Even if Trump wins both parties will continue to be beholden to the donor class. Trump has not a single proposal which will change how elections are financed. For all of Trump's rhetoric, Trump doesn't have a single policy nor has he ever advocated a policy which will change how elections are financed...oops. Hilary has and Hilary has policies which will change how campaigns are financed and will diminish the power and influence of the "donor class". So either you are grossly ignorant in this regard or grossly dishonest. Democrats have long favored campaign finance reform and reducing or eliminating the special influence afforded the donor class. Republicans have steadfastly opposed reducing the influence of the donor class, and as exhibited by the Citizens United ruling, Republicans have greatly increased the power in influence of the donor class. Unfortunately for you Wellwisher, facts do matter. And you know this how? Russia is one of the most corrupt nations on the planet and you want people to believe Russians are afraid of corruption in America? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index Get serious! Where is your evidence Democrats don't see anything wrong with the press? Are you making stuff up again? Yeah, you are. Two, just because the journalists are not and don't act like agents of the Republican party like Fox News and other Republican entertainers it doesn't make them corrupt, nor does it it make truthful journalism propaganda. The truth isn't propaganda. It's just the truth. I am an independent, and I normally vote. And outside the American right wing, the media isn't corrupt. Truth isn't corruption. The American right wing as demonstrated by you is just so screwed up they can no longer understand the difference between corruption and truthfulness. Well, that's your hope, but that doesn't make it true. There is absolutely no evidence of a silent majority, especially a silent majority for Trump. Trump's followers aren't the silent type. They preach Trumpism at every opportunity. I know a few. I have some in my family, and contrary to your assertions, they are the lesser educated members of the family. They are the ones who read the "tabloid scandals". They are the ones who watch shows like Jerry Springer. They are the ones who believe every conspiracy story coming down the pike. They, like you, don't need evidence or reason. They just believe, because that's the way the do it. Republicans have been trying to put Hilary Clinton in jail for 3 decades without success. Republicans impeached her husband but were unable to convict him. Republicans have appointed 3 special prosecutors to investigate Hilary Clinton. Republicans have conducted numerous congressional investigations of Hilary. The FBI has investigated Hilary, and very recently and found nothing much to the chagrin of Republicans. Much to the disgrace of the Republican Party and the nation, Republicans have repeatedly used the power of the state persecute their political opposition. That's banana republic stuff. That should be a cause of concern for you, but it isn't. Unfortunately, for Republicans, in order to prosecute someone in this country you need evidence. Unfortunately for Republicans the country isn't yet a banana republic where they can just throw their political opposition into jail. So while Republicans dream of throwing their political opposition into jail without merit and without evidence, we remain a country where rule of law matters. We have not yet been reduced to a dictatorship a la Russia. The only political party within the US which has a propaganda machine is the Republican Party. There are no Fox News equivalent on the left. Unfortunately for you and those like you, most people understand the truth isn't propaganda. It's just the truth. You should ask yourself why Republicans so fear the truth? But that is probably too much to ask of you.
Putin is doing this because he sees how corrupt Hillary and the corrupt media in the USA may steal the election and come to power. Putin is not afraid of Trump starting a world war. The worse Trump did was play with girls. Trump did not shake down work leaders and undermine the middle east. Trump tends to give donations to these people to build. This is true, however, all and all, Trump has reached a position of success, in spite of these ups and downs. This shows the determination needed to follow the American dream. One thing you need to remember is what Trump did in business, was not against the law, or else the Democrats would be point that out and then tell the corrupt press to cry for criminal charges. Trump took advantage of a crooked system that was legal. Since this was legal, the push of the Democrats has to be to appeal to moral law, which they despise. It is all about discouraging Trumps base. I asked myself, why are the liberals all of a sudden so moral about Trump's business decisions? Isn't liberalism the party of relative morality and immorality? Trump was using relative morality based on what was legal. He should be the poster child for liberalism. What we are seeing is analogous to a thief, who steals for a living, becoming the spokesman against those who take too much potato salad, at the all you can eat salad bar. He stands in judgement of something moral, while being himself illegal. Legal is far more watered down than immoral, so there is credibility issue. Shouldn't those who apply morality onto others, also be moral? The moral approach of the immoral Democrats is a tactic. If the thief can become the potato salad monitor at the open said bar, this is about trying to undermine the confidence of moral people, against Trump. However, this will backfire, since most moral people will look at the source of the accusations, to see if they are without sin, before they cast stones. This who case stones are corrupt and cannot be trusted to know truth. One litmus they will use is, if moral law is the new standard for the Democrats, how come they don't put abortion, homosexuality and the corruption of Hillary on the table? These are part if the moral law they are trying to appeal to. These are not on the table, because this is a con job, and not a change of heart coming from repentant sinners.
