Donald Trump, the road that might not lead to the White House!
- Thread starter weltweit
- Start date
- Status
Tankus
Amused OAP
when donald duck turns up with a hitler mustache ,USA flag nappy , and a giant strap on that lights up with the word TRUMP on it .....that's when you reach for the bucket of Nytol ,,,,,,
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
Dunno how much credence to place in this but at least it sounds more plausible than any of the conspiracies . Comey supposedly facing a mutiny within the FBI for not charging Clinton in the first place . Even strong criticism from his wife . Jumps at opportunity second time round .
Why FBI Director Comey jumped at chance to reopen Hillary Clinton email investigation | Daily Mail Online
Quite frankly she should have been . Her mass deletions and nonsensical explanations were plainly ridiculous .
CNN openly calling for Comeys head now . he has seriously pissed that entire crew off .
Why FBI Director Comey jumped at chance to reopen Hillary Clinton email investigation | Daily Mail Online
Quite frankly she should have been . Her mass deletions and nonsensical explanations were plainly ridiculous .
CNN openly calling for Comeys head now . he has seriously pissed that entire crew off .
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Which FBI personnel threatened to resign?
And why would that make him do what he did? He himself is probably going to end up having to resign because of this.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
Why are you asking me for the names of the FBI ?
Why on earth would he resign ? Nobody can touch him . He's pretty much unaccountable to anyone unless he does something illegal .
Last edited:
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
I thought the extract in post #7594 was the best bit and was hoping the rest of it would have been more in the same vein. Trying to resurrect Clinton as an optimistic feminist from the time of her university graduation was ridiculous. He somehow managed to ignore the real Hilary Clinton seen in power over the last decade.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
It's much the same picture here . There's big chunks of this were Moore seems completely at sea . And at variance with what he's saying himself . One minute he's saying people should ignore the math as regards Sanders certain impending defeat at the DNC , then stating the math means Trump can never win,..then it's beware the Trump victory that's statistically impossible . And massive blind spot after massive blind spot when it comes to Clinton .
This is the same Moore who defended ..advocated...left wingers voting for independents in past elections . But can't countenance anyone but Clinton now . Despite doing a pretty good analysis on why some working class voters want to fuck the elites up , ultimately he can't advocate anything more than vote for a continuance of the same order . He gets these blind spots . It was often the same when it came to criticising Israel . Although he finally grew a pair in that regard and did some decent work . But it was obvious he was previously too afraid to alienate democrat political factions in the US . It seems exactly the same with Clinton, he just hasn't the balls when it comes to challenging that taboo , and ends up sounding stupid .
Last edited:
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
I certainly wasn't impressed with Where to Invade Next, some discussion here:
What's Michael Moore been up to?
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
Haven't seen it . Thanks for the link .
At least one conplaint has already been filed accusing him of breaking the law (the Hatch Act).
https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.n...did-the-fbi-director-abuse-his-power.amp.html
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
By a random . We can probably expect a few more randoms retaliating regarding Loretta Lynchs inappropriate meeting with Bill Clinton just before the case was initially dropped by Comey .
None of which will go anywhere . Not investigating evidence in case it influences an election is still influencing it . He should have charged her the first time . Sanders would be sitting on a certain landslide at this point .
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
That article is a bit odd. Several hundred words arguing that Comey is blatantly guilty of a Hatch Act violation unless he has some justification, but no mention that he might actually have some justification for putting his head above the parapet in this way. You also have to wonder about the credibility of someone who appears to be arguing that politicians should enjoy immunity whilst they run for elected office.
As I said in my post, at least one. I imagine there may be more. It seems that some at the DoJ advised him against coming out publicly like he did so perhaps they may also feel that he broke the law.
You queried why would he resign. If he is found to have broken the law, then presumably this would be sufficient for him to resign or be fired.
The issue isn't with rthe investigation, it's with the potentially misleading statement that he put out.
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
I think it is all about the investigation; if it wasn't then they wouldn't be complaining about a statement that is only misleading in a way that obscures - in a positive way (for Clinton) - what the FBI may have found on that computer.
