Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[KerleyQ]

8 hours ago, needschocolate said:

In the example given above, wouldn't Donald have to report $40 million as income, because it is forgiveness of debt?  He spent $40 million and doesn't have to pay it back, makes it income, doesn't it? I heard someone one on the news mention that Trump hadn't reported forgiveness of debt income.  

I also heard, as you mentioned, that he deducted the losses of others.  I understood this to mean that, for example, he put $80 million int a project, and other investors put in $30 million, but Donald deducted the full $110 loss when the project went belly up.  

I heard a reporter ask a Trump surrogate why Trump didn't release his taxes and if Trump ever would and the surrogate claimed the standard excuse "under audit" and said that Trump would release them when the audit was done.  He also said that Trump has been audited for the last 15 years, so I guess that means, since he is "always" under audit, he will never release them.  

According to a CPA friend of mine, if the IRS audits you and finds nothing wrong, they don't keep auditing you.  If Trump has really been audited every year for the last 15 years, the IRS must be finding something improper being reported on his returns.  

What Trump apparently did was when the debt was forgiven, he issued the creditors new bonds "worth" $40 million.  Then, instead of reporting income of $40 million, he reports outstanding debt of $40 million.  Of course, he knew when he was issuing these bonds that they were worthless, but when has anything like honesty and ethics been an issue for him? 

[Padma]

Even if (when) Trump loses, he'll have at least 60 million Americans who voted for him.

When you know that--and maybe it will be 5 to 10 million more--it's really hard to have faith in the intelligence and judgement of the American people. That's just too many people willingly supporting the least qualified candidate in our history, a man who refuses to provide ANY transparency about his (very questionable) business practices--the only "record" he has for voters to look at--, and is, far and away, the biggest liar of any American politician,, per impartial fact-checkers.

Yet at least 60 million Americans will vote for him, including the Speaker of the House who said Trump is a racist, a  Rep enator from Texas who thinks Trump is a "pathological liar" and a Rep senator from Florida who believes he's a "conman"

[Kitty Redstone]

While I'm also disheartened at the number of people who are supporting Cheetos Mussolini given his complete disregard for the democratic institutions of this country and his embracing of completely deplorable people and all his other shadiness and horribleness, I don't think he'll get 60 million. 

[millennium]

I just saw Trump is doubling down on his pledge to eradicate Obamacare in the first week of his presidency.

I signed up for Obamacare when it first came out.   I had to.   I was buying my personal health insurance through a state-subsidized exchange and Obamacare replaced that.   Previously, I was paying more than $500/month, with the price increasing on average about 20% annually. 

The first year on Obamacare, my rate dropped to about $430/month.   But I could no longer see my regular doctor.  I became one of those people "betrayed" by Obama for "lying" that you could keep your doctor.   I wasn't happy about it, but I didn't get angry.   I'm pretty healthy.   My visits to doctors are the bare minimum.   I weighed my inconvenience against the idea that suddenly a lot of people who have a more dire need for health care but were denied it previously due to cost or pre-existing conditions could now see doctors again.   In that light, I couldn't complain.

The following year, a lot of the bugs were worked out of the Obamacare system.  I re-enrolled when the time came, moving to a better plan.  This time around, state subsidies that hadn't previously been available came into play.   I was able to return to my original doctor AND my monthly cost dropped to about $40/month. 

If it weren't for Obamacare, my monthly cost for health insurance, given the annual rate of increase, would be close to $1000/month, making it unaffordable for me.

Donald Trump wants to rip affordable health care away from me in January and replace it with ... how did he put it? ... "something better."

I'm a healthy person and I'm worried about how things might turn out in the very near future.  I can't imagine the sleeplessness and anxiety this horrible little man is causing for all the very sick people and low income families across the land.

Edited November 2, 2016 by millennium

[theredhead77]

1 hour ago, mythoughtis said:

Would someone please explain voting to Donald? Now he's telling early voters to go change their vote.  Here in Illinois, your votes are not attached to you. There is no way to void your vote after its fed into the machine and accepted.  

WTF?

 

Seriously.

 

What.The.Fuck?

[photo fox]

As much as this pains me, he is correct in some states (not Illinois): 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/national/can-you-change-your-early-vote-yes-some-states/CAmFsM9kabIeog0sGVOTyJ/

But he's still an idiot, and I'm still waiting for a small asteroid strike. 

[Rapunzel]

1 hour ago, millennium said:

I just saw Trump is doubling down on his pledge to eradicate Obamacare in the first week of his presidency.

I signed up for Obamacare when it first came out.   I had to.   I was buying my personal health insurance through a state-subsidized exchange and Obamacare replaced that.   Previously, I was paying more than $500/month, with the price increasing on average about 20% annually. 

The first year on Obamacare, my rate dropped to about $430/month.   But I could no longer see my regular doctor.  I became one of those people "betrayed" by Obama for "lying" that you could keep your doctor.   I wasn't happy about it, but I didn't get angry.   I'm pretty healthy.   My visits to doctors are the bare minimum.   I weighed my inconvenience against the idea that suddenly a lot of people who have a more dire need for health care but were denied it previously due to cost or pre-existing conditions could now see doctors again.   In that light, I couldn't complain.