and he did so by walking all over the very people that are currently supporting him including you...I guess you want more of the same?
Ignore evidence much....? Yeah, unfortunately you do. Do you really think Putin, one of the most corrupt men on the planet cares about imagined corruption in the US or democracy in the US? I gave you evidence as to how corrupt Russia is in comparison to the world. Further, you have no evidence of your alleged "corrupt Hilary". Hilary has been investigated more than anyone on the planet and no one has found a shred of evidence to indict her. If you believe the worst that Trump did "was play with girls", then you really haven't been paying attention. But then you are not one to believe in the truth, are you? Trump has a long track record of stiffing people going back decades. And what is known, what is on the record, shows that Trump's Middle Eastern policy wouldn't have been any different or any better. A rare moment of honesty, yes Trump's business record is abysmal. He has repeatedly made bad business decisions over and over again. Trump's success was being born into America's wealthiest family. And Trump has violated the law, he just hasn't been thrown in jail yet. The government found he violated fair housing laws. He violated tax laws relating to his "charitable foundation" by using foundation money for his own benefit. He he operated his charitable foundation illegally. He has violated a number of local building codes. And, if what he confessed to on tape is true, and it appears to be true, he has sexually assaulted women, and that's just what we know about. And then there is the matter of Trump University where Trump defrauded his students. So your assertion that Trump has never violated the law is just flat out untrue. Except where did anyone even suggest this was about morality? You're making stuff up again Wellwisher. Trump's business record, as previously stated, goes to his decision making skills, and Trump's business record as you have admitted is abysmal. Trump has a long history of making bad business decisions, and more importantly, he keeps repeating his mistakes. Trump doesn't appear capable of learning. That's a bad thing. Any world leader needs to be able to learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of others. Putin and Trump both lack that skill. And you think any of that makes the least bit of sense....seriously? What we have is the radicalization of a major Republican Party as evidenced by the nomination of The Donald. What we have is a political party that thanks to the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine has not only their own opinion but their own "facts" and in so doing become divorced from reality. That's a very dangerous thing. As a famous American once said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.". The rise of the Republican entertainment industry, e.g. Fox News, Right wing radio, et al, has allowed the Republican Party to create its own facts and that's a problem for the Republican Party and the nation at large. Reality will eventually take a bite, and we may be witnessing that bite.
Getting back to the OP, I think life after Trump depends to a large extent on how well Trump does on election day. If Trump loses by large margins as now appears to be the case, it will be more difficult for him to control or influence the party. If he loses my narrow margins, it's a whole different story. The good news is it appears Trump will lose and lose by large margins. Trump is losing in solid red states like Utah, Georgia, and South Carolina. This is looking like a Democratic landslide. Trump's problem with women will likely continue until election day as more and more women come forward with their experiences and testimonies. Russia will continue to release emails from Hilary's associates, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a big falsified document release just prior to election day. But I think most voters know Putin's game. So I don't see Russia's release of these stolen documents as a significant driver of election results.
