Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[HumblePi]

1 hour ago, biakbiak said:

David French's article about the Internet abuse of Trump fanatics and the alt-right  is a must read and revolting that this is where we are today.

I think that the overwhelmingly disgusting behavior of Trump's 'deplorables',  including those that threaten physical threats and anarchy make some people feel threatened and afraid that this is actually going to happen. That is their point after-all isn't it? It makes better sense to remind ourselves that they are in the minority of Republican voters. Those people are rabid followers who have been given a license by Donald Trump to unleash the hatred they've always had inside themselves, it's not new just because Donald Trump brought out the dark psyche of the American alt-right. The election will end up exactly as it should, with Hillary Clinton as the first woman President and one that will work to unite the parties once again. The haters will go back into the closet and serve up their special brand of hate upon their neighbors and spouses. The majority of this country can recognize that this man is a threat to this country (trust me, we're largely smart people) and they will not vote for him. This election, despite whatever the polls, the surrogates, the pundits or Fox news reports, will finish in a landslide win for Hillary Clinton.

[ari333]

9 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

I think that the overwhelmingly disgusting behavior of Trump's 'deplorables',  including those that threaten physical threats and anarchy make some people feel threatened and afraid that this is actually going to happen. That is their point after-all isn't it? It makes better sense to remind ourselves that they are in the minority of Republican voters. Those people are rabid followers who have been given a license by Donald Trump to unleash the hatred they've always had inside themselves, it's not new just because Donald Trump brought out the dark psyche of the American alt-right. The election will end up exactly as it should, with Hillary Clinton as the first woman President and one that will work to unite the parties once again. The haters will go back into the closet and serve up their special brand of hate upon their neighbors and spouses. The majority of this country can recognize that this man is a threat to this country (trust me, we're largely smart people) and they will not vote for him. This election, despite whatever the polls, the surrogates, the pundits or Fox news reports, will finish in a landslide win for Hillary Clinton.

WORD

I hope it is a landslide to use as a yardstick by which to measure any future landslides in the history of ever and that Bigly is so YUGELY humiliated that he crawls back under his rock and stays there.

[ari333]

Ok I'll say it.

When this is over and  he loses, I will do a prancy dance to end all prancy dances replete with hand gestures like palms out, windshield wipers and high knees as I prance in a circle and squeal and scare the cats.  I will do some fist pumps in the air and squeal again

Please join me all :-) No really....

[Kromm]

More details about Jessica Drake:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/302350-adult-film-star-latest-to-accuse-trump

Jessica Drake said in a press conference with attorney Gloria Allred that after meeting Trump at a golf tournament in Lake Tahoe in 2006, he offered her $10,000 to come to his room, which she said she declined.

This is interesting, because while the story doesn't even mention Stormy Daniels, follow the dots here. Drake says two other "friends" went to Trump's room with her, and also that she was called to come back and offered $10,000. So this is probably why Daniels isn't speaking up here... she likely accepted the money Drake turned down.

So okay. Groping. Check. Consensual sex? Well... sort of check. I mean it sounds like Donald pays for it. Literally (and not just with lavish gifts). 

[ari333]

From the photos above, at a glance, I thought Stormy was Marla for a second. Note to self : find my glasses

[Padma]

22 minutes ago, ari333 said:

Ok I'll say it.

When this is over and  he loses, I will do a prancy dance to end all prancy dances replete with hand gestures like palms out, windshield wipers and high knees as I prance in a circle and squeal and scare the cats.  I will do some fist pumps in the air and squeal again

Please join me all :-) No really....

If I didn't know how it would tick off the deplorables, it would be great for MILLIONS of Hillary supporters all across the country to have one jubiliant dance at the same time in all fifty states.  A great national celebration of victory over evil hateful Trump. But...unfortunately, while they would have been obnoxious in victory (and punitive) we'll all have to be gracious, inclusive and pleasant while they go on about rigging and criminals et. etc.

I don't share the optimism about the alt-right quietly going back into their holes when this is over. I think Trump has empowered them--with Bannon and Bossie, he has embraced them--and he will continue on as their guru, not reducing the hateful rhetoric and lies in any way. Maybe even ratcheting them up considerably (you know, robbed of the presidency and all.) Hope I'm wrong, but I don't picture a petty aftermath. I think Gettysburg was intentionally ... symbolic.

[Revlonred]

I'm so glad to have these boards to read, because I feel like I'm losing part of my mind with all of the insanity.  It's all very terrifying, and I think that when this is over...it won't be over.  The supporters aren't going anywhere; they are going to get louder.  It's madness. 

[ari333]

6 minutes ago, Padma said:

If I didn't know how it would tick off the deplorables, it would be great for MILLIONS of Hillary supporters all across the country to have one jubiliant dance at the same time in all fifty states.  A great national celebration of victory over evil hateful Trump. But...unfortunately, while they would have been obnoxious in victory (and punitive) we'll all have to be gracious, inclusive and pleasant while they go on about rigging and criminals et. etc.

