know her multiple flaws. How evil,"Careless" & corrupt she is. She seems to be the sort of person who could invade Russia for the sake of democracy or NATO.

P.S:- She took chanda from Amar Singh & Sant Singh Chatwal directly through her foundation for supporting the Indo-US nuclear deal & to get rid of the sanctions her own hubbie had imposed on us. :rofl: How "flexible" of her.

Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy

By Editorial Board July 22 2016

DONALD J. TRUMP, until now a Republican problem, this week became a challenge the nation must confront and overcome. The real estate tycoon is uniquely unqualified to serve as president, in experience and temperament. He is mounting a campaign of snarl and sneer, not substance. To the extent he has views, they are wrong in their diagnosis of America’s problems and dangerous in their proposed solutions. Mr. Trump’s politics of denigration and division could strain the bonds that have held a diverse nation together. His contempt for constitutional norms might reveal the nation’s two-century-old experiment in checks and balances to be more fragile than we knew.

Any one of these characteristics would be disqualifying; together, they make Mr. Trump a peril. We recognize that this is not the usual moment to make such a statement. In an ordinary election year, we would acknowledge the Republican nominee, move on to the Democratic convention and spend the following months, like other voters, evaluating the candidates’ performance in debates, on the stump and in position papers. This year we will follow the campaign as always, offering honest views on all the candidates.
But we cannot salute the Republican nominee or pretend that we might endorse him this fall. A Trump presidency would be dangerous for the nation and the world.

Why are we so sure? Start with experience. It has been 64 years since a major party nominated anyone for president who did not have electoral experience. That experiment turned out pretty well — but Mr. Trump, to put it mildly, is no Dwight David Eisenhower. Leading the Allied campaign to liberate Europe from the Nazis required strategic and political skills of the first order, and Eisenhower — though he liked to emphasize his common touch as he faced the intellectual Democrat Adlai Stevenson — was shrewd, diligent, humble and thoughtful.


In contrast, there is nothing on Mr. Trump’s résumé to suggest he could function successfully in Washington. He was staked in the family business by a well-to-do father and has pursued a career marked by some real estate successes, some failures and repeated episodes of saving his own hide while harming people who trusted him. Given his continuing refusal to release his tax returns, breaking with a long bipartisan tradition, it is only reasonable to assume there are aspects of his record even more discreditable than what we know.

The lack of experience might be overcome if Mr. Trump saw it as a handicap worth overcoming. But he displays no curiosity,
reads no books and appears to believe he needs no advice. In fact, what makes Mr. Trump so unusual is his combination of extreme neediness and unbridled arrogance. He is desperate for affirmation but contemptuous of other views. He also is contemptuous of fact. Throughout the campaign, he has unspooled one lie after another — that Muslims in New Jersey celebrated after 9/11, that his tax-cut plan would not worsen the deficit, that he opposed the Iraq War before it started — and when confronted with contrary evidence, he simply repeats the lie. It is impossible to know whether he convinces himself of his own untruths or knows that he is wrong and does not care. It is also difficult to know which trait would be more frightening in a commander in chief.

Given his ignorance, it is perhaps not surprising that Mr. Trump offers no coherence when it comes to policy. In years past, he supported immigration reform, gun control and legal abortion; as candidate, he became a hard-line opponent of all three. Even in the course of the campaign, he has flip-flopped on issues such as whether Muslims should be banned from entering the United States and whether women who have abortions should be punished . Worse than the flip-flops is the absence of any substance in his agenda. Existing trade deals are “stupid,” but Mr. Trump does not say how they could be improved. The Islamic State must be destroyed, but the candidate offers no strategy for doing so. Eleven million undocumented immigrants must be deported, but Mr. Trump does not tell us how he would accomplish this legally or practically.

What the candidate does offer is a series of prejudices and gut feelings, most of them erroneous. Allies are taking advantage of the United States. Immigrants are committing crimes and stealing jobs. Muslims hate America. In fact, Japan and South Korea are major contributors to an alliance that has preserved a peace of enormous benefit to Americans. Immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans and take jobs that no one else will. Muslims are the primary victims of Islamist terrorism, and Muslim Americans, including thousands who have served in the military, are as patriotic as anyone else.