The following year, a lot of the bugs were worked out of the Obamacare system.  I re-enrolled when the time came, moving to a better plan.  This time around, state subsidies that hadn't previously been available came into play.   I was able to return to my original doctor AND my monthly cost dropped to about $40/month. 

If it weren't for Obamacare, my monthly cost for health insurance, given the annual rate of increase, would be close to $1000/month, making it unaffordable for me.

Donald Trump wants to rip affordable health care away from me in January and replace it with ... how did he put it? ... "something better."

I'm a healthy person and I'm worried about how things might turn out in the very near future.  I can't imagine the sleeplessness and anxiety this horrible little man is causing for all the very sick people and low income families across the land.

Thanks for sharing this. I can't believe the difference in cost and the dramatic drop in your monthly premium. That's amazing.

I admit, I don't know a ton about Obamacare as I have fairly decent insurance through my employer, however when my Father passed away about a year ago I was helping my stepmom tried to decide what to do and looked into it a bit - she ended up paying COBRA and keeping my Father's plan as it was excellent coverage and only cost her about $400/month. Her biggest concern was keeping her own doctors and the switch would have affected that and she decided she couldn't handle changing physicians for a variety of reasons, including the fact that most of the doctor's she would have to switch to who would accept the plan she needed were pretty far away. She doesn't live in one of the more major cities and the closest place for her to get care is a little over 50 miles each way from where they lived.

Trump actually said he would replace Obamacare with "something terrific." Other than that really detailed plan, he just stated that healthcare would be private, and, according to "The Hill" Trump stated:

Quote

"At the lower end, where people have no money, I want to try and help those people," he said, adding that he would “work out some sort of a really smart deal with hospitals across the country” to cover the costs of care.

Wow. Sounds like something that will really fix all of our healthcare issues, doesn't it? What a fabulous plan - the. best.plan.ever. Most.terrific.healthcare.ever.  I'm being completely sarcastic here, of course. Anyway, keep telling yourself this shit you Puffy Cheeto. I can't believe his supporters don't want more detail. I'm sure many of them will be affected by this and they should care about how affordable healthcare will be for them and the level of care they will have access to.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Rapunzel

[GHScorpiosRule]

I was grateful to Obamacare because I have several pre-existing conditions, so no insurance companies could deny me coverage because of them; even though I hadn't had any relapses/was in remission.

And I know that he's saying Obamacare is the "worst," but what he's said he would replace it with, sounds so utterly ridiculous. He didn't say "something better" but "something terrific." Yeah, that's something tangible.

[BookWoman56]

58 minutes ago, Padma said:

Even if (when) Trump loses, he'll have at least 60 million Americans who voted for him.

When you know that--and maybe it will be 5 to 10 million more--it's really hard to have faith in the intelligence and judgement of the American people. That's just too many people willingly supporting the least qualified candidate in our history, a man who refuses to provide ANY transparency about his (very questionable) business practices--the only "record" he has for voters to look at--, and is, far and away, the biggest liar of any American politician,, per impartial fact-checkers.

Yet at least 60 million Americans will vote for him, including the Speaker of the House who said Trump is a racist, a  Rep enator from Texas who thinks Trump is a "pathological liar" and a Rep senator from Florida who believes he's a "conman"

I keep telling myself that if he loses, I can at least have the comfort of knowing that the majority of people here do not buy into his mindset. But if he does win, I honestly do not know if I can continue living in a country where the majority of people either flatly approve of Trump and what he stands for or are stupid enough to believe all the pro-Trump, anti-Hillary lies being spouted. I know that it would be better to stay and then vote the fucker out of office the next time around, but this election has made me distrust the general public even more than I used to. I'd hate to see a return to voting requirements that were intended to discriminate against minority groups, but FFS it seems like there should be a requirement that people who get to vote know something other than what Faux News tells them.

[mythoughtis]

My husband and son both have pre-existing conditions. When we were both self employed, my husband was on a plan provided by the state at $500 a month, 10 years ago. My son and I had cheaper coverage.  Now we are all covered under my employers plan, but my son is almost 25. He can move to his more expensive employer plan, as long as that is still provided and he is still employed. Obama care reminds me of that state plan for my husband - expensive because the healthy people go elsewhere - but very very necessary. 

Bookwoman - should he win, he won't actually govern. He will get bored, act as a figurehead. We will be in gridlock for 4 years. 

[Kitty Redstone]

LOD talked about Cheetos' Russian connections at the end of his show tonight.  I really hope the interconnections of Donald and his financial ties to Russia (and his refusal to release his tax returns), communication between his server and that Russian bank, two of his advisors and their connections to Russia, and the Russian hack of the DNC becomes a huge story.  It's a big deal, and I have a difficult time believing that anyone who claims to be patriotic would vote for this.