Wrong. The worst Trump did was sexually assault women. We've all had our sexual harrassment training by now. We all know what sexual assault is. When you brag about it on an hot mike, and then women start coming out testifying to you doing just that, that's pretty incriminating. It's disgusting and symptomatic of Trump's misogynist view of women. Geez..he even bragged about ogeling beauty pageant contestants while they were undressed in their rooms! Such an opportunistic scumbag shouldn't be anywhere near the White House. I don't want this pos representing me to the rest of the world.
Me too. We have been fortunate in many respects to have Obama at the helm of state. He rescued the global economy too.
Sometimes, Wellwisher, you are the last person you or anyone else should be asking about anything. For instance, part of your confusion is that you have never understood this "liberalism" thing you're so trembling afraid of. Those who actually pay attention to history, and among that set especially those who lived through it, would remember that in the old Cold War split between liberalism as communism and conservatism as capitalism, Donald Trump thrived according to conservative principles of business and politics. One of the reasons society is so horrified by this aspect of Trump is that Americans don't want to admit the $915m tax write-off and other seemingly infamous stunts were, in fact, the system We the People put in place. Donald Trump is the apex of Reaganite postcapitalist voodoo; he is the full character of that cult on full display. It's true, one thing Donald Trump gets to complain about―though part of the answer is that he's just that not smart― is that he probably has no idea when and how the world changed so much; it's like he woke up one day and suddenly the basis of his fame had become the foundation of his infamy. Back in the day, when all that history was being made, liberals could have and did tell society what's wrong. But we were criticized as just being bad for the economy, down on America, and far too commie for anyone to actually pay attention to. At least, that's how it was around here. I don't know, maybe that was back in the time when Hillary Clinton was wandering around your neighborhood hacking children to death with a machete because, you know, why not, since people will believe anything because it's her, right? Remember this: Republicans can complain about Bill Clinton surviving his trials, both in the court of public opinion and on the Congressional floor, all they want, but he survived those trials. Donald Trump defended him, then. And given what people already knew about Donald Trump, his business history, his infamous infidelity and sexism, and his generally boorish behavior, conservatives still went and nominated him for president. And now, as we're seeing, Donald Trump just doesn't have what it takes to survive the court of public opinion. Then again, those years after Bill Clinton's infamy, the really, really famous guy who really, really likes being famous still wasn't smart enough to figure out to not talk like that on camera. It's kind of weird, because Donald Trump is somewhat smart. Even if we want to say he's simply gangster-smart, he still survived and prospered as he did. Yet he's pretty much as stupid as he has shown us in this presidential run, and suddenly all the people who were supposed to look up to him in the eighties, nineties, and the first decade of the new century find themselves needing to pretend to be appalled, which really ought to be easy enough since they have spent decades pretending to be appalled about everything anal sex to zygotal existentialism, yet still can't pull off with a straight face. Seriously, the thing that gets me is that once again, America is going to have to lower its standards because our society simply can't function properly if we disqualify that many people for being that ridiculously stupid. It's always a little weird watching people pretend to be surprised. The surprising thing isn't that Donald Trump has a closet full of skeletons, it's that we're supposed to pretend to be surprised. It's like trying to figure the Trump response to any of this; as long as people compare him to baseline norms, none of this makes sense. But, yes, he's running a campaign styled after internet trolling. And, you know, Mike Pence is what it looks like in the hands of the GOP Old Guard; his constant denials and pretense of ignorance during his debate with Kaine pretty much reminded me of what passed for respectable discussion with some conservatives around here, in which reality is subject to equivocation―see, the basic idea is that when one side of the argument is reality, and the other side is an observable denial of reality, the only logical, fair, and therefore proper thing to do is violate reality in order to weigh the claims as equal testaments unto the unknown. Consider that liberal writers like Steve Benen↱ can notch easy points without lifting a finger to distort: Obviously, the accusers’ claims and Trump’s denials will draw careful scrutiny, but purely as a political matter, I can’t think of any controversy that’s followed such an unusual trajectory: 1. Trump is heard boasting on tape about groping women. 