[Fareed Zakaria: America would be Trump’s banana republic]

The Trump litany of victimization has resonated with many Americans whose economic prospects have stagnated. They deserve a serious champion, and the challenges of inequality and slow wage growth deserve a serious response. But Mr. Trump has nothing positive to offer, only scapegoats and dark conspiracy theories. He launched his campaign by accusing Mexico of sending rapists across the border, and similar hatefulness has surfaced numerous times in the year since.

In a dangerous world, Mr. Trump speaks blithely of abandoning NATO, encouraging more nations to obtain nuclear weapons and cozying up to dictators who in fact wish the United States nothing but harm. For eight years, Republicans have criticized President Obama for “apologizing” for America and for weakening alliances. Now they put forward a candidate who mimics the vilest propaganda of authoritarian adversaries about how terrible the United States is and how unfit it is to lecture others. He has made clear that he would drop allies without a second thought. The consequences to global security could be disastrous.

Most alarming is Mr. Trump’s contempt for the Constitution and the unwritten democratic norms upon which our system depends. He doesn’t know what is in the nation’s founding document. When asked by a member of Congress about Article I, which enumerates congressional powers, the candidate responded, “I am going to abide by the Constitution whether it’s number 1, number 2, number 12, number 9.” The charter has seven articles.

Worse, he doesn’t seem to care about its limitations on executive power. He has threatened that those who criticize him will suffer when he is president. He has vowed to torture suspected terrorists and bomb their innocent relatives, no matter the illegality of either act. He has vowed to constrict the independent press. He went after a judge whose rulings angered him, exacerbating his contempt for the independence of the judiciary by insisting that the judge should be disqualified because of his Mexican heritage. Mr. Trump has encouraged and celebrated violence at his rallies. The U.S. democratic system is strong and has proved resilient when it has been tested before. We have faith in it. But to elect Mr. Trump would be to knowingly subject it to threat.

Mr. Trump campaigns by insult and denigration, insinuation and wild accusation: Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy; Hillary Clinton may be guilty of murder; Mr. Obama is a traitor who wants Muslims to attack. The Republican Party has moved the lunatic fringe onto center stage, with discourse that renders impossible the kind of substantive debate upon which any civil democracy depends.

Most responsible Republican leaders know all this to be true; that is why Mr. Trump had to rely so heavily on testimonials by relatives and employees during this week’s Republican convention. With one exception (Bob Dole), the living Republican presidents and presidential nominees of the past three decades all stayed away. But most current officeholders, even those who declared Mr. Trump to be an unthinkable choice only months ago, have lost the courage to speak out.

The party’s failure of judgment leaves the nation’s future where it belongs, in the hands of voters. Many Americans do not like either candidate this year . We have criticized the presumptive Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, in the past and will do so again when warranted. But we do not believe that she (or the Libertarian and Green party candidates, for that matter) represents a threat to the Constitution. Mr. Trump is a unique and present danger.

How many articles have this same/similar headline? I've seen about 5-7 in the last few days #justaquestion #notbeingsarcastic

Certainly, Trump had conservatives in mind for picking, Pence, how this move plays out is yet to be seen. I think our good conservative friend, @Desertfalcon can shed some light on the issue.

According to the US Census Bureau data 52.1% of the electorates are females, and as many polls have shown that Hillary has an edge over Trump with the women voters, without narrowing that huge gap, I don’t think Trump has a chance to win the White House.
Disagree with the last line mate. & so does Nate Silver


I have observed,seen & written about politics & politicians around the world especially in South Asia. I have seen some of the most ruthless,pragmatic,unimaginable moves which have been made & which have both suceeded & failed.

& I firmly believe that DOnald trump depite his numerous flaws,mistakes & unorthodox moves has a chance at winning. It's not high now but it is far from zero. & the fact that Hillary Clinton is his opponent makes it easier for him to win.

& seeing the latest mails released by WIkileaks which prove the DNC was in cahoot with HC & tried to stop Sanders. I see Hillary losing many Sanders voters whom I doubt will vote for her now even if Sanders starts campaigning for her.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wikileaks-dnc-bernie-sanders_us_579381fbe4b02d5d5ed1d157

This could lead to a huge loss in credibility for the DNC & for Debbie Schultz especially.
 