I don't share the optimism about the alt-right quietly going back into their holes when this is over. I think Trump has empowered them--with Bannon and Bossie, he has embraced them--and he will continue on as their guru, not reducing the hateful rhetoric and lies in any way. Maybe even ratcheting them up considerably (you know, robbed of the presidency and all.) Hope I'm wrong, but I don't picture a petty aftermath. I think Gettysburg was intentionally ... symbolic.

I see your point and share that fear. I just meant that I want to dance in the privacy of the living room.  :-)

[millennium]

7 hours ago, MulletorHater said:

 

But, it just occurred to me that personality disorder(s) aside, there are some people who are just no damn good.  I'm serious.  There are some people who are so vile, so evil, so despicable, so scummy, so depraved and rotten inside that they simply defy all the norms of human decency.  Drumpf is a soulless monster with no moral compass whatsoever.  

 

In an earlier post I referred to Trump as Randall Flagg.   I can't be the only person who has been lately reminded of Stephen King's The Stand.   I picture all the Trump supporters lurching towards Las Vegas, while the rest of us get on our Vespas and head for Boulder.  

The other Stephen King character who springs to mind is Greg Stillson, the populist politician of The Dead Zone.   Stillson was a crazy dude but he seems relatively well-adjusted compared to Mr. Trump.  

Just the other night I was remarking how Trump has probably dealt a death blow to House of Cards.   Remember how venomous and underhanded Frank Underwood seemed a few seasons ago?   Not so much anymore.   We have a real live, walking, talking Presidential candidate who has bragged about grabbing women by the genitals and is trying his damnedest to start the next Civil War.   In the wake of Trump, Frank has no more power to shock.    He's a lame duck.

Apropos of nothing, Trump has kinda ruined that Rolling Stones song forever, hasn't he?

Edited October 23, 2016 by millennium

[random chance]

7 minutes ago, millennium said:

Just the other night I was remarking how Trump has probably dealt a death blow to House of Cards. 

Oh wow, excellent point. Trump makes Frank Underwood look pedestrian.

[Landsnark]

18 minutes ago, millennium said:

Apropos of nothing, Trump has kinda ruined that Rolling Stones song forever, hasn't he?

"Sympathy For the Devil?" 

Pleased to meet you, hope you guess my name.

[callmebetty]

9 minutes ago, Landsnark said:

"Sympathy For the Devil?" 

Pleased to meet you, hope you guess my name.

I'm a man of wealth and taste. (Nope can't be that song)

I think he uses You can't always get what you want.

Edited October 23, 2016 by callmebetty

[millennium]

LOL, no, the other one.

The Rolling Stones asked him repeatedly to stop using their music.   He keeps doing it.   Apparently it's legal via blanket licensing, although most politicians respect the wishes of the artist.

Respect isn't part of the Trump vocabulary.

[shok]

2 hours ago, biakbiak said:

David French's article about the Internet abuse of Trump fanatics and the alt-right  is a must read and revolting that this is where we are today.

I might have a little more sympathy for David French's plight if he wasn't one of the RWNJs who created much of the problem the country finds itself in. He's a well known ultra-conservative writer who for years has written Trump-like rhetoric that's been eaten up by the 'deplorables' who are Trump's most ardent supporters. His wife is also involved and has been Sarah Palin and her family's p.r. agent for years and is responsible for Palin's web site and fb. Of course no one deserves the treatment he and his family has gotten but it's kind of ironic that this sort of thing has happened to a number of other media people and he didn't have a problem or speak out against it until it affected him personally.

[biakbiak]

30 minutes ago, shok said:

I might have a little more sympathy for David French's plight if he wasn't one of the RWNJs who created much of the problem the country finds itself in. He's a well known ultra-conservative writer who for years has written Trump-like rhetoric that's been eaten up by the 'deplorables' who are Trump's most ardent supporters. His wife is also involved and has been Sarah Palin and her family's p.r. agent for years and is responsible for Palin's web site and fb. Of course no one deserves the treatment he and his family has gotten but it's kind of ironic that this sort of thing has happened to a number of other media people and he didn't have a problem or speak out against it until it affected him personally.

He actually mentions others. I think the fact that it happened to such an ultra-conservative is in some ways even more distressing.

Though I did have to laugh that Davis French of all people was the major political figure that Bill Kristel kept insisting was close to entering the race and blow Clinton and Trump out of the water, I mean David French? Really? No and never going to happen.

[Padma]

I admit I kind of rolled my eyes, too, when Kristol unveiled the big Trump vanquisher, David French. But after reading that article, I have a more respect for him than for the cowardly silence of McConnell, Ryan, etc.  (That might change if I ever read any of his ultra conservative musings.)

I've always wondered about the choice of "You Can't Always Get What You Want" at the close--not the open--of Trump rallies. I like to think that--after he's talked about the wall, the 11 million people deportation, how "quick and easy" it will be to beat ISIS and how, whatever "it" is, "I can fix it"--that someone thinks its funny to play this song (and it is) and also that Trump is too stupid to know he's being mocked.

That's how I like to see it any way. It's a pretty weird choice, otherwise.