2. Trump said his boasts weren’t true and that he never actually groped women. 3. A variety of accusers came forward to allege they were, in fact, groped by Trump. 4. Trump and his campaign insist there’s no reason to believe these women, so long as we overlook the recording of Trump’s previous comments. It’s like watching a more traditional campaign scandal play out in reverse. The only reason those four points should confuse anyone is that they are a Republican who often puts on a pretense of being confused by such realities. And it's so blatant that the hits keep coming. To wit, conservatives make it easy when one can turn around, as Benen↱ did, and flow so easily into the next, easily served, prefabricated (by the Trump campaign) question of disaster: In other words, when any of the various damaging revelations―about Trump’s finances, his boasts about his romances, women who allege he groped them―the Republican candidate’s staff has no prepared response because they don’t know what’s coming. As we talked about when Corn’s piece first ran, it would be a mistake for any national candidate to skip this examination, but for a guy like Trump―whose record includes a long list of personal and professional controversies―it represented an enormous risk. It now appears that was a gamble that failed to pay off. It's gotten to the point that I'm chuckling about a libertarian associate who hates Hillary Clinton insisting that Donald Trump is a strong campaigner because, well, as idiotic as his mincing, hand-wringing, ooh-can-the-little-lady-do-a-man's-job sideshow is, he's still not as far gone as his conservative neighbors who, unlike him, at least have the courage of their convictions to admit they want Mr. Trump to be president. And that makes for a dangerous time. As the commentariat begins to assert that it's over, that Trump has buried himself, it's not that I don't get why they're saying it. Rather, I also bear in mind that these are American voters we're talking about, and if we could be so blithely confident about American voters in general, then Republicans would have nominated a decent candidate. It's weird, but right now my superstition is pinging me because confidence feels like overconfidence. With forecast percentages for Hillary Clinton ranging between eighty and a ridiculous ninety-six percent, I don't disbelieve it because I think the numbers are skewed, but, rather I disbelieve doctrinally because I must, otherwise I'm about to catch a proverbial two-by-four to the skull. And what is even scarier is that strong discussion has become completely abstract; the upshot will be that as we cluster up to discuss sympathetically we will do so in some useful way instead of clustering up to fuck ourselves. I get what the numbers are telling me. It feels really, really scary because it's just not ever supposed to feel this way. And it's true, only Donald Trump. That is how warped this is getting. Only Donald Trump could create this bizarre an effect. Watching historians scramble through the short term, after it's over; and then try to figure out, through the middle term, just what they did in the short and what all those scribbled notes are supposed to mean; and then in the long term, as we finally start to build a composite thesis explaining what has happened here, will be one of the most fascinating chapters of our American tale. It will become the stuff of legend. This period might well have secured for all time Idiocracy’s seat in the panthea of cinematic and narrative accomplishments. We're already in Tropic Thunder territory, and Mr. Trump might well be preparing to attempt "full retard". That is to say, the question to that end is whether Trump's legions bring violence in the wake of their apparently impending electoral loss, and what role Mr. Trump, who appears to be sewing just those seeds↑, actually has in fomenting that unrest. All logic says Donald Trump should lose this election, and badly; and we seem to have a pretty good idea why. And, yes, that feels really weird. Yet, strangely, the prospect that everybody really does know what's about to happen to the point that candidate and supporters alike are already complaining doesn't assuage. It's a weird enough cycle without you spinning a whole new surrogate fantasy.
Notes for 48#↑ Benen, Steve. "Trump confronts new allegations of sexual misconduct". msnbc. 13 October 2016. msnbc.com. 13 October 2016. http://on.msnbc.com/2dmEgfS —————. "Trump's rejection of opposition research comes back to haunt him". msnbc. 13 October 2016. msnbc. com. 13 October 2016. http://on.msnbc.com/2dmKWKV
And once again, you present your ignorance as some kind of supporting evidence or justification for your assessments. If as far as you know you don't know enough to form an opinion, stop there. You need some information, about American economics and politics, before you form the opinions by which you will henceforth filter and screen and assess all future information you will encounter. You've been posting about the relative character flaws of Trump and Clinton for weeks now, while remaining - apparently and by your own claim - completely uninformed about any aspect of either person's life, career, or past behavior. Why would you do that?