[clb1016]

3 minutes ago, Kitty Redstone said:

LOD talked about Cheetos' Russian connections at the end of his show tonight.  I really hope the interconnections of Donald and his financial ties to Russia (and his refusal to release his tax returns), communication between his server and that Russian bank, two of his advisors and their connections to Russia, and the Russian hack of the DNC becomes a huge story.  It's a big deal, and I have a difficult time believing that anyone who claims to be patriotic would vote for this.

I just hope that, if he loses the election, all of this stuff isn't just forgotten.  There should still be follow-up on all his various scandals because some may involve actual crimes.

[Kitty Redstone]

Yes, totally agree!

[random chance]

12 minutes ago, BookWoman56 said:

IBut if he does win, I honestly do not know if I can continue living in a country where the majority of people either flatly approve of Trump and what he stands for or are stupid enough to believe all the pro-Trump, anti-Hillary lies being spouted.

This is what I'm telling myself: if he wins, it'll be crystal clear early on that he's an utter fraud who won't do any of the things he claimed he would do, and the Trumpsters will turn on him like a pack of rabid dogs.

[33kaitykaity]

1 minute ago, random chance said:

This is what I'm telling myself: if he wins, it'll be crystal clear early on that he's an utter fraud who won't do any of the things he claimed he would do, and the Trumpsters will turn on him like a pack of rabid dogs.

I think Drumpf would do the presidential duties that get him off, stroke his ego -- the rallies, the state dinners -- and the actual governing will be left to Medeival Mike so MM can implement national funeral service required for all miscarriages/abortions.  Kasich turned this deal down before Drmpf offered it to MM.  

[clb1016]

2 minutes ago, 33kaitykaity said:

I think Drumpf would do the presidential duties that get him off, stroke his ego -- the rallies, the state dinners -- and the actual governing will be left to Medeival Mike so MM can implement national funeral service required for all miscarriages/abortions.  Kasich turned this deal down before Drmpf offered it to MM.  

I've been saying this for a year.  He doesn't want to be president so much as he wants to win the presidency, because that would make him the biggest winner of all.

[theredhead77]

LOCK HIM (Comey) UP!

[Kromm]

3 hours ago, photo fox said:

Seriously.  They* would believe this.  I've been supporting McMullin on social media, and you CANNOT get through to these Trump people that even if McMullin takes Utah, it will NOT help elect Clinton.  The electoral college has to be won by a majority, not a plurality.  Apparently they all need to take basic math again.  And civics.  And logic.  All they can do is spittle-scream, "A vote for him is a vote for Hillary!  And lies!  And dead babies!  And ISIS!  And you're going to HELL!!!!!"

Clinton REALLY needs to win both the Electoral AND Popular vote (at least nationwide) to help shut down this bullshit cycle Trump has started towards open rebellion against Democracy. 

[Padma]

At the end of EVERY Trump rally, they always play "You Can't Always Get What You Want".

Ironic that neither the candidate nor his cultists seem to understand that's part and parcel of life in a democracy.

[random chance]

42 minutes ago, 33kaitykaity said:

I think Drumpf would do the presidential duties that get him off, stroke his ego -- the rallies, the state dinners -- and the actual governing will be left to Medeival Mike so MM can implement national funeral service required for all miscarriages/abortions.  Kasich turned this deal down before Drmpf offered it to MM.  

Even so, he won't be doing any of the fabulous things Trump has promised, because they simply aren't possible. There will not be any fantastic cheap health insurance, there won't be millions of new jobs, the miners and steel workers will not be going back to work, U.S. jobs won't be coming back from overseas, there won't be a wall, and so on. He won't be "draining the swamp," because he can't do that without the swamp's cooperation. He won't be making America "great" again because he doesn't have a time machine to take us all back to when his fans thought America was great (I'm guessing in the 50's). And since he's gone on record a thousand times about how fast everything will change, it'll be clear pretty quickly that it was all delusional jibberjabber.

[Jaded]

CNN Guest in Fight with Lewandowski: ‘I’m Not Getting Paid by One of the Candidates, OK?’

[backformore]

The Russian troll thing -  OK, I am new to posting on Twitter, and this makes sense to me now.   for the past few days Trump has been reigned in.  His tweets are being controlled by someone else, I am sure, because there's no impulsive attacks. 

But for a while. he would post all kinds of crap, and have 20,000 "likes"  within hours.   Those Russian trolls said they have hundreds of accounts, so it makes more sense.  AND there were a lot of anti-Trump posts which would generate arguments and attacks.  Any tweets they see about the rape case, from certain accounts, get reply after reply saying "that's dumb af"  and "everyone knows that was made up" . 

There are also people on twitter doing an "analysis"  state by state of which candidate will win, based on twitter and FB followers - of course, Trump will win all but two states.  Whatever - it's bullshit, since most twitter users don't say what state they live in.   AND - a lot of people, including those in the  media "follow"  Trump on Twitter so they can read what he says. 

Edited November 2, 2016 by backformore

[backformore]

I saw a clip on TV of Trump at a rally,  telling people that if they changed their minds, after doing early voting for Hillary, they  could go to the polls on election day and ask for their vote to be changed.   It sounds like he wants his supporters to vote for him and say they had early-voted, and wanted their previous vote to not count.  Is he trying to RIG the election?  telling supporters to lie? 