[zxy556575]

As others have mentioned about their lives, Trump has also cost me a couple of friends. I can never see them in the same way again. Luckily, my relatives are all liberals and I haven't become estranged from family members over this. But I wonder, in addition to how polarized politicians of both parties have become, how many permanent fractures this has caused in individual relationships? I would prefer not to surround myself with an echo chamber of like-minded people, but I'm afraid that's what it's coming to.

Edited October 24, 2016 by lordonia

[backformore]

3 hours ago, ari333 said:

Ok I'll say it.

When this is over and  he loses, I will do a prancy dance to end all prancy dances replete with hand gestures like palms out, windshield wipers and high knees as I prance in a circle and squeal and scare the cats.  I will do some fist pumps in the air and squeal again

Please join me all :-) No really....

Yeah, I've been thinking that coming home late from work and watching the election results alone is not going to do it for me.  I might have to organize a party or something.

[millennium]

I have family who will probably vote for Trump.   The older ones sneer "Better him than her!" and "I can't stand that woman!"   They vote along Republican loyalties, anti-abortion beliefs and personal animus.   The rest of the Trump package conveniently falls by the wayside.  Cognitive dissonance.   They can't be bothered to be informed.   I think it affords them the luxury of plausible denial.   I have explained to them how a Trump presidency would hurt me personally (loss of health care, loss of income, loss of personal freedoms as an LGBT person).   And they just. don't. care. 

They brush off my concerns with "Oh, he'll never be able to get (fill in some reprehensible initiative of his) through Congress, so don't even worry about it."   Like if he's elected, only the stuff they want to see happen will come true and the stuff that could hurt me and millions of others will be magically forgotten.

The funny part is, they were ardent Kennedy Democrats when I was growing up.   Irish Catholic family, portraits of the Pope and Kennedy in the parlor.

Know what changed them?

Bill Clinton.   That scandal turned them against the Democratic party.    Even the Kennedy portrait came down.

Personally, I blame Clinton for about 75% of what's wrong with politics today.   His sexcapades in the White House gave Dubya the White House for 8 long years.   Dubya's election was a national rebuke against Clinton.   Shrub was elected only because many Democrats became so disgusted with Clinton that they voted against Gore in protest.  During those 8 years we saw the rise of the neocon movement and all their cheerleaders -- Limbaugh, Colter, Beck, O'Reilly, etc.   Fox News got a stronger foothold.   People became more polarized than ever before, with the internet providing a soapbox for every malcontent who could afford dial-up.  

IMHO, everything that has led to Trump was set in motion by the President who couldn't keep it in his pants.   It is the height of irony that Clinton's wife, his biggest victim, now has to be our champion against the monster his actions unleashed. 

The anger over Bill Clinton hasn't gone away.  It has festered and become infected.   We see it in the news.    Pictures of people wearing shirts with Bill Clinton's picture and the word RAPIST on it.  

I think Clinton was a good President otherwise.  He may not have had actual sexual intercourse with Monica Lewinsky.  But he betrayed the office and the people's trust.   He screwed us all in the end.  YMMV.

Edited October 23, 2016 by millennium

[Kitty Redstone]

Tonight, the PBS show Great Performances focused on Lin-Manuel Miranda's Hamilton.  At one point, Miranda says "that the most extraordinary thing" George Washington did "was step down from the presidency, ensuring that this American experiment would continue without him.  By modeling a peaceful transition from president to president, he puts us eons ahead of every over fledgling democracy on earth."

Just another reason to despise what Donald, his supporters and his enablers are doing by spouting this election rigging bullshit.  There really isn't a stronger word than anti-American to describe them.

ETA:  The neocons long preceded Bill Clinton, millennium.  He is not responsible for them.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Kitty Redstone

[maraleia]

Regarding jessica drake (yes she uses all lower case letters). I've met her and she's the sweetest person and how she presented herself at that press conference with Gloria is how she is in real life. Also, she's uniquely situated within the adult industry to fend off the slut shaming that is already happening online and fellow adult actor Nina Hartley confirmed this in a series of tweets about the situation. Also, she has a vaunted status in the industry and her work as a sex educator and philanthropist have been lauded by many, many people nationwide.

Also, she runs the risk of having her legal name revealed just like Stormy Daniels' name was revealed in an article about her encounters with Orange Hitler. This might be why she waited. She had to get her ducks in a row with everyone in her life because it will affect them too.

Kudos to her for doing this. I wonder how many other adult actors he propositioned over the years.

[33kaitykaity]

3 minutes ago, millennium said:

I have family who will probably vote for Trump.   The older ones sneer "Better him than her!" and "I can't stand that woman!"   They vote along Republican loyalties, anti-abortion beliefs and personal animus.   The rest of the Trump package conveniently falls by the wayside.  Cognitive dissonance.   They can't be bothered to be informed.   I think it affords them the luxury of plausible denial.   I have explained to them how a Trump presidency would hurt me personally (loss of health care, loss of income, loss of personal freedoms as an LGBT person).   And they just. don't. care. 

They brush off my concerns with "Oh, he'll never be able to get (fill in some reprehensible initiative of his) through Congress, so don't even worry about it."   Like if he's elected, only the stuff they want to see happen will come true and the stuff that could hurt me and millions of others will be magically forgotten.

