Team Trump pretty much calls for civil war

Written By: - Date published: 8:02 am, August 3rd, 2016 - 168 comments
Categories: us politics - Tags: ,

I thought nothing that Donald Trump could do would surprise me any more. Picking a losing fight with the impeccable parents of a dead soldier. Parading his foreign policy ignorance and sexism. Posing for a photo “eating” KFC with a knife and fork. Same as ever.

But this – yeah this was a surprise:

Trump labels Clinton ‘the devil’ and suggests election will be rigged

Donald Trump has claimed that there is a possibility of the US presidential election being “rigged” as he tried to divert attention away from a disastrous week for his campaign by also labelling his rival Hillary Clinton as “the devil” …

Wow, OK. But wait – there’s more. Team Trump went further:

Roger Stone, a long time confidante of Trump, amplified these concerns in an interview with a far right wing radio show.

Stone said: “I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly.”

Laying out a strategy for Trump to adopt, Stone added: “He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: ‘I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it. If I lose Florida, we will know that there’s voter fraud. If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.’”

He also promised a “bloodbath” if the Democrats attempted to “steal” the election.

Team Trump is pretty much calling for civil war if they don’t get their way. We are through the looking glass.

168 comments on “Team Trump pretty much calls for civil war ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Sabine 1
    3 August 2016 at 8:40 am

    conservatism can not fail it can only be failed. Obviously, he can’t loose as he is the most spectacular, healthiest, funniest, smartes, richest of them all and obviously everyone would want to vote for him, and if they don’t vote for him it must be because of fraud, election rigging and such.

    again repeat after me

    conservatism can not fail
    it can only be failed.

    • Colonial Viper 1.1
      3 August 2016 at 10:30 am

      Hillary Clinton has Lockheed Martin, Goldman Sachs and the rest of the K Street corporate lobbyists backing her.

      She’s got powerful friends.

      • Sabine 1.1.1
        3 August 2016 at 10:47 am

        Hilary Clinton has pretty much every women in the US that still needs access to the Pill, that needs access to science based female centric health care, that still may need an abortion on her side.

        Fuck lockhead martin mate, you are blind sided by your prejudice. AS Cecile Richards from Planned Parenthood said, Women will decide this election, women and their right to bodily autonomy, women who know that if they can’t control their fertility (starting from about 10 – 11 years old till 46+ years +) they can’t control their lifes – very much like the girls in NZ that don’t go to school because they don’t have the 30$+ a month for sanitary napkins, tampons, painkillers etc etc to manage their monthly menstruation.

        Maybe you should read up on Mike Pence….who is btw backed by the Koch Brothers. But i guess for men these issues are secondary as with most ‘female centric issues’ and like Mike Pence you won’t need sanitary napkins, tampons, hysterectomies, abortions, food stamps for single mothers, medicaid for sick children raised by single mothers on three minimum wage jobs etc etc etc. – and you as much as him will never risk being thrown into prison for a miscarriage or refused healthcare while suffering a miscarriage in a state that has literally outlawed certain medical practices on the count of every sperm is sacred and must be carried to term, and yes, these are issues for women. May pay to listen to that every now and then.

        • McFlock 1.1.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 12:54 pm

          Hilary Clinton has pretty much every women in the US that still needs access to the Pill, that needs access to science based female centric health care, that still may need an abortion on her side.

          Not to mention every heterosexual man who doesn’t want to procreate but does want to have sex with those women. Oh, and who is capable of considering consequences.

        • North 1.1.1.2
          3 August 2016 at 5:57 pm

          At 10.47 this morning Sabine owned Colonial Viper whom at 10.48 this morning became Colonial Vapour.

      • Ralf Crown 1.1.2
        3 August 2016 at 10:58 am

        True, and that is maybe why she will loose in the end. With Clinton the USA rape of the rest of the world will continue, with Trump maybe there is a chance. The US propaganda in New Zealand, and that kiwis actually believe it, may cause us to loose the China market and our entire welfare and lifestyle.

        • red-blooded 1.1.2.1
          3 August 2016 at 9:41 pm

          Ralf, this comment is incoherent. A few little things:
          1) Learn the difference between “loose” (the adjective that can be applied to Trump’s lips and his morals) and “lose” (the verb for what he’s going to do, come election time).
          2) How is the US raping the rest of the world? Is the Us raping Australia? Fiji? NZ? Poland..? There’s some awful stuff happening in some parts of the world and the US is certainly morally compromised, but don’t let’s get too caught up in hyperbole.
          3) Pray tell, what do you see Clinton doing that would cause NZ to lose our trading status with China? Is that trading status an entirely good thing, BTW? Surely there are a heck of a lot of moral compromises involved in this relationship? Either way, just what is it that you think Trump would do to protect this status? Pray explain your reasoning (and I use that term very loosely).
          4) Do our entire welfare (system?) and lifestyle depend on China? Since when?

