Donald Trump, the road that might not lead to the White House!

[TomUS]

The most important issue imo, and the one you don't mention, is the effect of a Republican president stacking the Supreme Court with rightist, conservative judges.

Correct. And I did list that in my post 5632.

Appoint extreme right wing Fed judges (goodbye abortion rights, LGBT rights & more voter suppression of minorities & poor).

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The Arizona Republic, a newspaper that has never endorsed a Democratic candidate for president since its inception in 1890, has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/editorial/2016/09/27/hillary-clinton-endorsement/91198668/

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

The Dallas Morning News, a newspaper that hasn't endorsed a Democratic candidate in 75 years, has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

We recommend Hillary Clinton for president | Editorials | Dallas News

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

For people who are unfamiliar with the workings of American society: it's very significant to see conservative media outlets from right wing states, making these kinds of endorsements.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Was going to post this in the lazer guided cock thread. But it can go here too.

 

[krtek a houby]

Was going to post this in the lazer guided cock thread. But it can go here too.

 

[ViolentPanda]

So, you think unions don't work for companies that make stuff for export? Really? The UAW who work for Ford, GM & Chrysler (& support Hillary) would be surprised to hear that. If neoliberals support Hillary, who supports Trump....neoliberals who are also neo-facists. I do belive in TINA. The alternatives to Hillary are Trump & his neo-fascist mob, Libertarians who are neoliberals on steroids & who's candidate didn't know what Aleppo is & couldn't name a single foreign leader he admires. Then there's the Greens, a joke of a party that has accomplished nothing in 20 years except help put GW Bush into power.

Unions don't work for companies, union members do, and unions organise within those companies.

 

[gosub]

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

A sign from God:

'The lard works in mysterious ways' We caught up with woman who found Donald Trump in butter

 

[TomUS]

The billionaire Wall St. tycoon family behind Trump & the Repubs....Robert & Rebekah Mercer. They hate Hillary's proposed tax on trading Mercer's hedge fund specializes in.

To help pay for the convention, the family foundation Mercer runs wrote a $500,000 check–pocket change compared with the tens of millions of dollars it has showered on a sprawling web of conservative foundations, political networks and research institutions. That’s not counting the family’s reputed eight-figure investment in Breitbart, the house organ of the right-wing populist movement that fueled Trump’s ascent...Rebekah’s father Robert Mercer, a New York hedge-fund executive, has forked over more than $20 million in the 2016 election, which makes him the single largest Republican donor this cycle. Before the Mercers backed Trump, they bankrolled Texas Senator Ted Cruz...it makes sense that Mercer has bankrolled Republicans challenging Hillary Clinton, who proposed a new tax on some profits from lightning-quick trading

He's also a right wing conspiraloon.

People who know or have worked with Mercer portray him as a strong-willed thinker who mixes conservative doctrine–limited government, a robust national defense–with some fringier ideas...He has bankrolled a conservative activist who crusades against Agenda 21, a U.N. plan to encourage sustainable development that conspiracy theorists call a secret plot to abridge private-property rights. And he has sponsored an annual conference on disaster preparedness run by an Arizona physician who suggested government authorities may have had a role in the 2015 San Bernardino, Calif., massacre.

How a Reclusive Hedge-Fund Boss and His Daughter Are Reshaping the Republican Party

 

[Casually Red]

and you claim not to be a misogynist.
maybe you don't know what it means - it doesn't mean you don't like Japanese soup, you know

You must have been having kittens when Thatcher died.

Have some extra special urban " right on " points . Calling a genocidal mass murderer a " harpie " is more offensive than murdering millions of innocent people ? Trailing me round the forums acting holier than thou making these snide comments . Fuck right off lecturing me on my morals you smug , hypocritical , up your own arse, pontificating little shit .

There's hundreds of 1000s of Iraqi families who saw their kids die for want of vaccines, medicine or clean water whod call that fucking monster a damn sight worse. When your done sniffily lecturing them then get back to me.

Fuck off

 

[existentialist]

You must have been having kittens when Thatcher died.

Have some extra special urban " right on " points . Calling a genocidal mass murderer a " harpie " is more offensive than murdering millions of innocent people ? Trailing me round the forums acting holier than thou making these snide comments . Fuck right off lecturing me on my morals you smug , hypocritical , up your own arse, pontificating little shit .

You haven't said "you people" for quite a while...

 

[Casually Red]

You haven't said "you people" for quite a while...

You can fuck off and all . Weirdo .

 

[existentialist]

You can fuck off and all . Weirdo .

Yes, because the man running around shouting at the furniture isn't weird in the slightest

 

[Casually Red]

Yes, because the man running around shouting at the furniture isn't weird in the slightest

I only shout at the tv . The furniture is inanimate and therefore innocent of wrongdoing .