The funny part is, they were ardent Kennedy Democrats when I was growing up.   Irish Catholic family, portraits of the Pope and Kennedy in the parlor.

Know what changed them?

Bill Clinton.   That scandal turned them against the Democratic party.    Even the Kennedy portrait came down.

Personally, I blame Clinton for about 75% of what's wrong with politics today.   His sexcapades in the White House gave Dubya the White House for 8 long years.   Dubya's election was a national rebuke against Clinton.   Shrub was elected only because many Democrats became so disgusted with Clinton that they voted against Gore in protest.  During those 8 years we saw the rise of the neocon movement and all their cheerleaders -- Limbaugh, Colter, Beck, O'Reilly, etc.   Fox News got a stronger foothold.   People became more polarized than ever before, with the internet providing a soapbox for every malcontent who could afford dial-up.  

IMHO, it was all set in motion by the President who couldn't keep it in his pants.  The anger hasn't gone away eitherIt has festered and become worse.  We see it in the news.    Pictures of people wearing shirts with his picture and the word RAPIST on it.  

I think Clinton was a good President otherwise.  He may not have had actual sexual intercourse with Monica Lewinsky.  But he screwed us all in the end.  YMMV.

My one quibble is GWB was not "elected.'  He was selected by SCOTUS via their illegal interference with Florida election law in Bush v. Gore.  Gore won the national popular vote by more than half-a-million votes and if the intent of Florida voters had been honored would have been awarded Florida's 25 electors and then been inaugurated as our rightful 43. 

[Padma]

21 minutes ago, 33kaitykaity said:

My one quibble is GWB was not "elected.'  He was selected by SCOTUS via their illegal interference with Florida election law in Bush v. Gore.  Gore won the national popular vote by more than half-a-million votes and if the intent of Florida voters had been honored would have been awarded Florida's 25 electors and then been inaugurated as our rightful 43. 

And just one other irritation about that election: Kathrine Harris. She was the Republican SOS in charge of making many key decisions in the election and the recount.  She was also George W. Bush's campaign chair in Florida (not to mention that his brother was governor). Why was she not forced to recuse herself?

wiki: "Harris conducted a purge of voters in Florida prior to the 2000 presidential election; this purge has been found to have removed both eligible and ineligible voters. Harris, along with ...Governor Jeb Bush, used an inaccurate ineligible-voter list. This action resulted in eliminating a disproportionate number of African-American eligible voters from Florida voter rolls. According to journalist Jake Tapper, the problem went uncorrected for two years."

It was maddening that Democrats did not demand that she recuse herself. Instead, she made various harmful rulings, including stopping the recount and certifying Bush the winner--a decision overturned by the Florida state Supreme Court but then upheld by the conservative majority on the U.S. SC, 5:4. 

So, no, Bush was not "elected".  And if there was ever a questionable election result it was that one, including Sandra Day O'Connor reportedly expressing horror that Gore might have won in the Fl recount--then going on to vote on it as if she were unbiased. 

Gore doesn't get enough credit, imo, for his gracious speech and support for the new president under those circumstances (i.e. not like Trump's loss is going to be).  I think, with the memory of 2000 still so vivid to me, I find Trump's latest rants about "rigged elections" (before any votes are cast) particularly offensive. (Also because he's so stupid and has no knowledge--or interest--in history or government. He knows so little, obviously, and feels no need to learn more.)

Edited October 23, 2016 by Padma

[Rapunzel]

1 hour ago, backformore said:

Yeah, I've been thinking that coming home late from work and watching the election results alone is not going to do it for me.  I might have to organize a party or something.

Neither I nor my friends wanted to be alone for the results either (it's just too scary given that there's even the smallest chance that the orange douchebage could win), so I've already organized a gathering at my house on Election Day. I will not call it a "party" officially until Hillary is elected, but I have friends, neighbors and co-workers all coming over and I've ordered a case or two of champagne for when (again, I always say "when" and not "if" Hillary wins as positivity is important and she is just so much more qualified) and also have other spirits on hand just in case something goes extremely wrong and we need to drown our sorrows with something stronger - champagne just wouldn't be appropriate if that orange, misogynistic, piece of shit won. I love to entertain and to cook, so am making tons of finger food, having a taco bar, and lots of mini desserts (the desserts will be even more important if, for some odd reason, Hillary doesn't win).

As I'm in Southern CA, we're all leaving work early on Election Day and then taking at least the next day off. Everyone is planning to stay at our home, since, regardless of outcome, no one will be in any shape to drive. Even if they haven't had a drop to drink, we'll either all be elated and up all night or bummed out and going to sleep early after some of us drown our sorrows.  Though again, I think we'll be up all night as the Dumpster just cannot be President and I hope the majority of registered voters can see that. We are virtually certain he'll win CA, and nearly all of us of voted by mail already, but we'll have to see what happens in the other states, but again, I'm hopefully for Hillary.  We're already prepared to end up being up most of the next day as well, however, since he'll likely throw his little temper tantrum if he loses and won't concede, so we're prepared to tough it out to the bitter end.