          • Ralf Crown 1.1.2.1.1
            9 August 2016 at 3:41 pm

            Apologies that I do not reach your high academic standard in spelling and that I sometimes misspell. Raping. 1,200 US overseas military bases, biggest attack force in history, spend more on military than the rest of the world, and they are not shy of using it as in Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Guam, Marshall Islands, Iran, Libya,, Lebanon, Kuwait, Iraq, Somalia , Bosnia, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan , Sudan, Kosovo, Yemen , Pakistan, Syria, osv. Just this decade 2 million people would have been alive if it was not for the USA interventions all over the world. Coming to your neighborhood soon. If New Zealand loses China, I guess we can live on all the surplus milk powder, or eat your “moral”. ANZUS will not feed a hungry child, especially those 30% who go hungry today. With Clinton it will go worse, she is in the pocket of the “rapists”, with Trump, at least there is some hope. Our lifestyle depend just now on the USA, USA negotiations are like, “A gun to yur head, we are in agreement – right, otherwise we fire on you”.

    • Enough is Enough 1.2
      3 August 2016 at 1:38 pm

      The American public has the choice between a truly despicable candidate who is deep in the pockets of Wall Street, is completely inconsistent in its policy positions from year to year, and in no way shape or form represents the interests of working class American.

      However there is an even worse candidate than her and his name is Trump.

      It really is depressing.

      You’d almost want to vote for one to keep the other one out.

  2. John G 2
    3 August 2016 at 8:41 am

    I think Trump actually wants to lose. If he wins he will be constrained by the fact he actually has to do the job. If he loses he can hold (his version of) the moral high ground and be endlessly idolised by fox news et al.

    • esoteric pineapples 2.1
      3 August 2016 at 8:52 am

      One of his key campaign people said at the time she resigned that Trump didn’t expect to get so far and actually didn’t expect/want to be President. Unfortunately, I can’t find the original story but there are plenty of articles online suggesting he may actually be trying to lose the election.

    • te reo putake 2.2
      3 August 2016 at 9:14 am

      Yep. It’s Boris Johnson all over again. Do as much damage as possible, then walk away.

      • Colonial Viper 2.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 10:29 am

        Exactly like UK Labour MPs.

        Start up an unwinnable coup without having done the maths.

        Prove how disconnected and dismissive they are of the party membership by trying to silence hundreds of thousands of ordinary members.

        Make Labour look like an out of control mess and the Conservatives in total control in comparison.

        Then call the whole coup thing off after 3 weeks.

  3. Corvidae 3
    3 August 2016 at 8:41 am

    Has The Standard got a preference for the US election?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 3.1
      3 August 2016 at 8:46 am

      The Standard is a machine. It doesn’t think let alone have preferences. I’d get that into your head soon if you want to stick around 😈

    • r0b 3.2
      3 August 2016 at 8:48 am

      The Standard is a computer in lprents apartment and has no opinion on the matter. As to the authors – the day we all agree on anything will be a very strange day indeed! I believe CV is the only Trump supporter. TRP and most of the rest back (with varying degrees of reluctance) Clinton. I was firmly Sanders myself – don’t know what I’d do if I had a vote now.

      • Garibaldi 3.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 10:49 am

        The lesser of two evils is still evil. I don’t think either candidate is suitable. I also think the USA is a bloody farce and should be held to ridicule by the rest of the world.

      • weka 3.2.2
        3 August 2016 at 11:07 am

        “TRP and most of the rest back (with varying degrees of reluctance) Clinton.”

        I’m not so sure about that r0b. Holding one’s nose while voting Clinton is not the same as backing her 😉

        “I was firmly Sanders myself – don’t know what I’d do if I had a vote now.”

        If the election wasn’t looking close, I’d vote Stein easily.

        • Pasupial 3.2.2.1
          3 August 2016 at 11:35 am

          Fortunately, not being an USAian I don’t have to choose (though we all have to suffer the consequences). Stein does have an attraction for many who used to favour Trump – better that than just stay at home on voting day if you can’t bear to support either a warmonger or a sociopath.

          some believe Nader’s candidacy cost Gore the election.
          Perez said she is aware of that, but “can’t get herself” to vote for Clinton.

          “I think I would regret more voting for her than I would voting for Jill and then possibly risking a Trump presidency,” she said.