And I'm imagining someone who goes to early voting, votes for Hillary - then attends a Trump rally?  WHY? if they were undecided, they wouldn't have vted early.   And then, because they hear some vague thing about emails that they never heard before, and hear Trump's wonderful words about how he is going to make America great,  they feel duped by Hillary, are convinced that Trump is their guy, and now they have to change their vote.   Really?   Sounds like something out of a bad sitcom. 

Edited November 2, 2016 by backformore

[zxy556575]

12 hours ago, Pixel said:

It made me wonder- I'd been thinking about how these forums are overwhelmingly anti-Trump  that doesn't correlate to what I see on FB comments or other comment sections like on The NY Times. Makes me wonder if the difference is that there aren't any bots posting here. I have seen only tepid barbs at Hillary, and nobody who is admitting to being pro-Trump. Even those saying negative things about Hillary say they aren't voting Trump.

There were at least a couple of Trump supporters but they got shouted down pretty quickly. For whatever reason, posters here do seem to lean left, so it's probably not worth the trouble for conservatives to go against the tide.

HuffPo had an article about an erotic novel from 2012 that was announced with Trump's name as author but was changed prior to publication. Apparently, for once, he reconsidered his self-promoting actions. Wonder if the ghostwriter still had to give Trump any royalties.

Edited November 2, 2016 by lordonia

[Rapunzel]

There's an article in the Washington Post stating that the Dems just filed lawsuits against Trump and the Republicans for an alleged "campaign of vigilante voter intimidation."

Here's part of the article (I'll see if I can find the full link, but since I'm still having issues posting I put everything into Word first and then carry it over here and forget to put the links into Word):

Quote

Democratic Party officials filed lawsuits in four states this week against presidential candidate Donald Trump and the Republican Party, accusing campaign officials and supporters of seeking to threaten minorities to keep them from voting.

With the bitter election just days away from a seeming conclusion, these lawsuits were part of a flurry of legal action that could alter what voters experience on Election Day and how party officials can approach voters going forward.

The federal lawsuits in four battleground states — Arizona, Nevada, Ohio and Pennsylvania — arrived just over a week before Election Day and amid polls showing a tightening campaign between Trump and Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent. In these lawsuits, officials accuse Trump’s campaign and his backers of what the Ohio complaint describes as a “coordinated campaign of vigilante voter intimidation.”

Trump has repeatedly described the election as “rigged” without offering any evidence, claims that have worried officials preparing for potential unrest or violence on Election Day. Party leaders and officials across the country have also expressed concerns about voter intimidation and problems at the polls.

In the Ohio lawsuit, the state Democratic Party asked a federal judge to stop the Trump campaign, state party officials and a group associated with Trump supporter Roger Stone from sending people not officially appointed as poll watchers to voting locations.

Glad to see that the Dems are trying to do something here, but hopefully it isn't too late. Of course, the Republicans in Ohio responded by saying that this is "bogus" but they have to file a response to the suit by the end of the day Wednesday, as do the other states.

The article also mentions that Voter Rights Advocates are getting more calls than usual about problems and possible hostile behavior at the polls. Apparently, in Tampa Bay, Trump Supporters were “screaming at voters using bullhorns outside of a polling site. Video posted by news outlet ProPublica showed a Trump supporter on a bullhorn yelling, ‘How many Syrian refugees, Muslim refugees, are you taking into your home?’”.  

There is mention of another legal filing that happened on Monday where a Federal Judge ordered the RNC and the Trump campaign “to turn over ‘all agreements between the committee and the Trump campaign’ regarding voter fraud, ballot security, ballot integrity, poll watching, or poll monitoring.”

Keep in mind that the RNC is still under the 1982 Consent Decree (at least until near the end of 2017), which means that the RNC is prevented from engaging in “some voter fraud prevention efforts without prior court consent.” More specifically, this means that the RNC cannot engage in such things like those related to “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud, especially in areas where racial or ethnic makeup could be considered a reason for the activities.” Trump's campaign has openly admitted that they are intentionally trying to "drive down turnout among African-American voters."

The RNC has complained about this Decree for some time as they claim it is basically too ambiguous. So they really can’t tell if they are intimidating a voter or not? Clearly there are examples of this happening already, including them admitting to trying to suppress voting from at least 3 groups,  one of which being the African Americans I mentioned above. The others, if I remember right, were Muslim Americans and educated females.  I would also think the incident in Tampa Bay would qualify as voter intimidation, especially given the racial/ethnic factor, and the behavior of the woman in IA, the man in NC, etc. seem to qualify as voter fraud. The RNC and Trump should be held accountable for this – they got themselves into this mess decades ago for pulling the same shit, which is why the Decree exists. It’s no surprise that Puffy Cheeto is basically ignoring it and making his own rules to get himself elected as Dictator.