My husband is a Brit and will be here and not traveling, and he's almost more excited about this than I am. I've mentioned in previous posts that we split our time between the UK and US as I have dual citizenship and my in-laws and husband tend to be more republican leaning when it comes to American politics, however they all cannot stand Trump and want to make sure that I do my part to help ensure that that "bloody wanker" does not become our next President. Europe is quite worried about what will happen if he is elected as well.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Rapunzel
Typos

[formerlyfreedom]

This is the "Donald John Trump" topic. Please stick to that. Conversation is going wildly off topic in here. Future posts that aren't on-topic will be removed.

[Rapunzel]

I just read something in the Washing Post which states, in part:

Quote

CLEVELAND — As Donald Trump once again warned his supporters on Saturday that voter fraud is rampant and could cost him the election, he wondered aloud if he's receiving any of the fraudulent votes.

"Maybe they'll vote for Trump, I don't know, maybe I shouldn't be saying that," Trump said at a Saturday night rally in a convention center near the airport here. "I may be hurting myself, you're right. You're right. Maybe they're going to vote for Trump. Alright, let's forget that. It's okay for them to do it."

The article said his tone appeared to be joking (but doesn't he often try to play things off that way?).

Joking tone or not, I don't doubt for a second that if the election is "rigged" in his favor, he'll applaud it. He's already said as much by saying he would only concede if he won the election. This man has so many issues on so many levels - I just don't know how anyone can be persuaded that he would make a good President. Okay, so it appears he is promising to bring jobs back to America - we know that isn't likely to happen, especially as he himself has relied on overseas labor and materials in the past. Even if he somehow manages to help out the middle and lower classes in some ways, he's only going to hurt them in others. The harm he is going to do with his fiscal policies (or lack thereof) are only going to end up causing a net loss for the middle and lower classes and still result in a gain for those who need it the least - people like him. He can't even get the math straight on his own damn beloved "Wall" and keeps insisting Mexico will pay for it when the President of Mexico has said that Mexico will do no such thing. He's just a hypocritical, lying, nasty, misogynistic bigot who can't even put together an articulate sentence and has the most selfish, arrogant attitude out of anyone I've ever seen before.

I, like others, was not really a fan of Bush Jr., but I would take more of him over just one day of a Trump Presidency anytime.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Rapunzel

[Advance35]

Quote

Neither I nor my friends wanted to be alone for the results either, so I've already organized a gathering at my house on Election Day.

You guys are braver then me.  I was thinking of taking a pharmaceutical, going to sleep and HOPEFULLY waking up to a better world.

Quote

Regarding jessica drake (yes she uses all lower case letters). I've met her and she's the sweetest person and how she presented herself at that press conference with Gloria is how she is in real life. Also, she's uniquely situated within the adult industry to fend off the slut shaming that is already happening online and fellow adult actor Nina Hartley confirmed this in a series of tweets about the situation. Also, she has a vaunted status in the industry and her work as a sex educator and philanthropist have been lauded by many, many people nationwide.

Wow.  I'm definitely keeping a good thought for her and all of those other women.   It was very brave of them to come out with the truth.   In terms of the slut shaming, I have to admit that I am not super familiar with Gloria Allred's history but from what I've heard (read on blogs), she is anything but foolish or careless, I'd imagine she vetted all the women she is representing and knows what she needs to do in this situation.  Though from a legal standpoint I'm not sure what she's after in regards to Trump.  I assume the statute of limitations has come and gone and now with him threatening his counter suites where does this leave her and the clients she's representing?

[Padma]

Trump's threat today (lawsuits against the women after the election--what? As president?) was a real eye roller. I enjoyed the mocking of the NYT and Wash Post who say he threatens libel suits a lot but hasn't followed through since 1984.  I appreciated Hillary and Tim commenting about it today--pointing out that it doesn't sound very "presidential" on his "First 100 Days To-Do List".

I especially loved Gloria Allred immediately firing back with a threat of her own--basically, "Bring on the law suit, Donald! It means we get to depose you and, under oath, ask you all kinds of questions about inappropriate behavior." She is not intimidated by him at all.

That election eve party sounds amazing, but I'm almost of a mind to try to sleep through it--something I've never done in my life. Then again, here in So. Ca. with any luck it will be over (Hillary winning of course!) soon after our polls close so not a long night. I'd love it if Trump pulled a Jimmy Carter and conceded BEFORE the polls in Ca. close so that Republicans won't go vote for others on the ballot either.  He has no allegiance to the Republican party, so I could actually see him doing that--IF he concedes at all. Whatever's best for him, personally, after all. 

[NewDigs]

6 hours ago, Padma said:

 

I especially loved Gloria Allred immediately firing back with a threat of her own--basically, "Bring on the law suit, Donald! It means we get to depose you and, under oath, ask you all kinds of questions about inappropriate behavior." She is not intimidated by him at all.

 

A CNN commentator brought up that if Trump sues these women he would be opening himself up to more scrutiny. It would grant the women the right of discovery and the Court would/could decide to allow the Apprentice tapes shown in order, through discovery, to prove prior behaviors. I bet those tapes contain a big shitbox of behavior issues.

I guess he didn't see how well that tactic has worked for Cosby.

Trump's name would be very publicly dragged through the mud for years.