I voted for him , but I definitively disagree with your statement , Beside he is bringing us closer to ware , unless his policy is to improve economy by building war equipment and that is what hi have done , one is by destabilizing the peace in this world.
He is a much stronger campaigner than Clinton, or Sanders, or anyone in the Republican field. The more you point at his manifest disqualifications for the Presidency, the more striking his campaigning abilities become - how else did he get here, still, without a Party, without any political power base whatsoever, in the face of the "revelations" of a character never in the least concealed from public view? And your otherwise inexplicably Fox-headed (and Fox-expressed) pretense that my posts here about Clinton have been in any way idiotic, mincing, handwringing, "ooh-can-the-little-lady-do-a-man's-job", in substance or style, is your recognition of that fact. And this resort to the wrong, apparently in fear bordering on entrenching itself as cowardice, has become disturbingly typical of the Koolaid crowd. Their critics are craven misogynists and Clinton's flaws are imaginary, because otherwise they're in real danger. News: you are in real danger. Trump obviously scares you, and he should. He scares anyone with a working cerebral cortex and a long term memory. As I first heard in this context when the divorced, financially compromised, and comically uninformed Reagan was being treated as a joke candidate - the man is dangerous. He's dangerous because he can talk bar, and communicate with the amnesiac orc horde, and rally them at any time - because he can campaign, and he still has three weeks to do so, and that is a frightening prospect. Is he going to keep losing toes? Maybe - maybe not. But clinging to some kind of vision of Clinton as a masterful politician and icon of strength who will protect you from what Trump has made evidently possible is a child's reaction. Yes, Trump is a scary monster - but that doesn't mean Clinton is some kind of heroic figure capable of carrying the field to triumph, or likely to be anything other than a functional drag chute on a downward slide even if she does survive this. And it certainly doesn't mean that covering your eyes will improve your odds.
Did you vote for him? How has Obama brought us closer to war exactly? How has Obama destabilized peace in this world? And please be specific.
Maybe, maybe not. As long as you don't explain what is wrong with what I think, and don't support this with evidence, this is only an empty claim without any relevance. As usual. As usual, the Americans care more about some claims about indecent assault than about the murderous wars started by Clinton. In some sense, it was predictable that the establishment will win the elections. What helps against Strauss-Kahn, will help against Trump too. Pay some women to make claims against him, game over. So all we can hope for is that Clinton is sufficiently corrupt, so that it is sufficient to pay her some millions to avoid WW III. Else, good bye, humanity.