Another concern is that, if any Party wants to have official Poll Watchers out, those Poll Watchers are supposed to make themselves known to poll workers and Election officials to help avoid the appearance of impropriety. They are supposed to be on record (in writing, I believe) at the polling place if they are a Poll Watcher.  If they fail to do this, they can potentially face legal charges.

Of course, Trump doesn’t seem to care about this one either. He just tells people to go out there and sit and watch and report “suspicious behavior,” especially in "certain areas." Suspicious behavior to him is any woman, minority, etc. even setting foot in a polling place. In addition, it seems a lot of the people that Trump and the Republicans may have had out there “poll watching” are trying to pass themselves off as “citizen journalists” who claim are trying to collect legitimate exit poll info and they may even be given fake ID badges to make them seem official – this may be how they are trying to beat the registration requirement. Though selling the "citizen journalist" angle might be a tricky if they are toting a gun around with them as well.

What makes things even more worrisome for this election is that, apparently, for the first time in decades, the Justice Department cannot send out enough official “special election observers” to help monitor things and ensure compliance with Federal Laws. Instead, they plan on sending out attorneys, and they would need to get permission in nearly half of the states to be there to observe and help ensure compliance. They are also trying to recruit other types of volunteers as well (and give them basically a crash course on how to do things appropriately, what to report, etc.), and the League of Women Voters will be sending people, but I believe they still have to get permission to be there as well, whereas, if the Justice Department could send enough of their official people, I don’t think permission is required for them.

What happens at polling places where they grant permission to the Trump “poll watchers” but deny it to the attorneys and other volunteers who are supposed to help monitor things? How could that not be considered a form of tampering?

The amount of violations that have already been committed in this election by Trump, Comey, the RNC, etc. is staggering. Again, he just  cannot win this election and destroy our Country – especially not with all this controversy and the fact that people could be charged with some very serious crimes, including Trump, when these things are investigated further. You have violations of the Hatch Act, possible treason, election tampering, violations of the RNC Consent Decree, etc. Why isn’t there more being done to prevent these things? Instead, the list of violations just keeps on growing and it’s really sickening. Look at all the damage Puffy Cheeto has already done and the division he is causing within the Country and he isn't even in office yet. The sick bastard actually seems to feed off of it and enjoy it. When he loses (trying to stay positive here), he needs to be either thrown in jail or be forced to surrender his citizenship. He can move to Russia and become Putin's right hand man - though I have a feeling Putin wouldn't like having a man like Trump interfering in how he runs his Country. Trump, of course, would most certainly try to interfere because he can't keep his mouth shut and also because, as he's mentioned so many times, he is the smartest, most brilliant man ever who knows everything about everything and is just so great at diplomacy, knows more about military strategy than any 4 star general, etc., so Putin would probably put him in jail.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Rapunzel

[MulletorHater]

And, meanwhile, back at the ranch, while the mainstream media focuses on Huma and her estranged husband's emails, Drumpf has 75(!) ongoing legal actions that no one is talking about.   Trump's Ongoing Legal Battles

As is typical, Drumpf was projecting when he claimed that electing Secretary Clinton would result in a constitutional crisis.  We can get through that if it happens.  But, we're supposed to sit here and have no problem with a president (Lord, please--no!) who has numerous business-related unresolved cases, not to mention the rape trial, the Trump "University" trials and the investigation into Trump Foundation in New York.  But, I guess if a sitting president and first lady can be endlessly investigated for a failed land deal in Arkansas and claims of sexual assault, anything is possible.

It's interesting that the same people who shrieked that the Clintons brought dishonor to the White House are more than willing to put a thieving con artist, rapist and Putin-loving traitor in there.

Media Matters has also been tracking the amount of media coverage given to the emails versus Drumpf's massive tax dodge.

[HumblePi]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/11/01/the-kkks-official-newspaper-has-endorsed-donald-trump-for-president/

[Nidratime]

Video shows Trump with mob figure he denied knowing
https://www.yahoo.com/news/video-shows-trump-with-mob-figure-he-denied-knowing-090025964.html?ref=gs

By the way, the video interview of Mike Isikoff, the reporter for this story, is very good.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Nidratime

[Pixel]

So, I was talking to my boss this morning (who is just as terrified about a Trump win as I am) and she had no idea about the rape case with the 13 year old girl.  No idea! This is a very well informed, intelligent lady - who HATES Trump!  I was actually kind of floored. I knew it wasn't being talked about in the media, but I thought people knew about it.

[zxy556575]

51 minutes ago, Pixel said:

So, I was talking to my boss this morning (who is just as terrified about a Trump win as I am) and she had no idea about the rape case with the 13 year old girl.

I've brought it up to several Democratic friends who flat out didn't believe me. "Please. That has to be a campaign lie." Had to forward them the copies of the filing.

I still fault the media for not reporting it, but I have no doubt that Trump will choose a monetary settlement and non-disclosure clause.

Edited November 2, 2016 by lordonia

[backformore]

Jon Stewart recently  told a story about Trump starting a Twitter war with him back in 2013:

Unbelievable that someone so impulsive and childish might get to be president!

