Here are some highlights. They're the only ones under about 25 minutes total that I could find. They're from The Guardian, and the Guardian is not shy about its liberal leanings so take that for what it's worth. I think it's a good summation of the more substantive moments of the debate, especially for Trump who really struggled with substance. To be fair though, they miss out on Trump's best moment which was pressing Clinton on the Clinton Foundation. The "nasty woman" comment it at 4:25.
Trump called "Fix" when he lost a primary and even when his show didn't get an Emmy.
It's his "I didn't really lose" face saver in the same way he and many republicans refused to accept Obama as president as he wasn't born, according to Trump and other "birthers", in the US.
And yet when there was real rigged voting in Florida that cost Al Gore the election the same republicans cried "sore loser"
I've heard he's questioned Springsteen's claim as well.
It's a real indication of just how poor the two candidates are that Clinton is still showing only single digit leads against someone as abysmal as Trump.
I'm writing this about an hour into the debate. Hilary is really, really fucking good tonight. And Donald Trump has just said that he will not necessarily respect the outcome of the election.
I'm off to buy canned goods and a generator for the upcoming coup.
That sounds totally and utterly nonsensical, if very worrying.
I switched off Family Guy to try and watch the last 20 minutes of Sky Atlantic's coverage; and they've been discussing the possibility of anarchy, and how a large number of his supporters are anti-establishment - to the point of viewing some of the media coverage as a form of election rigging! The whole mentality and extremes at work here are utterly bizarre. What's going on at the moment?
I'm confused by the Trump supporters though, are they traditionally Republicans - or do the Republicans look at Trump as a bit of an outcast? I can't imagine many traditional Republicans considering themselves as anti-establishment, nor can I see many welcoming foreign intervention in to US politics. There seems to be a lot of role reversal going on, and blurring of party lines.
Interesting to hear some of the fact checking going on though.. demonstrates what an un-inspiring choice the two are.
Yeah glad you could be bothered mate, hate to interrupt Family Guy for ya (by the way if it's late 90s/early 2000s FG you're absolutely right).
I promise this will be my last post on the debate for a while.
So this question of "where did these people come from" has been pervasive amongst people on both coasts and those who live in big cities, along with some in the media. The answer is they are base Republicans, but what you're seeing now is a particular part of that base who have been fermenting for quite some time now. They're still mad that Obama took their country from them. They're mad that they, or their family or their friends don't have jobs (something we all share) and they have been fed the line that immigrants and foreign countries have stolen their jobs (the immigrants line has been a Republican line for quite some time). They are incredibly socially conservative, and there is still a fair amount of Christian Evangelicals in this movement it seems.
It is a particularly nasty subset of this country. I think it's a transformation of neo-conservativism, which was quite dark in its own right, into something bigger, larger, and louder, and without the pretense of having to cater to "Christian Ideals" as interpreted in a very fundamentalist way.
That's my guess anyway. If I can find some of the things I've read I'll post here.
That new movement is the alt-right, and you'd all best be scared of it. Unless you're part of it. Nobody who's posted here recently could be, though. Nope.
I'm just back from Florida. I honestly couldn't believe the amount of political shirts and attire on show. Just seemed alien to me. I genuinely walked past a man in Universal (a place full of kids and families) with a T-Shirt that said "Hillary for Prison", a woman also had a T-Shirt on that read "Trump can grab my pussy"! I also saw about 20 people wearing "Make America Great Again" hats (as an aside, when exactly is their point of reference that America was so "great"? Something tells me with this mob that it was before the abolishment of slavery to be honest) and plenty of "BlueLivesMatter" T-Shirts supporting the police in the current struggles over there against the "BlackLivesMatter" group. I saw very very few pro Hillary tops but there was 1 or 2 but no where near as many as pro Trump.
Now, this could be because Trump supporters feel the need to wear the stuff far more that Hillary supporters do, which is probably likely, but it really did strike me as mad, especially the woman with the "he can grab me" top on, I almost wanted to stop her to take a picture, but she looked terrifying!
Yeah...yeah. I think it's worth noting that Orlando is a real condensation of middle America, and America in general. It's where so many from the south and midwest go on holiday. It's WAY too much America for me, and I'm not particularly surprised by it to be honest. Also, yes, some of the things on shirts and that are said at Trump rallies are very terrifying . As he's really started embracing it it's really started to register with me (and I am very jaded and cynical about the political and moral lows of this country, they didn't start with Trump and they won't end with him) just how disturbing this rhetoric is when stirred up by a presidential candidate.