Which "murderous wars" has Clinton started exactly? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Surely you must have a word for NONE in Russian. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And yes, unlike your beloved Mother Russia, Americans do care about civil rights. Unlike your beloved Mother Russia we do care when people are assaulted, especially sexually assaulted. What Trump is facing is more than just "claims". Trump is recorded on tape boasting about his sexual assaults on women and referring to his daughter as a nice piece of ass. Now in your beloved Mother Russia, that may pass as acceptable. But in the civilized world it isn't. Again, you are confusing the US with your beloved Mother Russia. Our media doesn't pay people for their stories in instances like this, and you have no evidence that any of these women have been paid for their testimonies by anyone. The truth works against both Trump and your beloved Mother Putin. Except Clinton isn't corrupt, period. You can hope all you want. It's not going to help you. Republicans have used the power of state to investigate Clinton to Hell and back a thousand times over and not found a shred of evidence to support any of their many charges. Unlike your beloved Mother Putin, Clinton isn't corrupt. She cannot be bought for a few million dollars. Further your Russian sabre rattling is getting a little old, ok, a lot old. It's not going to impress anyone from the West. We have been down this road many times before with you. Russia is a 2 bit backwater wannabe state. It doesn't have a global military. It has a small regional 3rd rate army. It's straining just to conduct a few bombing missions in Syria. If Russia wants to get suicidal, so be it. But the Western world won't live in fear of a 2 bit petty dictator who dreams of global domination. It ain't happening. The Western world, and the US in particular, has more and better everything. The US has a larger and better trained military. The US military has a professional military, in contrast, only a third of Russia's military is a professional force. The US has more hardware and better hardware. The US has more and better technology. No one is impressed by Mother Russia, and these Russian temper tantrums and threats won't impress anyone. They just make Russia and Putin in particular look foolish and childish. You can rattle your nuclear sabres all you want. It ain't gonna work. It has never worked in the past and it's not working now. If Putin doesn't want a military confrontation with the US, it's really very easy to do. If Putin doesn't want WW III, there is a very easy solution, and it would be the world against Russia. All Putin need do is stop invading and annexing the lands neighboring states. That's not Clinton's call. That's Putin's call. If Putin stops invading the lands of neighboring states and doesn't attack anyone else, there will be no WW III against your beloved Mother Russia.
It Just Started Okay: Charlie Sykes appeared on All In, and it was already an interesting interview, but then he responded to Chris Hayes and the enormously consequential question of what Donald Trump is to the Republican Party by making the obvious point: Donald Trump doesn't really represent conservatism; doesn't really represent the Republican Party. (1) Okay, yeah, I see it. (2) Still, there are a bunch of us who will shrug and remind that the alt-right isn't so alt, and that the only difference between Mr. Trump and other conservatives is that the GOP nominee isn't afraid to speak his mind. (3) It really is a different formulation than the post-electoral psyche I speculated, but that's the thing: These are Republicans; the concept that Donald Trump does not actually represent conservatives or the GOP is now in play from the conservative side―keep an eye and ear on this, because it will be quite enlightening to witness the transformation into an appeal against the legitimacy of the Hillary Clinton presidency.
First he moved from Iraq to Afghanistan, then Yemen , destabilized middle East , removed Kadaffi supports the rebellion in Syria, got himself involved in Ukraina. Why don't we stop pushing our phony democracy and let every nation take care its own policy . He started pushing Russia since the winter Olympics and with his liberalisation of homosexuals in the easter world . Lets take example from Japan and Germany they are big economical powers in the world , they buy and sell, but don't dictate in how to live and spread their policy in others . Have we not learned from the war in Viet Nam. Now we kiss their ass to make busines, Because our arrogance we lost over 55000 man and over 150000 injured. We must stop spreading our man in different country , that cost money , let them stay here and spend the dollar here and not Europe ete .ete.
I think one of the problems is that the USA is not immune or indifferent to it's leadership position in the world. ( nor is it immune to the inflated egoism associated ) For example: When 50,000 Yazidi's cried for help to prevent genocide trapped on a mountain with ISIL seeking them out the USA was there to aid in their plight. When Saddam of Iraq gassed his own people and the cry went out for help... the USA was there. When Assad used chemical weapons and the cry went out for help the USA reacted. With a world scared sh*tless about Biological and chemical WMA's the USA is there. As far as I know it is very rare to find that the USA has actually started a war but has certainly endeavored to promote it's own interests when assisting others who are in vulnerable circumstances. Name one act of open aggression that is not in response to an urgent plea for help? Why does the USA participate in NATO? Why is the USA calling for a war crimes investigation into the murder of thousands of children in Aleppo? ( it is not the USA making the decisions to slaughter thousands of civilians regardless of the expediency called for by the Russians and Syrian Gov.) Opinion: Unfortunately the USA takes it's leadership position sometimes too seriously, self righteously and fails to remember that people forget why they got involved in a conflict to start with.