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
Thing that gets me is that this is all on the Donald Trump thread.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
It's a thread about Trumps white house bid . Anything pertaining to that bid, affecting it, is relevant .
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
Well, obvs. You are missing my point that Trump is the focus of Clinton's private server. Where is the Clinton thread? (Prob on page 3, I haven't lately looked.) There are two candidates and the focus is on one of them. Is Urban following the trend or led by it?
OK, I'm JAQing.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Because in your post, you said you thought you'd read that some FBI personnel had threatened to resign. I'm asking for the names of those intending to resign - or at least a link, so we can read about it ourselves.
Clinton email inquiry: FBI gets search warrant as agency head accused of 'partisan' actions
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
No , in the actual post of mine you quoted there was a link. That you didn't bother reading .
bimble
floofy
It is a bit astounding that Trump went on this man's show, isn't it, that nobody was able to advise him to just maybe not do that, at least not publicly endorse this rabid loon.
Makes this sort of thing very unsurprising: Man shouts ‘Jew-S-A’ at journalists covering Trump rally in Phoenix
Last edited:
FiveThirtyEight is where I'm getting most of my info just now.
Polling is interesting. North Carolina shows a solid Clinton lead as does Nevada and both states have early voting, in which the numbers are good for Clinton thus far. I think they calculate this based on relative turnout for Dem/Rep/Ind voters in the state rather than the actual votes cast but it's reckoned that Trump's going to have a job overturning what looks to be a solid Clinton lead in these states.
Assuming that's the case, Trump's going to have to win Ohio (could happen, it's started to lean Trump in the polls in the last week or so), Florida (still a small Clinton lead and it's always on a knife edge), Iowa (leaning a bit Trump, he seems to be doing well in the rural/non Des Moines parts of the state) and somewhere that would be mildly surprising - for example the upper MidWest ie Wisconsin and Michigan where there's been little polling but seem to be fairly good for Clinton or the redder parts of the North East ie New Hampshire and Maine's second Congressional district plus Pennsylvania (this would be a shocker, it's always portrayed as a swing state but it didn't even go for Bush).
In other words, if Trump loses in North Carolina - as looks very possible based on actual voter turnout already - he's going to have to pull some rabbits out of hats to win the Presidency. On the flip side, if Clinton loses NC then she can still very plausibly win by holding down the upper MidWest/Pennsylvania/New England votes that look like they should come home for her.
It's harder for Trump to win than Clinton just now and we're going to have to see a bigger shift in the polls (still around a five point Clinton lead on average) to see this change.
Of course, the polls could be wrong and turnout is always key anyway. But we're told that Clinton has a much better GOTV operation than Trump. But based on the handful of key states in which voting has already started, my money's still on Clinton.
All this doesn't even take account of some odd polling elsewhere which isn't positive for Trump. Alaska seems closer than normal (poll this week has Clinton ahead, though if that came through it'd be a shocker), Utah has a three way split involving conservative Mormon Evan McMullin which could upset Trump's apple cart and Arizona is wobbling a little, though has swung back Trump's way in the last week.
Trump's going to need something a bit more solid than some emails
Polling is interesting. North Carolina shows a solid Clinton lead as does Nevada and both states have early voting, in which the numbers are good for Clinton thus far. I think they calculate this based on relative turnout for Dem/Rep/Ind voters in the state rather than the actual votes cast but it's reckoned that Trump's going to have a job overturning what looks to be a solid Clinton lead in these states.
Assuming that's the case, Trump's going to have to win Ohio (could happen, it's started to lean Trump in the polls in the last week or so), Florida (still a small Clinton lead and it's always on a knife edge), Iowa (leaning a bit Trump, he seems to be doing well in the rural/non Des Moines parts of the state) and somewhere that would be mildly surprising - for example the upper MidWest ie Wisconsin and Michigan where there's been little polling but seem to be fairly good for Clinton or the redder parts of the North East ie New Hampshire and Maine's second Congressional district plus Pennsylvania (this would be a shocker, it's always portrayed as a swing state but it didn't even go for Bush).