[Shannon L.]

Anyone remember the movie 9 to 5?  It just occurred to me that Trump is Frank Hart, the sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigot! 

1 hour ago, lordonia said:

I've brought it up to several Democratic friends who flat out didn't believe me. "Please. That has to be a campaign lie." Had to forward them the copies of the filing.

I heard a caller today on the radio tell the host this and the host needed to have his people fact check it before he would talk about.  I don't know that he wasn't aware of the story in general or if he needed to be sure of certain details that the caller mentioned, but still....it's just crazy that it's not reported more than it has been. 

[Ohwell]

7 hours ago, lordonia said:

There were at least a couple of Trump supporters but they got shouted down pretty quickly. For whatever reason, posters here do seem to lean left, so it's probably not worth the trouble for conservatives to go against the tide.

It's not just just Trump supporters (I am definitely NOT) who get shouted down.  It's people like myself who don't want him or her and will either not vote for president and just vote down ballot, or will vote for the third party candidate.   

[backformore]

this morning, Trump once again had a number of tweets, each almost immediately with 20,000 to 30,000 "likes".

here's one:

Quote

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 6h6 hours ago

You can change your vote in six states. So, now that you see that Hillary was a big mistake, change your vote to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

Edited November 2, 2016 by backformore

[needschocolate]

Saw the some of an interview on MSNBC with Stephanie Somebody talking to the General who is a Trump surrogate.  She asks him about the ties to Russia and Trump's fondness for Putin (she put it nicer than that).  Well, she tries to ask him about this but he just keeps interrupting and talking over her to spout off about the emails and how Hillary was part of the group that gave a bunch of money to Iran so they can build nukes.  Eventually he says that the US has to work with Putin not antagonize him, like Hillary wants to do.  Aargh.  The reporter tried to get her point across, but was also so polite with him - "please let me finish my question, sir" I was hoping that they would turn off his mic and tell him that he either has to answer the question or the interview is over.  

13 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

And I know that he's saying Obamacare is the "worst," but what he's said he would replace it with, sounds so utterly ridiculous. He didn't say "something better" but "something terrific." Yeah, that's something tangible.

Per dictionary.com, one of the definitions of "terrific" is "causing terror; terrifying."

12 hours ago, mythoughtis said:

Bookwoman - should he win, he won't actually govern. He will get bored, act as a figurehead. We will be in gridlock for 4 years. 

We are going to be in gridlock the next four years if Hillary wins too, unless Dems win a majority in House and/or the Senate.  But, at least we won't be wearing radiation protective clothing.

12 hours ago, clb1016 said:

I've been saying this for a year.  He doesn't want to be president so much as he wants to win the presidency, because that would make him the biggest winner of all.

And if he loses, I bet he goes around boasting about how he "changed American politics" and "brought down the Republican party"

9 hours ago, backformore said:

There are also people on twitter doing an "analysis"  state by state of which candidate will win, based on twitter and FB followers - of course, Trump will win all but two states.  Whatever - it's bullshit, since most twitter users don't say what state they live in.   AND - a lot of people, including those in the  media "follow"  Trump on Twitter so they can read what he says. 

Trump's ego won't let him think about the fact that not everyone follows you because they like you.  A video only has to play on Facebook for 3 seconds in order to count as a view.  The number of followers and the number of views jsut make Trump believe he is very popular.

9 hours ago, backformore said:

I saw a clip on TV of Trump at a rally,  telling people that if they changed their minds, after doing early voting for Hillary, they  could go to the polls on election day and ask for their vote to be changed.   It sounds like he wants his supporters to vote for him and say they had early-voted, and wanted their previous vote to not count.  Is he trying to RIG the election?  telling supporters to lie? 

And I'm imagining someone who goes to early voting, votes for Hillary - then attends a Trump rally?  WHY? if they were undecided, they wouldn't have vted early.   And then, because they hear some vague thing about emails that they never heard before, and hear Trump's wonderful words about how he is going to make America great,  they feel duped by Hillary, are convinced that Trump is their guy, and now they have to change their vote.   Really?   Sounds like something out of a bad sitcom. 

The whole election sounds like something from a bad sitcom.

1 hour ago, Pixel said:

So, I was talking to my boss this morning (who is just as terrified about a Trump win as I am) and she had no idea about the rape case with the 13 year old girl.  No idea! This is a very well informed, intelligent lady - who HATES Trump!  I was actually kind of floored. I knew it wasn't being talked about in the media, but I thought people knew about it.

My husband faithfully watches the news every night.  He reads the newspaper every day.  He had no idea about the rape trial until I told him - he had no trouble believing it.

I hope that, now that the victim has come out of hiding, the rape trial will get more attention.  

[clb1016]

2 minutes ago, needschocolate said:

And if he loses, I bet he goes around boasting about how he "changed American politics" and "brought down the Republican party"

9 hours ago, backformore said:

We've already got his excuse if he loses:  "it was rigged."

[briochetwist]

13 minutes ago, Ohwell said:

It's not just just Trump supporters (I am definitely NOT) who get shouted down.  It's people like myself who don't want him or her and will either not vote for president and just vote down ballot, or will vote for the third party candidate.   