[random chance]

I'm sure that's why he's saying he'll wait until after the election to sue them, so that he can say he'll sue them without having to actually put up or shut up.

[Landsnark]

It's likely that if he does get elected, which is unlikely, he'll be impeached and Pence will be President before the end of the spring.

[HumblePi]

If nothing else, Donald Trump has managed to light a fire under the asses of people that are ordinarily indifferent as to what's happening politically. He has been instrumental in bringing awareness of many issues like the TPP, NAFTA, women and gay rights, gun control, terrorism and important international news of Aleppo and Mosul. Nobody really gave much thought to particular issues and now we do. Donald Trump's candidacy also reminded us of how fragile not only the Republican party but how vulnerable our entire democracy can become. If it only takes one bombastic man doing a diatribe on how crooked, dishonest, rigged and unfair our democratic system is to bring out the haters from their dark worlds and into the light. It reminds us that despite interference from foreign governments, our democracy will overshadow the darkness they strive to lead us into.

According to the famous quote by Alexander Fraser, a Scottish lawyer in 1854, this is the sequence that has ended every democracy in history after 200 years.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.

Our democracy has survived beyond the Fraser expiration date, 227 years because although we became a country independent of Britain since 1776, our first constitution wasn't created until 1787, so we're a true democracy for 227 years. I think we're all very prepared to vehemently protect our democracy for just a bit longer and out-vote a man that wishes to create an authoritarian government and is intent at destroying our democratic way of life.

[atomationage]

12 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.

He's basically talking about British history there.  His era would be selfishness to apathy, which would be exemplified by  Drumpf this year.  He's selfish and doesn't care about others, but I don't think we are.   Probably his biggest mistake was antagonizing immigrants.  Immigrants vote when they become citizens.  More importantly, the children of immigrants vote, and can relate to how Drumpf would treat their own parents.  It hasn't been determined yet how many deplorables vote.

Edited October 23, 2016 by atomationage
deplorables

[NewDigs]

And, finally, in the last weeks of the process he has actually brought up a couple of issues that aren't completely nonsensical and self-serving.

For instance, changing some lobbying laws. Make them more restrictive. Imho, it's wrong for members of Congress to move so seamlessly from Senator-on-the-floor to Lobbyist-allowed-on-the-floor. 

And though I wouldn't mind revisiting some of those trade agreements I fear that the global economy has moved us beyond much intervention.

He really missed many many opportunities because he let his ego and hubris get in the way. I almost feel sorry for republicans but they brought it.

Edited October 23, 2016 by NewDigs

[Landsnark]

WRT trade agreements, what exactly are his proposals?  That they'll be "better?"  Ok.  How? 
Manufacturing and coal are industries that are just done.  They're gone.  Forever.  There is no "bringing them back."

Some trade agreements, y'know, are good for say Northern California while simultaneously being a drag on Eastern Ohio.  So when you say you'll make "better agreements," it's simply pandering for votes.  Additionally, the world's economy is a real thing.  If the US demands goods be purchased from us at higher rates and we purchase goods at lower rates, well, then... it has direct, immediate results.  It's not theoretical.  The world markets react immediately.  Tourism, real estate, security, terrorism, poverty, the environment, dictatorships... all of this is tied to the quality of trade agreements being fair on all sides.  It's not simple.  Certainly, it's not bumper-sticker Trump-voter simple.
But, hey, there is social media and Yahoo Comments so the deplorables know all about TPP and NAFTA and they are experts.
I find his business bona fides to be hilarious.  Because, you see, up until last September, not one American states person was smart.  Not one of them gave a fuck about strong trade agreements.  Nobody knew about business.  But... now!  NOW, we have Trump!  It's all going to be different.  He's the smartest person in the world.
I wonder who his favorite American economist is/was?  Certainly there must have been one or two he admires back when America Was Great, right?

Edited October 23, 2016 by Landsnark

[HumblePi]

39 minutes ago, NewDigs said:

And, finally, in the last weeks of the process he has actually brought up a couple of issues that aren't completely nonsensical and self-serving.

For instance, changing some lobbying laws. Make them more restrictive. Imho, it's wrong for members of Congress to move so seamlessly from Senator-on-the-floor to Lobbyist-allowed-on-the-floor. 

And though I wouldn't mind revisiting some of those trade agreements I fear that the global economy has moved us beyond much intervention.

He really missed many many opportunities because he let his ego and hubris get in the way. I almost feel sorry for republicans but they brought it.

I couldn't agree more with your opinion on limitations for lobbyists. This is probably one of the only opinions of Donald Trump that I actually agree with, but my agreement comes with a footnote. Regarding lobbyist campaign contributions, Donald Trump said;

"A lobbyist, a person, very good person, came to me, offered $5 million, ‘please, I want to give you $5 million for the campaign.’ I said I have no interest in taking that. In fact, it’s the first time I think he’s ever been turned down. He’ll be coming to me and he’ll be saying in two years, in one year, in four years, he’ll be representing a country, maybe a company or maybe a person—I’m not doing anything for him."

