I thought I would have a browse of the New York Times

One interesting thing about this election is that the NYT is now branding outright falsehoods as lies when a candidate (mostly Trump) says them. Previously they were loathe to call politicians liars but now they’re all over it.

I think his ego will be hurt so he will spout shit then try and make money out of it all

Certainly, Fox isn’t extreme enough but luckily, the majority of his ventures go tits up so there’s no real worry. A host on RT I can certainly see though 🙂

Previously they were loathe to call politicians liars but now they’re all over it.

There is a line between spin and outright BS
He never seems to be on the spin side of this line

I thought I would have a browse of the New York Times – it has Clinton 89% chance of winning which is good news.

** dons tinfoil hat **
Not necessarily. The illusion of democracy only works when voters on the side that loses can be convinced that enough people voted for the other side to explain their loss, hence the reason for constantly published polls of voter intention.

If you publish polls that suggest a skew too far towards one candidate to be believable (and remember, despite how much of a buffoon he is there appears to be A LOT of people willing to vote for Trump) and “sensible” people on the other side, above and beyond the usual loonies, are going to start asking questions re: polling machine fraud etc.
Better to stick to the close, but believable to the losing side, leading by 10-15 points type polls.

@tjagain
“how will he cope with losing the election?”

Build his own white house? that will teach Hillary – sorry Madam President
though by my assessment of his tax returns* he will need a bigger deposit and a hefty mortgage

*I have not seen his tax returns but thought it fair to make shit up anyway

I’d also suggest he will be inundated with meeting requests from lawyers, courts, the IRS and a few law enforcement people to deal with some very serious allegations that have been made about him.

it has Clinton 89% chance of winning

The 11% other chance is too scary to contemplate though. I’m still worried that WikiLeaks has something bad and it’s all about timing but it’s looking less likely

As mentioned earlier though, it’s amazing just how direct the press are getting though. It’s as if everyone has recognised that subtlety is just to risky now. The Australian New South Wales parliament motion to declare him a slug was amusing. It’s also reassuring now though that they appear to be going after the folks lower down the list which suggests that they are confident of the win

Is there an argument for it being better if he does win?
If you were a Yank I think it would be a trainwreck, but for us in the UK….?

Will America under Trump just give up on the middle east and pull out, leaving them to their own devices?
Would it become a very insular nation in general and leave the rest of the world to fill the vacuum it has left?
Would that assuage the Russians and Chinese and defuse the tensions there?

Would American society crumble and fail and stand as a warning to the rest of the world not to vote for these nutters/populists? Would it change the political conversation?

I have no idea, it’s very complex, but worth thinking about???

Is there an argument for it being better if he does win?

NO

and remember, despite how much of a buffoon he is there appears to be A LOT of people willing to vote for Trump

Yes there are. There are states where he’ll probably win the popular vote by so close to 100% as makes no difference, and yet those stupid folk will still worry about “voter fraud” in places so far away from them that FoxNews will have to pin the name to a map…

However it means nothing if 100% of the folk of Dogshit, Wisconsin or Mianus Connecticut vote for you if the state only has 3 electoral college votes…

There’s no way around it. He really is a bumhole.

However it means nothing if 100% of the folk of Dogshit, Wisconsin or Mianus Connecticut vote for you if the state only has 3 electoral college votes…

snort. There really is absolutely no love for him. If there had been anyone even slightly more electable that Hillary we would never have had this thread.

tjagain – Member
I wonder what he will do after his loss?

Probably buy up half of the “independent” Scotland because SNP will welcome him with group hug to encourage investment.

Will he scream “I was robbed”? He cannot accept being beaten or wrong in any way but how will he cope with losing the election?

Most losers will scream “I was robbed” anyway so nothing new there.
You just have to look the the outcome the two referendums (Scotland & UK) to see the same screams being heard. Normal really … it is far more dangerous with the unpredictable no scream, take it on the chin, silence.
He will probably cope by buying more properties …

p/s: Good to see you back TJ.

found this a interesting read about why some will vote from Trump
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

I wonder what he will do after his loss?

Probably buy up half of the “independent” Scotland because SNP will welcome him with group hug to encourage investment.

That would be the same SNP from which Alex Salmond said of Trump: “If he wins, I’m moving to Antarctica because it’s the only place the radiation won’t reach.”

Have you anything pertinent to say about anything, chewkw? I mean, at all?

Mr Woppit – Member

Probably buy up half of the “independent” Scotland because SNP will welcome him with group hug to encourage investment.