Last edited:
24/07/2016

5 reasons Trump is going to win:

1. Midwest Math, or Welcome to Our Rust Belt Brexit. I believe Trump is going to focus much of his attention on the four blue states in the rustbelt of the upper Great Lakes - Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Four traditionally Democratic states - but each of them have elected a Republican governor since 2010 (only Pennsylvania has now finally elected a Democrat). In the Michigan primary in March, more Michiganders came out to vote for the Republicans (1.32 million) that the Democrats (1.19 million). Trump is ahead of Hillary in the latest polls in Pennsylvania and tied with her in Ohio. Tied? How can the race be this close after everything Trump has said and done? Well maybe it's because he's said (correctly) that the Clintons' support of NAFTA helped to destroy the industrial states of the Upper Midwest. Trump is going to hammer Clinton on this and her support of TPP and other trade policies that have royally screwed the people of these four states. When Trump stood in the shadow of a Ford Motor factory during the Michigan primary, he threatened the corporation that if they did indeed go ahead with their planned closure of that factory and move it to Mexico, he would slap a 35% tariff on any Mexican-built cars shipped back to the United States. It was sweet, sweet music to the ears of the working class of Michigan, and when he tossed in his threat to Apple that he would force them to stop making their iPhones in China and build them here in America, well, hearts swooned and Trump walked away with a big victory that should have gone to the governor next-door, John Kasich.

From Green Bay to Pittsburgh, this, my friends, is the middle of England - broken, depressed, struggling, the smokestacks strewn across the countryside with the carcass of what we use to call the Middle Class. Angry, embittered working (and nonworking) people who were lied to by the trickle-down of Reagan and abandoned by Democrats who still try to talk a good line but are really just looking forward to rub one out with a lobbyist from Goldman Sachs who'll write them nice big check before leaving the room. What happened in the UK with Brexit is going to happen here. Elmer Gantry shows up looking like Boris Johnson and just says whatever shit he can make up to convince the masses that this is their chance! To stick to ALL of them, all who wrecked their American Dream! And now The Outsider, Donald Trump, has arrived to clean house! You don't have to agree with him! You don't even have to like him! He is your personal Molotov cocktail to throw right into the center of the bastards who did this to you! SEND A MESSAGE! TRUMP IS YOUR MESSENGER!


And this is where the math comes in. In 2012, Mitt Romney lost by 64 electoral votes. Add up the electoral votes cast by Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It's 64. All Trump needs to do to win is to carry, as he's expected to do, the swath of traditional red states from Idaho to Georgia (states that'll never vote for Hillary Clinton), and then he just needs these four rust belt states. He doesn't need Florida. He doesn't need Colorado or Virginia. Just Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. And that will put him over the top. This is how it will happen in November.

2. The Last Stand of the Angry White Man. Our male-dominated, 240-year run of the USA is coming to an end. A woman is about to take over! How did this happen?! On our watch! There were warning signs, but we ignored them. Nixon, the gender traitor, imposing Title IX on us, the rule that said girls in school should get an equal chance at playing sports. Then they let them fly commercial jets. Before we knew it, Beyoncé stormed on the field at this year's Super Bowl (our game!) with an army of Black Women, fists raised, declaring that our domination was hereby terminated! Oh, the humanity!

That's a small peek into the mind of the Endangered White Male. There is a sense that the power has slipped out of their hands, that their way of doing things is no longer how things are done. This monster, the "Feminazi,"the thing that as Trump says, "bleeds through her eyes or wherever she bleeds," has conquered us -- and now, after having had to endure eight years of a black man telling us what to do, we're supposed to just sit back and take eight years of a woman bossing us around? After that it'll be eight years of the gays in the White House! Then the transgenders! You can see where this is going. By then animals will have been granted human rights and a fuckin' hamster is going to be running the country. This has to stop!

3. The Hillary Problem. Can we speak honestly, just among ourselves? And before we do, let me state, I actually like Hillary - a lot - and I think she has been given a bad rap she doesn't deserve. But her vote for the Iraq War made me promise her that I would never vote for her again. To date, I haven't broken that promise. For the sake of preventing a proto-fascist from becoming our commander-in-chief, I'm breaking that promise. I sadly believe Clinton will find a way to get us in some kind of military action. She's a hawk, to the right of Obama. But Trump's psycho finger will be on The Button, and that is that. Done and done.