Actually apologies. I'm a tad under the weather this morning and my comment was a bit uncharitable . Illbe back to my cheery self before long I'm sure

 

[Casually Red]

and you claim not to be a misogynist.
maybe you don't know what it means - it doesn't mean you don't like Japanese soup, you know

Apologies for my earlier post slagging you off . Was a bit uncalled for .

 

[Maltin]

USA Today, a newspaper that says it hasn't taken sides in Presidential races in the past, decides to come out anti-Trump saying he is unfit for President.

USA TODAY's Editorial Board: Trump is 'unfit for the presidency'

 

[SpackleFrog]

The most important issue imo, and the one you don't mention, is the effect of a Republican president stacking the Supreme Court with rightist, conservative judges.

The most important issue is building a movement that can oppose Clinton or Trump. Not who's on the Supreme Court.

 

[SpackleFrog]

So, you think unions don't work for companies that make stuff for export? Really? The UAW who work for Ford, GM & Chrysler (& support Hillary) would be surprised to hear that. If neoliberals support Hillary, who supports Trump....neoliberals who are also neo-facists. I do belive in TINA. The alternatives to Hillary are Trump & his neo-fascist mob, Libertarians who are neoliberals on steroids & who's candidate didn't know what Aleppo is & couldn't name a single foreign leader he admires. Then there's the Greens, a joke of a party that has accomplished nothing in 20 years except help put GW Bush into power.

Ford, GM, Chrysler... Don't actually make many cars in the US anymore. They've outsourced production to countries with lower wages. Clinton supports the liberal trade regime that allows them to do this. Trump offers protectionism - tariffs etc - to prevent these companies outsourcing production. Now I don't think protectionism is the right response. It's not a policy I advocate. But when you consider that Trump is offering a solution to workers who fear their jobs will be moved abroad, and that Clinton supports a liberal trade regime which will offer no protection whatsoever, then maybe you'll see why many workers who traditionally vote Democrat aren't enthused about Clinton.

Maybe you'll also realise that your claim that workers benefit from the free trade regime is ignorant bollocks.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Was going to post this in the lazer guided cock thread. But it can go here too.

EWWWWWWW

Thought - I've suspected for a while that Trump's racist rhetoric is largely a deliberate attempt to gain support, and isn't particularly sincere. He certainly doesn't seem to hate all Muslims for example, not if they're wealthy business types. His mysogyny on the other hand seems to be the main aspect of his politics or ideology that he actually means. I don't think he wants to be seen as a sexist, but can't help coming across as one because he has some seriously dark and unpleasant views on women.

Not sure I'm making sense - but anyone agree?

 

[Maltin]

Trump offers protectionism - tariffs etc - to prevent these companies outsourcing production. Now I don't think protectionism is the right response. It's not a policy I advocate. But when you consider that Trump is offering a solution to workers who fear their jobs will be moved abroad

Except Trump isn't interested in protectionism, he's only interested in what makes him the most money and willingly outsources production for his own products. I doubt he would be willing to change his methods if he were to become President.

How many Trump products were made overseas? Here’s the complete list.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Except Trump isn't interested in protectionism, he's only interested in what makes him the most money and willingly outsources production for his own products. I doubt he would be willing to change his methods if he were to become President.

How many Trump products were made overseas? Here’s the complete list.

I didn't say he meant it. I said he's talking about protectionism.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

EWWWWWWW

Thought - I've suspected for a while that Trump's racist rhetoric is largely a deliberate attempt to gain support, and isn't particularly sincere. He certainly doesn't seem to hate all Muslims for example, not if they're wealthy business types. His mysogyny on the other hand seems to be the main aspect of his politics or ideology that he actually means. I don't think he wants to be seen as a sexist, but can't help coming across as one because he has some seriously dark and unpleasant views on women.

Not sure I'm making sense - but anyone agree?

I agree that he probably can't help himself re sexism. But I see his racism in the same light, largely. He is on record as racialising moral and intellectual abilities - he's a full-on biological racist. And this seeps out even without him realising it when, for instance, he says something he probably thinks isn't racist because he's being positive about something he sees as a racial trait, such as that he wants a Jew to handle his money for him.

I agree that he's using racist rhetoric on purpose, but I don't see him as using it in a controlled way. Both his racism and his misogyny have deep roots in his way of thinking and he's not capable of expressing himself without these attitudes coming out. His thoughts don't merely end with racist/misogynist conclusions - they begin with racist/mysogynist assumptions.

 

[Maltin]

EWWWWWWW

Thought - I've suspected for a while that Trump's racist rhetoric is largely a deliberate attempt to gain support, and isn't particularly sincere. He certainly doesn't seem to hate all Muslims for example, not if they're wealthy business types. His mysogyny on the other hand seems to be the main aspect of his politics or ideology that he actually means. I don't think he wants to be seen as a sexist, but can't help coming across as one because he has some seriously dark and unpleasant views on women.