That would be the same SNP from which Alex Salmond said of Trump: “If he wins, I’m moving to Antarctica because it’s the only place the radiation won’t reach.”[/quote] But they were once “buddy buddy mates” weren’t they so Salmon is just doing what typical politicians do really as a sign of time or backstabbing each others.

Have you anything pertinent to say about anything, chewkw? I mean, at all?

Although the mood has changed now they were mates before so no I don’t say anything as the proof is in that photo above. Aren’t they happy in that photo?

Some news bloke wrote this article.

It is always sad when friends fall out like this. If only we could instead preserve the sweet memory of happier times. Like when the Scottish government – presided over by one Alexander Salmond – did its very best to ensure Trump’s grandiose golf project on the Menie estate went ahead.

Gay Pee-Wee Herman is back:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jp-PK1TihE[/video]

I almost can’t be bothered, but – Salmond has admitted how he and the SNP were hoodwinked by Trump and have said that they will never again give him the time of day.

Stop posting old news and trying to support your drivelling.

Ladies and gentlemen, let’s hear it for the New York Times:

http://www.nytco.com/the-new-york-timess-response-to-donald-trumps-retraction-letter/

I love the idea of the owners, lawyers and editors sitting round a table. “Well, what should our response to Mr Trump’s threat of legal action be?”
“Let’s call him a ****”

It is a great piece of work and was quite clear from the start that they new what he would do. Bluff called

It’s good, but it’s no Arkell vs Pressdram

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2013/08/arkell-v-pressdram.html?m=1

Although the mood has changed now they were mates before so no I don’t say anything as the proof is in that photo above. Aren’t they happy in that photo?

If that photo proves anything, it proves that you are naive at best.

So let’s get this right, the SNP gets hoodwinked (they kissed his ass for money) and then they are aloud to run a country. Same stupid politicians, same stupid political party. What Salmond allowed Trump to do is disgusting.

That’s a great response from the NYT 🙂

I almost can’t be bothered, but – Salmond has admitted how he and the SNP were hoodwinked by Trump and have said that they will never again give him the time of day.

Well that’s OK then.

I mean Trump, bankrupt strip club owner and reality TV star, came across as such an honest and pleasant character with that golf course development. 🙄

Missing the point.

According to the maggotty one, Scotland would do the same again.

Clearly, they won’t be doing anything of the sort.

To be fair the SNP and Salmond are just like any other political party ( often the centre left). They love a bit of money sucking up to those that have it. A fine example of this would be Blair and his mate Mandelson, Brown to a less extent.
Trump of course knows this and uses it to get his own way as always. They’ll let you do anything when you promise money.

Dear lord how can you keep spouting drivel like this. She has been investigated for all of these issues and at no point has anyone who actually knows what they are talking about come to the conclusion that she has acted illegally.

@gonefishing she has been ordered to appear before a Federal Judge under threat of Pergury – she has repeatedly said, including to Senate Committee, she did not know that using a personal email server for Government business was illegal / breach of security. That’s a lie under oath in my and may ofher peoples opinion. Remember her defence to FBI for not knowing what constituted a government secret was she fell over and hit her head and forgot everything.

Salmond. Remember he wrote to RBS encouraging them to press ahead with their acquisition on ABN Amro inckuding their large US Subprime operation, it was this deal that killed the bank. As for Trump they where only too keen to take his money and grant him the planning per ission he wanted. Salmond and the SNP weren’t hoodwinked by anyone, they knew what they where doing and encouraged him to invest in Scotland

I wonder what the Economist thinks of Trump?

‘The debasing of American politics’

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/10/tracking-trump-presidential-candidate

Is not everyone who appears before a judge under threat of perjury as you do have to tell the truth – is there really a judge you are allowed to lie to? Your statement is to make it look “worse” or more severe than just having to answer some questions in court

That’s a lie under oath in my and may other peoples opinion

RW Trump supporters do indeed think this , the problem is they are not very interested in evidence

the FBI stated that Clinton was “extremely careless” in handling her email system but recommended that no charges be filed against Clinton. On July 6, 2016, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced that no charges would be filed. On July 7, the State Department reopened its probe into the email controversy. On September 2, 2016, the FBI published a 58 page report on the investigation into her server

According to Clinton’s spokesperson Nick Merrill, a number of government officials have used private email accounts for official business, including secretaries of state before Clinton.[37] State Department spokesperson Marie Harf said that: “For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account.”[30]

@gonefishing she has been ordered to appear before a Federal Judge under threat of Pergury

Firstly 😆

A right wing group has brought a nuisance lawsuit and made a freedom of information request, a judge has ordered her to answer some questions.