Honestly, I understand that you don't like either candidate, but with it being so close, all votes matter, why waste yours? If you are not ok with President Trump your vote for Hillary matters, it's too close to call.

[Menrva]

Did anyone see this yet? A black church in Mississippi was burned and then someone spray painted "Vote Trump" on the side of the building. Disgusting. And people still want to vote for Tang the Conqueror?  And the KKK's newspaper also officially endorsed Trump. How revolting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mississippi-church-burned-vandalized-trump_us_5819ef95e4b01f610e393372

[backformore]

19 minutes ago, needschocolate said:

Saw the some of an interview on MSNBC with Stephanie Somebody talking to the General who is a Trump surrogate.  She asks him about the ties to Russia and Trump's fondness for Putin (she put it nicer than that).  Well, she tries to ask him about this but he just keeps interrupting and talking over her to spout off about the emails and how Hillary was part of the group that gave a bunch of money to Iran so they can build nukes.  Eventually he says that the US has to work with Putin not antagonize him, like Hillary wants to do.  Aargh.  The reporter tried to get her point across, but was also so polite with him - "please let me finish my question, sir" I was hoping that they would turn off his mic and tell him that he either has to answer the question or the interview is over.  

Interesting -  because this is almost exactly what I just saw from KellyAnne Conway on The View this morning.  Any question about why Trump was doing something was answered as "why isn't anyone asking why Hillary>>>>> blah blah."    she kept going on and on, even when called out on it, she got pouty, and said she wasn't being allowed to speak.   They must all attend a class on "How to Deflect direct questions" 

[MulletorHater]

Just now, Menrva said:

Did anyone see this yet? A black church in Mississippi was burned and then someone spray painted "Vote Trump" on the side of the building. Disgusting. And people still want to vote for Tang the Conqueror?  And the KKK's newspaper also officially endorsed Trump. How revolting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mississippi-church-burned-vandalized-trump_us_5819ef95e4b01f610e393372

I saw it earlier; I'm just too depressed to even comment about it.  I attend an AME church in Maryland and have belonged to that denomination all my life.  The shooting at Emanuel in Charleston was painful, and Metropolitan AME here in D.C. received a bomb threat the following week when it was hosting a special memorial service for the "Emanuel 9."

Because of that shooting my own church had to do the unthinkable:  employ armed security guards.  Unfortunately, this is the world we live in and these types will only become more emboldened thanks to Drumpf.  

[proserpina65]

On ‎10‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 11:56 AM, peachmangosteen said:

How can you find out if you need to show ID to vote? I'm in Maryland. I've never had to show ID, but I don't know if that's actually the law or not and this talk has me a bit worried they're going to ask this time and I'd like to know if that is allowed here or not. Maryland is a blue state, but I live in a county that is very much red so I'm a bit concerned about election day to say the least. We've had someone steal our Clinton sign and replace it with a Trump one and honestly there's probably 10 Trump signs to every 1 Clinton sign here. Sigh.

Maryland does not require ID to vote, not even for early voting.  You can still register to vote during the early voting period (ending at 8pm on Thursday, Nov. 3) and for that, you do need ID, but not for the actual voting.

[ChromaKelly]

Would the media please report on Trump's ties to Russia, the rape case, the fraud investigation, and all this other fuckwittery? I'm about to lose my goddamn mind!
I just don't get how he is getting a free pass from this but the "new" not new emails is all we hear about! I'd also like to know more about the Russian social media bots. How is this not in the news either?

I am heartened by our discussions here. The comments section on FB and stuff would lead me to believe Trump is going to win.

[backformore]

15 minutes ago, ChromaKelly said:

just don't get how he is getting a free pass from this but the "new" not new emails is all we hear about! I'd also like to know more about the Russian social media bots. How is this not in the news either?

Bots and trolls are used to increase the social media presence of people on Reality TV shows -  to artificially inflate their popularity.  Someone looks up a competitor on The Voice, or DWTS, and concludes "they must be popular, they have all these followers."   It's not always Russia.   It's companies that will put up a bunch of fake profiles to follow you and like your comments.  Nobody wants to put out a blog with 4 followers, so you "buy"  followers, and then that attracts "real"  people to your site. 

[clb1016]

29 minutes ago, ChromaKelly said:

Would the media please report on Trump's ties to Russia, the rape case, the fraud investigation, and all this other fuckwittery? I'm about to lose my goddamn mind!
I just don't get how he is getting a free pass from this but the "new" not new emails is all we hear about! I'd also like to know more about the Russian social media bots. How is this not in the news either?

I am heartened by our discussions here. The comments section on FB and stuff would lead me to believe Trump is going to win.

There will be  dozens--perhaps hundreds--of books written about this election.  I hope some of them deal with the media's abdication of journalistic integrity, which was directly responsible for elevating this execrable individual to a serious contender for the Presidency (regardless of the outcome of the election).

[scriggle]

This is what really pisses me off about the media and their coverage of this election.