In other words, if Trump loses in North Carolina - as looks very possible based on actual voter turnout already - he's going to have to pull some rabbits out of hats to win the Presidency. On the flip side, if Clinton loses NC then she can still very plausibly win by holding down the upper MidWest/Pennsylvania/New England votes that look like they should come home for her.
It's harder for Trump to win than Clinton just now and we're going to have to see a bigger shift in the polls (still around a five point Clinton lead on average) to see this change.
Of course, the polls could be wrong and turnout is always key anyway. But we're told that Clinton has a much better GOTV operation than Trump. But based on the handful of key states in which voting has already started, my money's still on Clinton.
All this doesn't even take account of some odd polling elsewhere which isn't positive for Trump. Alaska seems closer than normal (poll this week has Clinton ahead, though if that came through it'd be a shocker), Utah has a three way split involving conservative Mormon Evan McMullin which could upset Trump's apple cart and Arizona is wobbling a little, though has swung back Trump's way in the last week.
Trump's going to need something a bit more solid than some emails
There are other relatively small factors to look out for (can Clinton win the Omaha district to take one of Nebraska's EC votes? Omaha went for Obama in 2008) but that's the gist of it. Clinton has a much wider margin for error than Trump
Look at George W Bush's winning electoral maps, the last time the Republicans took the White House. In 2000 he lost the popular vote but won the EC by the slimmest of margins -271 to 267. In that year he won Florida, New Hampshire and Ohio but lost Iowa. He also won states that are probably a lock for the Dems now - Colorado, Nevada, Virginia and North Carolina is now in play in a way that it wasn't back then. In 2004 he was a little more comfortable (286 - 252) but again that was with states that Trump can only dream of winning now - New Mexico, Virginia for example. Bush won in elections that starkly divided the electorate but with a coalition of voters that Trump cannot hold together. College educated whites and Hispanics aren't going for Trump the way they went for Bush.
Fact is that Clinton is very likely to win - even if she loses Ohio, Florida and Iowa - unless Trump can pull off wins in Wisconsin, Michigan etc, which looked plausible a couple of months ago but less so now. The rest is media clickbaiting and huff/puff from the Trump camp
Look at George W Bush's winning electoral maps, the last time the Republicans took the White House. In 2000 he lost the popular vote but won the EC by the slimmest of margins -271 to 267. In that year he won Florida, New Hampshire and Ohio but lost Iowa. He also won states that are probably a lock for the Dems now - Colorado, Nevada, Virginia and North Carolina is now in play in a way that it wasn't back then. In 2004 he was a little more comfortable (286 - 252) but again that was with states that Trump can only dream of winning now - New Mexico, Virginia for example. Bush won in elections that starkly divided the electorate but with a coalition of voters that Trump cannot hold together. College educated whites and Hispanics aren't going for Trump the way they went for Bush.
Fact is that Clinton is very likely to win - even if she loses Ohio, Florida and Iowa - unless Trump can pull off wins in Wisconsin, Michigan etc, which looked plausible a couple of months ago but less so now. The rest is media clickbaiting and huff/puff from the Trump camp
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
J Ed
Follow Back Pro Expropriation
It has basically become the American politics thread. I tried to start and maintain a Clinton thread but everyone wants to post on here, might be worth changing the title of it but then again it isn't really necessary.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
That last line wasn't needed.
That pic is how power works btw - see the thread that J ed started about power using leftish nice-sounding tropes.
That pic is how power works btw - see the thread that J ed started about power using leftish nice-sounding tropes.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
yeah it included plenty of sanders chat before he became no longer a contender
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
Quite in order for Trump to win this, alot of things have to fall correctly for him, depressed women, millenial and black turnout (not happening we can see that from early voting), and for pretty much every battle ground state to fall this way. Clinton can lose somewhere like Ohio, or Florida or Pennslyivan or in some cases all three and still map a route to victory. Meanwhile with states like Virginia, Utah and Texas all looking dicey, the republicans are having to spent time, money and effort protecting their lead in states they should be easily leading.
- Status
Similar threads