Not sure I'm making sense - but anyone agree?

Agree that he's sexist? Agree that he's insincere and untrustworthy? Agree that he's mainly interested in making money? I think many people agree with you on those.

 

[redsquirrel]

Just so you know, you support Clinton's neoliberal policies because you are a neoliberal who believes in TINA - 'there is no alternative'.

He's an anti-union fuck, perfect example of a Clinton supporter.

Gov union workers are the privileged few & then play the victim if they're asked to make any sacrifice at all in a time of economic disaster. Don't know much about Wisconsin but in my state of Oregon, state union workers contribute nothing to their cushy pension plans & nothing to their health ins plans & most get automatic pay raises no matter how bad the financial condition of the state. They can't be fired no matter how bad a job they do. They don't give a damn about private sector workers who get fired by the millions. In fact they launch attacks on priv sector workers by using union funds to promote constantly higher taxes to pay for benefits that only they get. They even push for non-union state workers to be laid off. For the 95% of workers who live in the real world, it does get pretty irritating.

 

[J Ed]

For people who are unfamiliar with the workings of American society: it's very significant to see conservative media outlets from right wing states, making these kinds of endorsements.

I think that many of us who *are* familiar with the number of deeply unpleasant, often criminal, people on 'the other side of the aisle' who have endorsed or all but endorsed Hillary Clinton are further horrified (if that is possible at this point) rather than buoyed by it.

 

[J Ed]

Some of these have been discussed upthread, but well worth another mention.

Negroponte's Crimes

Among the right-wingers that have jumped the Republican ship and thrown their support behind Hillary Clinton in the last few months, you’ll find neoconservatives and warmongers who have vocally supported just about every heinous US foreign policy venture under the sun, from the Iraq War to Libya to torture. But though their cheerleading may have been valuable in the push for these actions, few can claim direct responsibility in the making of these disasters.

Not so for John Negroponte, the former career diplomat who served under four Republican presidents and one Democrat and whose support for Clinton was announced last week.

The endorsements of Clinton by right-wing hall-of-famers like Negroponte have not come about entirely out of nowhere. It’s true that many elements of Clinton’s foreign policy appeal to the interventionist and neocon wing of the Republican Party.

Nonetheless, as Politico reported last week, the Clinton campaign has been actively courting leading lights of the GOP, culminating in last week’s launch of “Together for America,” a site touting the growing list of high-profile Republicans and independents backing Clinton.

...

son of a Greek shipping magnate, Negroponte cut his diplomatic teeth in Vietnam, where he served under future Clinton mentor and war criminal Henry Kissinger(another luminary whom Clinton’s campaign is now reportedly wooing for an endorsement) during the Paris peace talks.

While Kissinger helped Nixon to win in 1968 by secretly scuttling peace negotiations with North Vietnam, once in power, both wanted eventually to get the United States out of the war, mostly out of concern for how a continuing quagmire would hurt Nixon politically. Negroponte challenged him about a concession in the peace agreement that allowed the North Vietnamese to station troops in the South after US withdrawal.

“Do you want us to stay there forever?” Kissinger asked the young Negroponte. The United States’ years of bloodletting in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos apparently wasn’t enough for Negroponte.

Negroponte worked for several years in a number of less prominent diplomatic positions, owing, at least in one observer’s view, to being “exiled” by Kissinger because of his break with the secretary of state over Vietnam.

Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980 gave Negroponte his big break.

Under Reagan, Latin American politics took a hard right turn, which his administration enabled by sending aid, arms, and, in the case of Grenada, troops to assist right-wing governments and forces — nearly all of which aided in scores of human rights atrocities.

In 1981, Reagan made Negroponte the US ambassador to Honduras. Negroponte had held earlier posts in Greece and Ecuador; Honduras was the big leagues.

In 1980, neighboring El Salvador had plunged into civil war between leftist guerillas and a quasi-fascist, US-backed military government and its right-wing paramilitary forces that included death squads. A year earlier, its other neighbor, Nicaragua, had seen its US-backed dictator deposed and replaced by the socialist Sandinista government.

The Sandinistas were opposed by a coalition of brutally violent counterrevolutionaries that included former members of the National Guard, ex-soldiers, Conservative Party members, and disgruntled peasants and farmers. They were known as the Contras, later of Iran-Contra fame.

In both countries, the Reagan administration threw in with the right-wing torturers and murderers.

The action was principally in Nicaragua and El Salvador, but Negroponte had not been relegated to some insignificant backwater. Honduras was central to the Reagan administration’s efforts to halt the spread of leftist rule in Central America, serving as the home base for its covert war against the Left in the region. Honduras had one of the largest US embassies in Latin America, hosted thousands of American troops, and eventually housed the biggest CIA station in the entire world.