Just seemed so mad to me that they'd happily wear them out in "public" (and especially Theme Parks) as it were and not confine them to the rallies or other political events.
Whilst I was in New York the second debate was on, every bar in Brooklyn seemed to have it on, with many having people standing outside on the street watching through windows of bars. I don't think it had really registered with me quite how much the political game in America is such a "show". It kind of made me realise finally quite how a reality tv star has done so well.
I've recorded the third one which I'll watch later tonight, it doesn't sound like there was much controversy as it seems quiet on the social media front so far. Apart from the refusal to accept the result as mentioned above.
Yes, it's definitely blood sport. It always has been to some degree, but because of Trump it's even more of a circus now. There is a sort of morbid curiosity with these debates. I think that everything you're seeing is amplified quite a bit because of this election, because of the chasm within America, but yes, it really is a spectacle here.
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
So there's a lot to unpack here. First off, Roger Stone occasionally of the Trump campaign, apparently has a direct line to Assange (just heard this from Wasserman of 538, cannot independently verify). But I think that anything overly damning would have come out by now. Is it clear that there is a pay for play element with the Clinton Foundation? Yes. Is that the case in all of American politics? Yes. That is the case on both sides of the aisle, but Republicans appointed the SCJ who said, in Citizens United, that corporations have the same rights as people, and opened up the door to unlimited campaign contributions and the furthering of money in politics.
I refuse to accept criticism about that NOW just because one side is losing. It's something that has infuriated me for years, I'd argue it's a longer-standing, more dangerous undermining factor of our democracy than Trump is. But for everyone to start complaining about it because the other team is doing it is transparent politicking rubbish. It's worth noting that major Bush campaign donors and former Cheney employers Halliburton won numerous no bid contracts for services in the Afghan and Iraqi wars, and it was later discovered that they massively overcharged the Government. This is not new.
Now, as for the penalty analogy, it would be more like us beating Millwall 7-0, Millwall having had 3 players sent off for vicious challenges that were undoubtedly red cards, and then after the game Millwall's coach coming out with no evidence or precedent and saying the game was rigged. This is not a close race. There is no recent history of substantive voter fraud in the US.
Now, the reason why voter fraud on such a grand scale is basically impossible in the US is because we have de-centralized elections. Each state basically runs its own election, and then their electoral college votes are touted up. This includes states with Republican Governors, Attorney Generals, etc. who oversee this voting. On top of that, there is the Federal Election Commission whose job it is to oversee voting as a whole to ensure there is no voter fraud, discrimination, or intimidation (the latter of which Trump supporters have claimed they will be doing in this from the Boston Globe).
These are baseless claims made by a man who is floundering badly. You can say what you like about it being bad policy and contradicting his family and running mate, but Trump is so arrogant that he thinks he only loses if things are rigged against him. There is absolutely zero empirical evidence of this, and in fact, with new stringent voter ID laws in place in states with a history of voter suppression against minorities (thanks to The Court overturning part of the Voting Rights Act), the opposite is far more likely to be true.
I just watched a video of Trump in the primaries saying, and I quote "You've been hearing me saying it's a rigged system but now I don't say that anymore because I won".
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
Unless! Oh, unless! Oh CORRUPTION! Put that dog-whistle DOWN, sir!
Try putting your left bias to one side for an hour or three and study the documentary evidence, as I have:
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned. Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia. I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
Unless! Oh, unless! Oh CORRUPTION! Put that dog-whistle DOWN, sir!
Try putting your left bias to one side for an hour or three and study the documentary evidence, as I have:
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned. Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia. I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
Unless! Oh, unless! Oh CORRUPTION! Put that dog-whistle DOWN, sir!
Try putting your left bias to one side for an hour or three and study the documentary evidence, as I have:
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned. Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia. I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
Someone who retweets Matt Drudge, Sean Hannity and any number of gurgling mouthbreathing deplorables has no political bias? I'm sure his sources are totally legit.
Let's browse his Twitter (which the Jews haven't taken down yet, somehow!) and gauge for ourselves what kind of man this is: twitter.com/mpsmithnews
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
Unless! Oh, unless! Oh CORRUPTION! Put that dog-whistle DOWN, sir!
