USA presidential elections 2016

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 24 Sep 2016, 12:58

woodburner wrote:
It has become an accepted reality of this presidential campaign that Trump spins a near-endless series of falsehoods. For months, the media has struggled with this unprecedented situation—a candidate who, unlike other politicians who stretch the truth, simply creates his own reality. Trumps regularly peddles “facts” that aren’t true, describes events that never happened or denies engaging in actions that everyone saw him do. He utters his falsehoods so fast that before reporters have the chance to correct one, he has tossed out five or six more.

This time, it is different. Trump can’t skip past his perfidy here. There are two records—one, a previously undisclosed deposition of the Republican nominee testifying under oath, and the second a transcript/video of a Republican presidential debate. In them, Trump tells contradictory versions of the same story with the clashing accounts tailored to provide what he wanted people to believe when he was speaking.
From this obviously biased and spun headline story, or could it be more like facts?

Yet this truth mangler might be the next US president, if the electorate want an inveterate liar because they believe the bits they want to hear, lies or not.

Trump's lies while numerous pale in comparison to the lies and corruption of Hillary. The voters have no good choice.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 24 Sep 2016, 16:39

vtsnowedin wrote: Trump's lies while numerous pale in comparison to the lies [...] of Hillary.

Which raises an interesting numerical comparison between Trump's lies and those of Hillary.

What information does anyone have about this?

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 24 Sep 2016, 17:42

johnhemming2 wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote: Trump's lies while numerous pale in comparison to the lies [...] of Hillary.
Which raises an interesting numerical comparison between Trump's lies and those of Hillary.

What information does anyone have about this?

You can start with the "Truth squads" when Bill was governor of Arkansas then move on to cattle futures, and travel gate, ..... and end up with forgetting to tell the public she had pneumonia. Mondays debate should add to the list.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 24 Sep 2016, 21:55

Neither of the current runners have any credibility. To choose one over the other is to abdicate responsibility. The correct choice is to not vote for either. If the vast majority of electors did this the so called winner would have no mandate and could be removed.

I don't care that Trump's lies are lower point scoring than Clinton's. They are both needing to be incarserated.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 25 Sep 2016, 00:22

woodburner wrote:Neither of the current runners have any credibility. To choose one over the other is to abdicate responsibility. The correct choice is to not vote for either. If the vast majority of electors did this the so called winner would have no mandate and could be removed.

I don't care that Trump's lies are lower point scoring than Clinton's. They are both needing to be incarserated.

I agree with your first sentence completely but I have to quibble about them both needing to be incarcerated. Trump's lies are foolish and should cost him votes. Hillary's lies are ofttimes perjury and have been issued from the seat of a public office. She should already be in jail.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 25 Sep 2016, 02:26

perjury applies to trump too.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 25 Sep 2016, 08:42

Updated my blog with my views on a Trump presidency...

https://forecastingintelligence.org/

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 25 Sep 2016, 08:44

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 25716.html

We've never before seen a candidate who's spent his life enriching himself at the expense of others. He's the first candidate in our history to be a serial fabricator, making up things as he goes along. Even when he tells the truth, such as, "Barack Obama really was born in the U.S.," he adds two lines, that Hillary Clinton started the birther movement, and that he finished it, even though when Barack Obama put out his birth certificate, he didn't believe it. We've never had a candidate before who not just once, but twice in a thinly disguised way, has incited violence against an opponent. We've never had a candidate before who's invited a hostile foreign power to meddle in American elections. We've never had a candidate before who's threatened to start a war by blowing ships out of the water in the Persian Gulf if they come too close to us. We've never had a candidate before who has embraced as a role model a murderous, hostile foreign dictator. Given all of these exceptions that Donald Trump represents, he may well shatter patterns of history that have held for more than 150 years, lose this election even if the historical circumstances favor it.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 25 Sep 2016, 14:58

Lord Beria3 wrote:Updated my blog with my views on a Trump presidency...

https://forecastingintelligence.org/

Portions of you post such as this show a confidence in Trump's abilities that I have seen no evidence of.

Trump will thus employ the Nixonian “Madman” strategy of disorientating both allies and adversaries around the world to maximum affect, as he develops and matures, as a world leader.

Donald Trump understands that with the gigantic American national debt growing, the long-term sustainability of the vast global network of military bases and treaty commitments to her allies is untenable. A partial strategic withdrawal and rebalancing of America’s global role is therefore a realist response to the crushing monetary burden of being the self-appointed world policeman. The strategic thinker and national security advisor under the Carter Administration Zbigniew Brzezinski has recently also argued such a shift in foreign policy in the American Interest.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 25 Sep 2016, 15:01

woodburner wrote:perjury applies to trump too.

Do you have an example? When has he ever testified under oath?He may well have in one of his bankruptcy or divorce proceedings but I'm not aware of it.

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 25 Sep 2016, 15:25

demagogue
ˈdɛməɡɒɡ/
noun
a political leader who seeks support by appealing to popular desires and prejudices rather than by using rational argument.

I am not sure he is that bothered about what he actually does apart from winning.

Catweazle · Post by **Catweazle** » 25 Sep 2016, 20:29

Trump doesn't appear to be very bright, but he has experience with money. It doesn't actually need a genius to work out that Russia and China pose a threat to the Dollars position as defacto reserve currency, especially as they have both been buying gold like crazy. I worry what he will do.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 30 Sep 2016, 18:56

LB3 may be proved wrong about the election winner

Read more..........

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 30 Sep 2016, 19:11

"Break with tradition"?

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 30 Sep 2016, 19:21

I was the only one who predicted a narrow Leave victory in the Brexit referendum (and that is on a thread on this forum).

I have rated a Trump victory at 70% - but naturally there is a chance he could lose.

My gut instinct still says that he will (probably) pull it off.

Lets see though.