Although Honduras had a civilian government — its first in more than a century — the military remained powerful, and General Gustavo Alvarez, the chief of the armed forces, held considerable sway. Under Alvarez, Honduras became the training ground and headquarters for the Contras and other right-wing forces, who were then sent to wreak havoc in Nicaragua and El Salvador.

It was also where budding members of Honduran death squads received their schooling, including the notorious Battalion 3-16, responsible for the disappearance of at least 184 people, mostly leftists, and the torture of many more.

All of this was done with the support of the United States and its man on the ground, Negroponte.

US military aid to Honduras increased from $4 million to $200 million between 1980 and 1985, and the Reagan administration paid top Honduran military brass for their assistance. Repressive forces, including Battalion 3-16, were trained by the CIA and FBI, and the United States provided the money to hire Argentinian counterinsurgency officers — involved in their own US-backed, horrific, decade-long “Dirty War” against leftists — to provide further instruction.

The “coercive techniques” they learned were partly taken from CIA interrogation manuals that advocated using threats of violence and disruption of “patterns of time, space and sensory perception” against prisoners.

With this training in their back pocket, these US-backed Honduran forces proceeded to cut a swath of brutality across the country and its neighbors. Within Honduras, hundreds of people suspected of being subversives were kidnapped, tortured, disappeared, or all three. All of it was known, and quietly approved, by Negroponte.

The torture endured by prisoners covered just about the entire spectrum of depravity, including suffocation, beatings, sleep deprivation, electrocution of the genitals, rape, and the threat of rape toward family members. In one case, military forces used rope to tear off a man’s testicles before killing him.

People were picked up off the street and thrown into unmarked vans. Some victims were completely innocent, such as a union organizer who was befriended and betrayed by a battalion member who knowingly turned him over to security forces under false charges.

Military forces barged into homes, ransacked them, and arrested the occupants if they found Marxist literature. And the Contras, whoRonald Reagan called the “moral equals of our Founding Fathers,” were possibly even worse.

Negroponte played a key role in covering up all of this. As the ambassador, Negroponte’s job was to ensure that the abuses committed by Honduran forces remained unknown to US lawmakers and the general public so they could continue unabated.

Had Congress caught wind of the atrocities, the government would have had to shut off the flow of tens of millions of dollars of military aid to the country, which, under the Foreign Assistance Act, is prohibited to governments engaging in human rights violations. This was the last thing Negroponte and the Reagan administration wanted. They were bent on defeating the leftists, and if that required turning a blind eye to widespread torture, rape, and murder, so be it.

The Reagan administration’s grand strategy was enabled by a steady stream of obfuscation from the Honduran embassy and Negroponte himself.

Wolfowitz, a neocon and strong supporter of Iraq war, says he'll vote for Clinton | News | DW.COM | 26.08.2016

Paul Wolfowitz, a neoconservative who as a senior advisor to then-US President George W. Bush was a vociferous advocate for the preemptive war against Iraq in 2003, says that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump poses a security risk to the country and that he will vote for the Democratic candidate, Secretary Hillary Clinton.

Wolfowitz told Der Spiegel magazine that he has "serious reservations" about Clinton, but that he could not vote for Trump.

"It's important to make it clear how unacceptable he is," Wolfowitz told the magazine.

 

[Maltin]

I think that many of us who *are* familiar with the number of deeply unpleasant, often criminal, people on 'the other side of the aisle' who have endorsed or all but endorsed Hillary Clinton are further horrified (if that is possible at this point) rather than buoyed by it.

I don't understand your point. You're saying you'd prefer the deplorables to stay in the Trump camp? Just because someone may be deeply unpleasant doesn't make them stupid enough to think Trump is a viable choice for president.

 

[Maltin]

Trump has been made to appear a wise and learned master of geopolitical reality by the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson, who on being asked his opinion of the Aleppo situation replied 'and what is Aleppo'.

Can't believe that this is the American public's third option.

Gary Johnson blunders again: ‘I guess I’m having an Aleppo moment’

 

[8den]

EWWWWWWW

Thought - I've suspected for a while that Trump's racist rhetoric is largely a deliberate attempt to gain support, and isn't particularly sincere. He certainly doesn't seem to hate all Muslims for example, not if they're wealthy business types. His mysogyny on the other hand seems to be the main aspect of his politics or ideology that he actually means. I don't think he wants to be seen as a sexist, but can't help coming across as one because he has some seriously dark and unpleasant views on women.

Not sure I'm making sense - but anyone agree?

His dad was in the Klan, he kept a copy of Mein Kampf on his bedside locker, he's be caught out discriminating against black tenants.

It doesn't really matter if he's just saying racist things or is racist, at some point they become the same things.