Try putting your left bias to one side for an hour or three and study the documentary evidence, as I have:
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned. Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia. I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
You do know Google can't take sites down, right? They're not a host, and they have no power to force another host to take a site online. All they can do is delist the site, which would be simple enough to do, but a simple Google search shows they haven't even delisted it. In fact a Google search for it brings up the guys website, Facebook page and Twitter account as the first 3 links, so clearly Google really don't care.
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
Unless! Oh, unless! Oh CORRUPTION! Put that dog-whistle DOWN, sir!
Try putting your left bias to one side for an hour or three and study the documentary evidence, as I have:
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned. Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia. I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
You do know Google can't take sites down, right? They're not a host, and they have no power to force another host to take a site online. All they can do is delist the site, which would be simple enough to do, but a simple Google search shows they haven't even delisted it. In fact a Google search for it brings up the guys website, Facebook page and Twitter account as the first 3 links, so clearly Google really don't care.
But the establishment. And the thing is you don't get it because...the establishment.
If anyone can watch the video in that link (presuming you can get past the URL) for more than twenty seconds you're a hardier person than me.
Anyway, these are the fucking wingnut cunts you look up to, q_a. Take a look at yourself.
Twitter, twitter, tweet, tweet, that's the whole problem with the political debate these days. Read the documents thoroughly, try putting your usual lefty insults and obscenities to one side just for once. If you take the time to actually read something thoroughly, rather than concentrate on one line tweets, you will see that all sides of politics are implicated for their deals with the Clinton foundation. BTW, the video you have linked to is not the journo in question, but then the first duty of any lefty is always to try to discredit someone by means of character assassination, I know the score! The guy you refer to as a wingnut c***t, is a former policeman, soldier, corporate executive, and radio host who has sacrificed almost everything he had in order to expose the truth. I don't need to look at myself at all, I am old enough and intelligent enough to decide who to believe and who to trust in life and I base my judgement not on a few tweets, but from years of reading documents, obtained under FOI or from the archives, something like 1500 in the case of the Australian AWU scandal.
What Trump said about possibly not accepting the result, was political suicide, madness, whatever was he thinking! He contradicted his running partner, his chief of staff, even his daughter, it doesn't make any sense. Unless, unless he knows something we don't, like a future Wikileaks release that proves his case that the election is in fact rigged. If we as Charlton fans, lost in the FA Cup final to Millwall to a last minute disputed penalty, and we subsequently found out that the referee had been paid off by the Millwall chairman, would we accept the result? I know I wouldn't. I deplore corruption and am sick of it invading and affecting the lives of decent honest people.
Unless! Oh, unless! Oh CORRUPTION! Put that dog-whistle DOWN, sir!
Try putting your left bias to one side for an hour or three and study the documentary evidence, as I have:
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned. Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia. I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
You do know Google can't take sites down, right? They're not a host, and they have no power to force another host to take a site online. All they can do is delist the site, which would be simple enough to do, but a simple Google search shows they haven't even delisted it. In fact a Google search for it brings up the guys website, Facebook page and Twitter account as the first 3 links, so clearly Google really don't care.
As I said, it was put back up yesterday. As we know with Meire, references can be cleaned and this is what happened. You can read about it here, if you are interested:
Thanks for posting that last link though. In one of the images you can see that the following article comes up high on a Google search for this madman:
Featuring the following quote He’s also big-hearted, unguarded and foul mouthed: every sentence, it seems, is peppered with “prick”, “bastard”, “fuck”, “bullshit” or “dickhead”.
I'll keep my lefty obscenities right where they fucking belong, thanks.
As I'm in Canada right now, I watched the whole debate live last night (and the previous one). Whatever you make think about Hillary, and the Clintons in general, and the "establishment", if this guy ever gets near the Presidency there will be absolute chaos and a serious risk to all of our safety and security. He is simply not psychologically suitable to be President, even if you ignore his misogynism, racism, and hairdo!
Comments
Here are some highlights. They're the only ones under about 25 minutes total that I could find. They're from The Guardian, and the Guardian is not shy about its liberal leanings so take that for what it's worth. I think it's a good summation of the more substantive moments of the debate, especially for Trump who really struggled with substance. To be fair though, they miss out on Trump's best moment which was pressing Clinton on the Clinton Foundation. The "nasty woman" comment it at 4:25.
I promise this will be my last post on the debate for a while.