          “Because it condones all of the rigging and the fraud that went on and you’re letting go of the prime opportunity to push forward a third party.”

          https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/02/jill-stein-sanders-supporters-green-party

          From the Dem’s campaign perspective; a voter switching from supporting their candidate to the Greens is only half as bad as one going all the way over to the GOP (+1 becoming 0, rather than -1 votes). Personally, at this point I’m more interested in the downticket elections. It seems more likely that Clinton’s calculated campaign will lead to increased Democratic representation, than Trump’s; “it’s all about me”, bluster will aid other Republican candidates.

      • lprent 3.2.3
        12 August 2016 at 8:30 am

        As to the authors – the day we all agree on anything will be a very strange day indeed!

        Indeed. If I was in the US I wouldn’t have supported Sanders. His heart was in the right place but his head was somewhat vague. However he was pretty useful in pushing a more progressive stance into the democrats.

        The problem is that Trump being on the other side is going to push a pile of moderate Republicans up for grabs. So Clinton and the democrats up for election will be trying to get their reliable voting for themselves. So they won’t be wanting to scare the horses.

  4. DH 4
    3 August 2016 at 8:47 am

    This is getting pathetic. Leave all the false accusations to the yanks, we don’t need this shite here.

    • r0b 4.1
      3 August 2016 at 9:16 am

      Like it or not DH, American politics affects us all. And like it or not, Trump and his people said what they said.

      • DH 4.1.1
        3 August 2016 at 9:32 am

        Sorry Rob but that’s just horseshit. This ‘Team Trump’ you quote is a figment of your imagination. You’re making shit up mate, that Stone Guy doesn’t speak for Trump and he’s not part of the team.

        Trump will eventually lose because he’s pissed off too many powerful media people. It’s inevitable that the tide would turn, the media will just keep throwing mud until some sticks and that’s what is happening. But it’s dirty, filthy and disgusting.

        • te reo putake 4.1.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 9:37 am

          Stone was talking about what Trump had already said, DH. You owe r0b an apology.

          “I’m afraid the election’s gonna be rigged, I have to be honest.”

          Donald Trump, Columbus, Ohio. Monday, 1 August.

          “I’m telling you, November 8th, we’d better be careful because that election is going to be rigged,” Trump said. “And I hope the Republicans are watching closely or it’s going to be taken away from us.”

          Donald Trump, Fox News. Monday, 1 August.

          • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 10:24 am

            Liberals accept that Florida was stolen from Al Gore through fraud.

            There are voting machines dumped off a boat at the bottom of the Great Lakes.

            Studies have shown that computerised voting machines used in the USA have next to no security and can be successfully interfered with by even amateurs.

            The Simpsons have even covered it.

            It’s not like voter fraud is an unknown event in the USA.

            • te reo putake 4.1.1.1.1.1
              3 August 2016 at 10:40 am

              Doesn’t stop your 1%er hero sounding like a loser, though. It’s like he’s realised he isn’t going to win and he’s getting his lame excuses in early. The problem being it’s not actually going to be rigged. He’s simply going to lose on his merits. Or lack of them.

              • Colonial Viper …
                3 August 2016 at 10:54 am

                Interesting how you can say that when it’s clear that the Democratic primaries process has been rigged at each step.

                Oh how quickly liberals forget their whining about the bias of the mainstream media when it is finally working for your establishment candidate.

            • Lanthanide 4.1.1.1.1.2
              3 August 2016 at 10:52 am

              “Liberals accept that Florida was stolen from Al Gore through fraud.”

              I think what LIberals accept is that the Supreme Court decided along partisan lines to stop the recount that had been ordered by the Florida Supreme Court.

              • Colonial Viper …
                3 August 2016 at 10:55 am

                And the turning away of Black voters at polling booths, etc.?

                • Lanthanide …
                  3 August 2016 at 10:58 am

                  I prefer to look at actual verifiable facts.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      3 August 2016 at 11:35 am

                      Odd to link to a story that seems to be about the process underway, when these events happened 15 years ago. Surely there’s articles that say what the outcomes of these hearings actually were?

                    • red-blooded …
                      3 August 2016 at 9:51 pm

                      Golly, CV, so now The Guardian’s a reputable source of info? Seems like just a few days ago that you were knocking it and saying that it is biased…
                      Comment:Open mike 29/06/2016
                      Comment:Open mike 29/06/2016
                      Comment:Open mike 07/07/2016
                      Comment:Open mike 07/07/2016
                      …I could go on (as you tend to), but I think the point has been made.

                  • adam …
                    3 August 2016 at 11:12 am

                    like exit polls?

                    • Lanthanide …
                      3 August 2016 at 1:00 pm

                      Exit polls are just numbers. They have to be interpreted to draw conclusions from them.