Pergury (sic) is not a threat, it is the act of making intentionally false statements in legally binding situations. Committing perjury is against the law in that it is a normal point of procedure in law, stating it as a threat is just hysterical hyperbole.

That’s a lie under oath in my and may other peoples opinion.

I was going to reply to this but Junky and MSP have it pretty much covered.

What does amaze me though is that with there being plenty of policy from Clinton available why do people not concentrate on criticising that rather than relying on made up garbage like the emails and the “rape defender”

That’s a great response from the NYT

I always enjoy it when they skip straight over ‘the story is true’ to the ‘you had no reputation left for us to ruin anyway’ in response to libel action threats. 🙂

under threat of Pergury

is Pergury something else you’ve “studied”?

Looks like Hillary is going full on for the Reagan Iran-Contra Alzheimer’s defence:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37651858

cut n paste for reps trying to save their party

Well, this is embarrassing.

It appears that Donald Trump is not the man I thought he was at all.

I must withdraw my support. I cannot in good conscience endorse this man. Not in light of the tape of him speaking cavalierly to Billy Bush of taking advantage of his powerful position to assault women, or the allegations that he did exactly what he boasted about.

Truly, I never saw this coming. Not when he said that Megyn Kelly was crazy and had “blood coming out of her … wherever.” Not when he retweeted that meme about Heidi Cruz. Not with all those decades of footage of him boasting on the radio about how dodging sexually transmitted diseases was his Vietnam, a totally normal thing that people of course say all the time, respected people whom I feel fine electing president.

Not when he called a former Miss Universe “Miss Piggy” and “Miss Housekeeping.” Not when the female employee who testified that he was a perfectly fine boss also said that he kept a “fat picture” of her in a drawer to motivate her.

Not when he supported Howard Stern calling his daughter Ivanka a “piece of a*sterisk” and said on “The View” that he’d date her, AS THOUGH THAT WERE A COMPLIMENT AND NOT SOMETHING THAT WALDER FREY OR AN OEDIPAL NIGHTMARE PERSON WOULD SAY.

Not when he was on TV looking at his baby daughter Tiffany and wondering about when she would have breasts like her mother.

“Yes,” I said to myself then, “a man who looks at a baby and says, ‘Ah, what a shame that I cannot sexualize this infant yet’ — that is a man who I bet does not have a problem with women. That is a man who should be president. He will certainly be different, and different is what I want!”

All of these remarks that Donald Trump made when he knew his microphone was on did not appall me. They seemed normal and fine, and I stood by them.

So I was BLINDSIDED by the remarks that Trump made when he did not know his microphone was on.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2016/10/13/well-of-course-i-disavow-donald-trump-now/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.974def8071b7

Looks like Hillary is going full on for the Reagan Iran-Contra Alzheimer’s defence:

Yup. Plus the blood clot on the brain was definitely not a stroke, no not at all. She fell, she hit her head, she forgot, she couldn’t work for weeks / months ? All while Secretary of State.

If she repeats the lies under oath in front of the judge she’ll be toast. If she says something different (ie I forgot) she’ll be asked why.

She used a personal server to cover things up and to enable her to delete messages in a way that they could not be traced.

As Trump and his increasingly small band of republican backers spin into anti-illuminati teritory
Clinton is now confident enough to talk about other stuff too

“We haven’t had a chance to talk about how we’re going to fix what doesn’t work with the Affordable Care Act,” she continued. “We haven’t gotten a chance to talk about how we’re going to defend women’s rights and Planned Parenthood, gay rights … voter rights … disability rights … workers’ rights … And we haven’t had much of a chance to talk about how I intend to take on the gun lobby.”

a post Trump rep party will be punished in the senate by disgruntled reps who blame them for backing/not backing Trump

Theyve been courting this madness for years with their endorsements of the Tea Party movenment

Except, you know, the FBI said there was no crime committed.

Plus the blood clot on the brain was definitely not a stroke, no not at all. She fell, she hit her head, she forgot, she couldn’t work for weeks / months ? All while Secretary of State.

Is this you proving that your lack of knowledge on medical issues is on a par with your ignorance of American legal processes?

appear before a Federal Judge under threat of Pergury

Will this be in Italy?