So this question of "where did these people come from" has been pervasive amongst people on both coasts and those who live in big cities, along with some in the media. The answer is they are base Republicans, but what you're seeing now is a particular part of that base who have been fermenting for quite some time now. They're still mad that Obama took their country from them. They're mad that they, or their family or their friends don't have jobs (something we all share) and they have been fed the line that immigrants and foreign countries have stolen their jobs (the immigrants line has been a Republican line for quite some time). They are incredibly socially conservative, and there is still a fair amount of Christian Evangelicals in this movement it seems.
It is a particularly nasty subset of this country. I think it's a transformation of neo-conservativism, which was quite dark in its own right, into something bigger, larger, and louder, and without the pretense of having to cater to "Christian Ideals" as interpreted in a very fundamentalist way.
That's my guess anyway. If I can find some of the things I've read I'll post here.
er, yeah
I refuse to accept criticism about that NOW just because one side is losing. It's something that has infuriated me for years, I'd argue it's a longer-standing, more dangerous undermining factor of our democracy than Trump is. But for everyone to start complaining about it because the other team is doing it is transparent politicking rubbish. It's worth noting that major Bush campaign donors and former Cheney employers Halliburton won numerous no bid contracts for services in the Afghan and Iraqi wars, and it was later discovered that they massively overcharged the Government. This is not new.
Now, as for the penalty analogy, it would be more like us beating Millwall 7-0, Millwall having had 3 players sent off for vicious challenges that were undoubtedly red cards, and then after the game Millwall's coach coming out with no evidence or precedent and saying the game was rigged. This is not a close race. There is no recent history of substantive voter fraud in the US.
Now, the reason why voter fraud on such a grand scale is basically impossible in the US is because we have de-centralized elections. Each state basically runs its own election, and then their electoral college votes are touted up. This includes states with Republican Governors, Attorney Generals, etc. who oversee this voting. On top of that, there is the Federal Election Commission whose job it is to oversee voting as a whole to ensure there is no voter fraud, discrimination, or intimidation (the latter of which Trump supporters have claimed they will be doing in this from the Boston Globe).
These are baseless claims made by a man who is floundering badly. You can say what you like about it being bad policy and contradicting his family and running mate, but Trump is so arrogant that he thinks he only loses if things are rigged against him. There is absolutely zero empirical evidence of this, and in fact, with new stringent voter ID laws in place in states with a history of voter suppression against minorities (thanks to The Court overturning part of the Voting Rights Act), the opposite is far more likely to be true.
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2016/09/new-documents-that-reveal-bill-clintons-backdated-contracts-and-multimillion-frauds-in-the-name-of-h.html
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2016/09/the-21-pages-deleted-from-the-clinton-foundations-2005-irs-tax-exempt-annual-return.html
Unlike the mainstream media who spin the news according to their own political bias, this guy obtains documents, forensically examines them and then allows the evidence to tell the story. Google has twice tried to take down his site and yesterday removed all references to it via their search engine, it has only just returned.
Being out of work, I spend far too much time reading this stuff, and the more corruption he exposes, the more depressing I find it. He is without doubt, the finest investigative journalist I have ever read. He has the political establishment of all sides running scared, so much so that he is currently in hiding in SE Asia.
I have no doubt that Bill and Hillary are two of the biggest crooks to be walking the face of the earth.
Let's browse his Twitter (which the Jews haven't taken down yet, somehow!) and gauge for ourselves what kind of man this is: twitter.com/mpsmithnews
If anyone can watch the video in that link (presuming you can get past the URL) for more than twenty seconds you're a hardier person than me.
Anyway, these are the fucking wingnut cunts you look up to, q_a. Take a look at yourself.
Another woman on sky news now explaining how she was sexually abused.
*never know who's reading this!
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2016/10/google-reacts-by-erasing-us-today-our-work-on-clinton-foundation-undiscoverable.html
Friday, 21 October 2016 (GMT+10)
Time in Brisbane QLD, Australia
go to bed m8
https://www.crikey.com.au/2012/11/27/inside-misogynist-nut-job-hq-in-bed-with-michael-smith/
Featuring the following quote
He’s also big-hearted, unguarded and foul mouthed: every sentence, it seems, is peppered with “prick”, “bastard”, “fuck”, “bullshit” or “dickhead”.
I'll keep my lefty obscenities right where they fucking belong, thanks.