Trump’s history of corruption is mind-boggling. So why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one?

Quote

The big difference is that there are an enormous number of reporters who get assigned to write stories about those issues regarding Clinton. The story of something like the Clinton Foundation gets stretched out over months and months with repeated tellings, always with the insistence that questions are being raised and the implication that shady things are going on, even if there isn’t any evidence at a particular moment to support that idea.

When it comes to Trump, on the other hand, we’ve seen a very different pattern. Here’s what happens: A story about some kind of corrupt dealing emerges, usually from the dogged efforts of one or a few journalists; it gets discussed for a couple of days; and then it disappears. Someone might mention it now and again, but the news organizations don’t assign a squad of reporters to look into every aspect of it, so no new facts are brought to light and no new stories get written.

The end result of this process is that because of all that repeated examination of Clinton’s affairs, people become convinced that she must be corrupt to the core. It’s not that there isn’t plenty of negative coverage of Trump, because of course there is, but it’s focused mostly on the crazy things he says on any given day.

[Kitty Redstone]

29 minutes ago, clb1016 said:

There will be  dozens--perhaps hundreds--of books written about this election.  I hope some of them deal with the media's abdication of journalistic integrity, which was directly responsible for elevating this execrable individual to a serious contender for the Presidency (regardless of the outcome of the election).

Agreed.  The two guys on With All Due Respect (their names are escaping me at the moment) have basically said the media abdicated their responsibility and would need to do some reflecting after the election.  Most days I can't even watch MSNBC during the morning and afternoon because it's all Donald, all the time.  If it's not his rallies or surrogates spouting lies it's their reporters talking about his rallies or surrogates (without challenging the lies). 

[clb1016]

2 minutes ago, Kitty Redstone said:

Agreed.  The two guys on With All Due Respect (their names are escaping me at the moment) have basically said the media abdicated their responsibility and would need to do some reflecting after the election.  Most days I can't even watch MSNBC during the morning and afternoon because it's all Donald, all the time.  If it's not his rallies or surrogates spouting lies it's their reporters talking about his rallies or surrogates (without challenging the lies). 

Mark Halperin and John Heinemann, who are undoubtedly writing a book; they wrote "Game Change" about the 2008 election.

I've pretty much given up on MSNBC during the daytime, but Chris Hayes has become must-see TV for me and I usually just stay w/Rachel after his show.  CNN isn't any better, what with paying Corey Lewandowski while he's also being paid by DJT, and their panels of partisans from both sides (8 people, really?) are unwatchable.

[Ohwell]

1 hour ago, briochetwist said:

Honestly, I understand that you don't like either candidate, but with it being so close, all votes matter, why waste yours? If you are not ok with President Trump your vote for Hillary matters, it's too close to call.

I refuse to be in a position of holding my nose when I vote.  I want to vote with a clean conscience when I enter that booth, and when I leave I'm pretty sure I'll feel much better.  I have a friend who has to bury her child in a few days and if anything puts life in perspective, that does.  So, no matter the outcome of this election, I am reminded that there are far worse things that can happen--and this election isn't one of them.  I'll survive it.  

[Padma]

Remember the article posted here last week from someone who documented what a dirty dumpy place a lot of Trump Tower really is?  I've also read about the room he calls "campaign headquarters" (and bills donors tens of thousands of dollars for renting). Dirty, dingy, small, etc.

So it kind of amused me to get this "once in a lifetime" offer from Trump in the mail this morning. It's called, "Your Name on My Wall!" (Remember, these online donations are all money he doesn't have to share with the RNC--it's bankable for DJT!)

Friend,
I want to share something special with you.
I am dedicating a wall at campaign HQ in Trump Tower for a select group of donors who chose to step up during the final stretch of the most important election of our lifetime.
But space is LIMITED. We can only fit 2,000 more names on the wall, so you’ll need to act fast.
Please make a contribution of at least $49 to earn your spot on the TRUMP Donor Wall.

The names on our TRUMP Donor Wall are the men and women who’ve chipped in whatever they can to save our country.
Most campaigns only ever recognize the biggest donors. But this campaign is about more than money. Ours is a movement fueled by patriots -- hardworking, tough Americans who know what it takes to win this election and win for our country.
These patriots humble me. They remind me why I get up every single day to fight for America.
I’m inviting you to join them during the final hour of the most important election of our lifetime.
Please make a contribution of $49 to add your name to the TRUMP Donor Wall.
Thank you and God bless you, DJT

I'm sorry but I just thought how fitting it was for this conman to be bilking his trusting supporters right to the end with the "opportunity" to pay $50 and have some underpaid staffer write their name in marker on a dingy wall in some dirty unused room in Trump Tower.  Imagine visiting NYC and looking for your "name on the wall". Hopefully, that would finally tell them something about their candidate...but I doubt it.

[scriggle]

370 economists just accused Donald Trump of misleading the public with his economic plan

Quote

Rather than focusing on ideological differences, the letter, published Tuesday in the Wall Street Journal, calls out Trump for his repeated attempts to mislead the public.