Let's face it: Our biggest problem here isn't Trump - it's Hillary. She is hugely unpopular -- nearly 70% of all voters think she is untrustworthy and dishonest. She represents the old way of politics, not really believing in anything other than what can get you elected. That's why she fights against gays getting married one moment, and the next she's officiating a gay marriage. Young women are among her biggest detractors, which has to hurt considering it's the sacrifices and the battles that Hillary and other women of her generation endured so that this younger generation would never have to be told by the Barbara Bushes of the world that they should just shut up and go bake some cookies. But the kids don't like her, and not a day goes by that a millennial doesn't tell me they aren't voting for her. No Democrat, and certainly no independent, is waking up on November 8th excited to run out and vote for Hillary the way they did the day Obama became president or when Bernie was on the primary ballot. The enthusiasm just isn't there. And because this election is going to come down to just one thing -- who drags the most people out of the house and gets them to the polls -- Trump right now is in the catbird seat.

4. The Depressed Sanders Vote. Stop fretting about Bernie's supporters not voting for Clinton - we're voting for Clinton! The polls already show that more Sanders voters will vote for Hillary this year than the number of Hillary primary voters in '08 who then voted for Obama. This is not the problem. The fire alarm that should be going off is that while the average Bernie backer will drag him/herself to the polls that day to somewhat reluctantly vote for Hillary, it will be what's called a "depressed vote" - meaning the voter doesn't bring five people to vote with her. He doesn't volunteer 10 hours in the month leading up to the election. She never talks in an excited voice when asked why she's voting for Hillary. A depressed voter. Because, when you're young, you have zero tolerance for phonies and BS. Returning to the Clinton/Bush era for them is like suddenly having to pay for music, or using MySpace or carrying around one of those big-*** portable phones. They're not going to vote for Trump; some will vote third party, but many will just stay home. Hillary Clinton is going to have to do something to give them a reason to support her -- and picking a moderate, bland-o, middle of the road old white guy as her running mate is not the kind of edgy move that tells millenials that their vote is important to Hillary. Having two women on the ticket - that was an exciting idea. But then Hillary got scared and has decided to play it safe. This is just one example of how she is killing the youth vote.

5. The Jesse Ventura Effect. Finally, do not discount the electorate's ability to be mischievous or underestimate how any millions fancy themselves as closet anarchists once they draw the curtain and are all alone in the voting booth. It's one of the few places left in society where there are no security cameras, no listening devices, no spouses, no kids, no boss, no cops, there's not even a friggin' time limit. You can take as long as you need in there and no one can make you do anything. You can push the button and vote a straight party line, or you can write in Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck. There are no rules. And because of that, and the anger that so many have toward a broken political system, millions are going to vote for Trump not because they agree with him, not because they like his bigotry or ego, but just because they can. Just because it will upset the apple cart and make mommy and daddy mad. And in the same way like when you're standing on the edge of Niagara Falls and your mind wonders for a moment what would that feel like to go over that thing, a lot of people are going to love being in the position of puppetmaster and plunking down for Trump just to see what that might look like. Remember back in the '90s when the people of Minnesota elected a professional wrestler as their governor? They didn't do this because they're stupid or thought that Jesse Ventura was some sort of statesman or political intellectual. They did so just because they could. Minnesota is one of the smartest states in the country. It is also filled with people who have a dark sense of humor -- and voting for Ventura was their version of a good practical joke on a sick political system. This is going to happen again with Trump.

Coming back to the hotel after appearing on Bill Maher's Republican Convention special this week on HBO, a man stopped me. "Mike," he said, "we have to vote for Trump. We HAVE to shake things up." That was it. That was enough for him. To "shake things up." President Trump would indeed do just that, and a good chunk of the electorate would like to sit in the bleachers and watch that reality show.

(Next week I will post my thoughts on Trump's Achilles Heel and how I think he can be beat.)

5 Reasons Why Trump Will Win, by Michael Moore on huffington post.

Trump is up in new polling:
chart.png



uasdata usc edu/ data/ election-poll
 
Back
Top Bottom