Personally, I think lobbyist that are currently allowed to enter Congress, should be banned entirely but their right to lobby is guaranteed by the First Amendment so we can't touch that. But there's no reasons at all that we can't put limits on the amounts of money they throw at Congressmen in order to benefit whomever they're representing whether it be a pharmaceutical company, an oil corporation or a political candidate. In the most simplified term it's outright legal bribery. They have no limits imposed so they have the resources to extend egregious amounts of money to sway votes in their behalf. More than just about anything else in politics, that fuels anti-government cynicism. Everything we see says that government is gridlocked and is bought and paid for by big donors and special interests, and politicians rig the system for what just might be the most irresponsible companies.

The footnote is that if Donald Trump didn't happen to be a billionaire, I'm sure his opinion about lobbyists would be very different because he wouldn't be able to run a campaign without the money from lobbyists and special interests. Trust me, that really hurt to admit to agreeing with Donald Trump about anything.

[Advance35]

Well I know some predict that Trump is done but there are still some that say this is far from over.  From Hillary's bad rep, to Orange's appealing to fear in regular voters, to voter suppression in NC.  I've seen a few places that speculate he still has a very real chance.

If he gets in the external conflict will probably be the tip of the iceberg.  He's going to wage war with the Media, with Women's right's activist (there are quite a few Trumpettes but I'd also wager quite a few women know that if some rights are taken away getting them back will likely take decades (if ever), the LGBT Community (Under a Trump/Pence regime, those rights are done hon.), pretty every minority community (though I bet Pence is shrewd enough to undermine each one at a time).   Hell, forget immigrants trying to get in here, I'll probably be trying to get out.   To say nothing of the Capital Hill battleground.   Even some of the more reptilian republicans are probably NOT going to be ok with his "admiration" of Russia.

[Menrva]

I can't muster the energy to be outraged at anything Trump says anymore. It's inevitable that every day, even every hour will bring some new misdeed to light. The debate went pretty much as I expected; Trump started seeming subdued. I wondered out loud how long it would be before the meds wore off. Wasn't disappointed as he quickly spouted off nonsense about abortion and ripping babies out of the womb. Proved he had no idea what he was talking about. I've had three c-sections, one of them an emergency, and I can tell you, no woman undergoes that lightly.

I was really disgusted by his refusal to acknowledge the election results, and that line about "Keeping us in suspense" was nauseating. And his disgraceful performance at the Al Smith dinner was yet another low point in this ugly, ugly campaign. I went back and listened to the Al Smith dinner from 2008 and it was a different world then. McCain was funny and self-deprecating and even humble, knowing that he was unlikely to win the presidential election; after his jokes, McCain then went on for several minutes to say how much he respected his opponent, despite their differences. He was kind and thoughtful and respectful - everything Trump is not. I am sad for the degradation of common decency and respect.

My husband and I have an election night party and we create a menu based on the candidates. I also make cakes; last election, for Obama I made 47% of a cake. We had deep dish pizza for Obama and bacon-wrapped scallops for Biden, apple pie for Romney and a cheese plate for Ryan. When it was McCain and Palin, we had chili and Klondike bars. Not sure what I'll do for this election. I was thinking that orange colored junk food would represent Trump pretty well.

[HumblePi]

14 minutes ago, Menrva said:

My husband and I have an election night party and we create a menu based on the candidates. I also make cakes; last election, for Obama I made 47% of a cake. We had deep dish pizza for Obama and bacon-wrapped scallops for Biden, apple pie for Romney and a cheese plate for Ryan. When it was McCain and Palin, we had chili and Klondike bars. Not sure what I'll do for this election. I was thinking that orange colored junk food would represent Trump pretty well.

How about a crybaby cake with sour cream frosting?  

[atomationage]

25 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

In the most simplified term it's outright legal bribery.

I recently read most of Our Man in Charleston, by Christopher Dickey.  I couldn't finish it because I didn't want to read all the bile that was being spouted in South Carolina back then(before 1863).  It's too similar to what we are hearing from the deplorables now.   Back then, lobbying and bribery were synonyms.  If Drumpf were elected, his own family would be the lobbyists, and Russia would have inside knowledge of everything he would do.  I just had to turn off Face The Nation on the radio because I didn't want to hear Reince Preibus's nonsense. 

19 minutes ago, Menrva said:

I was thinking that orange colored junk food would represent Trump pretty well.

An avalanche of cheetos?

[Darian]

You could add some orange frosting "hair" to that (adorable) cake. I had orange food for the last debate for Trump, but if I have or attend any kind of election night gathering, my favorite color will not be featured. Nasty Woman cocktails, maybe. 

And now Trump, via Conway, is apparently floating the idea of a fourth debate. It's obviously not going to happen, which is why Trump can raise the idea, but any ideas about his angle? It can't be as simple (or stupid) as claiming she's scared to do it, since that would backfire. What's he up to?

[Moose135]

2 hours ago, Landsnark said:

It's likely that if he does get elected, which is unlikely, he'll be impeached and Pence will be President before the end of the spring.

Which would take the country out of the frying pan and into the fire.  In many ways, Pence is more dangerous that Trump.

[ClareWalks]

We need a good laugh, folks. I think we need Alyssa Edwards to read Donald to filth.