                      They’re clearly not in the same league of ‘factual information’ as minuted court proceedings are.

            • McFlock 4.1.1.1.1.3
              3 August 2016 at 1:06 pm

              It’s not like voter fraud is an unknown event in the USA.

              Actually, voter fraud is minimal in the USA.

              Electoral fraud, gerrymandering, misrecording votes, blocking access to booths in Democrat (african-american) areas, illegal de-registering of voters, and arbitrarily overruling the ballot and declaring the candidate with fewer votes the winner – these are all well known in the USA. Oh, and “preventing voter fraud” by demanding forms of id that your targeted demographic doesn’t carry as much as others.

              • Colonial Viper …
                3 August 2016 at 1:21 pm

                thanks for pointing that out McFlock I needed to use a more encompassing term there.

        • r0b 4.1.1.2
          3 August 2016 at 12:43 pm

          This ‘Team Trump’ you quote is a figment of your imagination.

          My “imagination” has a web site:
          http://www.teamtrump2016.com/

          You’re making shit up mate, that Stone Guy doesn’t speak for Trump and he’s not part of the team.

          Not officially, just in practice:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Stone

  5. James 5
    3 August 2016 at 8:57 am

    Just as a parallel many on here comment that poll results are “rigged” here in NZ. (Cannot remember if the same people said about the election but too lazy to look).

    Perhaps when the look at it from another view they can see how crazy the look always trotting the rigged line out.

    as for calling her the Devil – it’s pretty shit and will look worse for him than her.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1
      3 August 2016 at 9:01 am

      Yes, right wing trash have made various pathetic accusations of vote rigging against Mike Williams, for example.

      As for Trump, like most people on the centre-right, he accuses his opponents of the things he intends to do himself.

    • Robert Guyton 5.2
      3 August 2016 at 5:23 pm

      Remember when John Key called the Labour Party, “The Devil Beast”?

      • Phil 5.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 5:33 pm

        Remember when Helen Clark said Don Brash was Cancer?

        In 1983, Joshua understood “the only winning move is not to play.” It’s a pity most politicians still aren’t that smart.

        • Robert Guyton 5.2.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 5:38 pm

          “corrosive and cancerous”, it was, Phil, in response to nasty rumours about her husband. Key’s “Devil Beast” was the result of…what provocation, do you recall?
          *smiles sweetly

          “Prime Minister Helen Clark yesterday attacked National leader Don Brash as a “corrosive and cancerous” person and unfit to lead New Zealand – just moments after she condemned the use of personal attacks and extreme rhetoric.

          She also called him divisive and polarising and invited the National Party caucus to get rid of him.

          The description came as a shock because it seemed the political temperature had dropped since Sunday and Monday when a furious Helen Clark accused Dr Brash and National of spreading malicious rumours about her husband, Dr Peter Davis.”

          • In Vino 5.2.1.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 9:38 pm

            Well said Robert. I have been waiting for a devastating response, but it appears that Phil may have discovered that he had to take back an overdue library book.

            • Phil 5.2.1.1.1.1
              4 August 2016 at 9:12 am

              I’m flattered you think my comeback would be that good and you’re waiting with bated breath.

              Anyway, why would I be writing a response when Robert and I are basically in agreement? This shit is unacceptable, and we should expect better from our elected representatives.

  6. George Hendry 6
    3 August 2016 at 9:04 am

    According to the US Election Justice Network, their work, usefully summarised in shows 107 and 110 of the American political comedy show Redacted Tonight, shows convincingly that Mrs Clinton should not be the Democratic nominee, as she was ‘elected’ through seven methods of electoral fraud variously applied across many states, quite apart from media collusion with the Democratic National Conference and systematic media bias.

    Bernie Sanders said several times that, according to polls, as the Democratic nominee he would be far more certain to beat Mr Trump, with which all evidence I have seen seems to agree.

    While Trump is being set up as excessively dangerous, we could note that he might be far less so if the partisan media decided to apply to him the censorship they applied to Sanders for so long.

    Also, as long as the Democratic party is represented by a candidate known to have got there via many rigged elections, quite apart from other widely perceived violations of justice on her account, they also share responsibility for validating the excessive statements Trump makes.

    There is so much the other parties ( Democratic and media) are doing wrong, and which is now widely known by the electorate, that no matter what Trump says he will still poll well and possibly be elected.

    Clinton and Trump are , in my view, essentially differently drawn pictures on opposite sides of the same forged banknote. No matter who ‘wins’, the election has already been rigged.