[NewDigs]

10 minutes ago, atomationage said:

I recently read most of Our Man in Charleston, by Christopher Dickey.  I couldn't finish it because I didn't want to read all the bile that was being spouted in South Carolina back then(before 1863).  It's too similar to what we are hearing from the deplorables now.   Back then, lobbying and bribery were synonyms.  If Drumpf were elected, his own family would be the lobbyists, and Russia would have inside knowledge of everything he would do.  I just had to turn off Face The Nation on the radio because I didn't want to hear Reince Preibus's nonsense. 

An avalanche of cheetos?

Noooo!!! Don't sully my cheetos!

Edited October 23, 2016 by NewDigs

[HumblePi]

8 minutes ago, Darian said:

And now Trump, via Conway, is apparently floating the idea of a fourth debate. It's obviously not going to happen, which is why Trump can raise the idea, but any ideas about his angle? It can't be as simple (or stupid) as claiming she's scared to do it, since that would backfire. What's he up to?

I can only imagine Kellyanne Conway talking to Donald Trump like a music teacher would talk to her piano student, "we're just going to stay here and keep doing it over until you get it right! (dammit)" I think that every time there has been a debate, he's been warned against going off script or replying impulsively as he has many times. I truly believe that if Kellyanne Conway is requesting a fourth debate that she's hoping that at least one time, he'll pay attention and follow the script she writes.

[atomationage]

14 minutes ago, Darian said:

What's he up to?

They're trying to get Hillary off the campaign trail and back to debate prep.   She actually prepares for debates.  All Drumpf does is repeat the same talking points.   They probably want him to say Benghazi, emails, crooked and rigged for a larger audience a few more times.

Edited October 23, 2016 by atomationage

[HumblePi]

15 minutes ago, Darian said:

You could add some orange frosting "hair" to that (adorable) cake. I had orange food for the last debate for Trump, but if I have or attend any kind of election night gathering, my favorite color will not be featured. Nasty Woman cocktails, maybe. 

 

Cheetos 'frosting' hair maybe? 

[Kromm]

13 hours ago, Kitty Redstone said:

Tonight, the PBS show Great Performances focused on Lin-Manuel Miranda's Hamilton.  At one point, Miranda says "that the most extraordinary thing" George Washington did "was step down from the presidency, ensuring that this American experiment would continue without him.  By modeling a peaceful transition from president to president, he puts us eons ahead of every over fledgling democracy on earth."

Just an FYI kind of thing: It is worth noting that that's Miranda's comment, and not totally reflective of Hamilton himself.

Hamilton has been glorified a bit in retrospect, but one of HIS "wants" for the Constitution was lifetime appointments, not ONLY for the President, but also for Senators.

Second time I used that this week!  The previous was a post on another board where someone had a quote they attributed to Hamilton (incorrectly actually): "The constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” Which is actually a Samuel Adams quotation by the way, so fie on that person's argument even from the get-go. Hamilton himself quite clearly spoke in terms of militias, not individuals, in HIS writings.

Anyway, the hero of the situation is Washington himself, of course. While lifetime appointments indeed did not make their way into the Constitution, Washington is the one who set the precedent, quite intentionally apparently, to bow out after two terms. FDR of course went against that eventually, and the Twenty-Second Amendment made the two terms an official limit, but we never would have even had that mindset at all as a country if it wasn't for Washington (because even a guy as supposedly as enlightened as Hamilton believed otherwise).

Again, the peaceful acceptance of losing, of transfer of power, is a tradition more than something encoded. But Donald Trump, sociopath that he is, only respects traditions which directly benefit him.

Here's a link to an article about how while most people inherently think the loser should accept an election... that's apparently not true with Trump supporters specifically.: 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/two-thirds-voters-loser-concede-election-poll-shows-article-1.2839690
 

Quote

A new survey from Politico/Morning Consult shows 68% of voters think "the losing candidate should accept the results," with just 14% disagreeing. That includes 87% of Clinton supporters in the poll, and 49% of Trump supporters. But a majority of Trump supporters either disagree (24%) or aren't sure (27%), a warning sign that if Trump does make good on his promise his most diehard supporters will go out fighting with him.

Those are similar to a new NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll, 45% of Republican likely voters said they might not accept the election's results, including 18% who said they definitely wouldn't.

No matter which set of numbers you accept, that's a LOT of people willing to spit in the face of Democracy.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Kromm

[Padma]

How can 18% (nearly 1 in 5 Republicans!!!) say they definitely won't accept results of an election that hasn't even been held yet?  What is WRONG with these people????

Sour grapes makes a nice Trump appetizer.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Padma

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, HumblePi said:

I can only imagine Kellyanne Conway talking to Donald Trump like a music teacher would talk to her piano student, "we're just going to stay here and keep doing it over until you get it right! (dammit)"

Oh sure. But Trump being Trump, I'm sure the moment the tutoring is done, he's got some way to put Kellyanne in her place (at least what he thinks her place is).

1 hour ago, Menrva said:

I can't muster the energy to be outraged at anything Trump says anymore. It's inevitable that every day, even every hour will bring some new misdeed to light.

I think we can coin a new phrase describing this: "outrage fatigue"