    • RedLogix 6.1
      3 August 2016 at 10:19 am

      And therein lies the problem the Democrats have created. Everyone could see the huge, enthusiastic crowds Sanders drew, while Clinton’s could barely fill the frame of a photo-op.

      Everyone can see the polling that showed Sanders way more popular than Clinton, and yet she won the nomination. Regardless of what really happened, the perception is that it stinks. And that is but one small step away from thinking that the Dem Primary may have been rigged. And certainly the work of this USA ENJ Network has poured petrol onto this smouldering suspicion.

      What then is surprising about Trump fanning it into flame?

      • Colonial Viper 6.1.1
        3 August 2016 at 10:33 am

        The Democratic establishment screwed the scrum from the very top levels in order to shoe horn in the weaker, less popular, neocon backed candidate.

        Clinton’s BS claims that Russia leaked the DNC emails demonstrates why the neocon establishment backs her – she intends to continue escalating the Cold War against Russia – even as she took big money into the Clinton Foundation from Russian business interests as little as 4 or 5 years ago as Sec State.

        • Garibaldi 6.1.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 10:59 am

          It is more than just the DNC though isn’t it ? She has been chosen by the “you know who” group and will be planted in place to carry on with the plan. Trump is nothing but a diversion now. So much for democracy – it doesn’t exist in the USA.

      • Phil 6.1.2
        3 August 2016 at 10:53 am

        Everyone can see the polling that showed Sanders way more popular than Clinton

        What polling are you looking at? In head-to-head US nationwide match-ups during the democratic primary race (from Sanders’ campaign launch at the end of May 2015 to June 2016) there were 109 polls. Sanders led Clinton in just four of those, and by never more than three percentage points.

        • adam 6.1.2.1
          3 August 2016 at 11:13 am

          Start with the exit polls. They are the reason this actually has teeth.

          • Phil 6.1.2.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 11:56 am

            Exit polls ain’t perfect.

            The pre-vote polls of the Democrat primary races did a pretty good job of calling the results, in what are fundamentally difficult circumstances (e.g. low turnout levels, voter turn-out composition etc). There was one major outlier, Michigan, but the post-vote analysis, undertaken by people like Nate Silver at 538, did a reasonable job of explaining why the polls might have missed badly in that instance.

            • adam 6.1.2.1.1.1
              3 August 2016 at 12:13 pm

              Don’t downplay that only one was out, the majority were out and that is the problem.

              “Exit polls ain’t perfect.”

              sheesh anymore facile arguments? Seriously xxx is not perfect or zzz is not perfect. What we supposed to use then, divining sticks and the vibe?, ‘yeah man the vibe, can you feel it’.

              So all the elections monitoring outfits who use exit polling to measure if a election is rigged or not – have got it wrong. Time to bring out the divining sticks and get your mojo on!

              • Lanthanide …
                3 August 2016 at 12:22 pm

                “So all the elections monitoring outfits who use exit polling to measure if a election is rigged or not – have got it wrong. Time to bring out the divining sticks and get your mojo on!”

                I’ve never heard of these elections monitoring outfits. Can you link to some of them? Have they produced reports highlighting potential problems in the Democratic primaries? If so, please link to them as well. Then we will all be informed about what really happened.

                • adam …
                  3 August 2016 at 1:02 pm

                  I was talking in general about how exit polls help keep elections honest Lanthanide, and here is one outfit who deem exit polling very important to measuring election legitimacy.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organization_for_Security_and_Co-operation_in_Europe#Legal_status

                  That said, most of the major networks do exit polls in the USA. As do the political parties themselves. This work formed the basis for many of the investigations and criticisms.

                  Try http://www.gregpalast.com/ that should also help with some of your questions.

                  Try here http://trustvote.org/ are a very good source as well, being proffessors of political science, other accidemics and lawyers.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    3 August 2016 at 1:13 pm

                    So no actual reports from “election monitoring outfits” showing that the democratic primaries were rigged, based on exit polls, then?

                    • adam …
                      3 August 2016 at 1:27 pm

                      You did not follow the links then?

                    • Lanthanide …
                      3 August 2016 at 2:14 pm

                      I did, I didn’t see any “election monitoring outfits” that had reports (as in, white papers) showing the democratic primaries were rigged, based on exit polls.

                      You linked to a recognised “election monitoring outfit” on wikipedia, but there was nothing at the link that was a report on the democratic primaries.

                      Greg Palast appears to be an individual journalist.

                      Trustvote doesn’t appear to have a hugely long track record. I did find this on their site where they talk about the exit polls in the primaries, but apart from making assertions, there doesn’t seem to be any actual conclusive proof of anything: http://trustvote.org/protecting-our-elections/

                    • adam …
                      3 August 2016 at 4:42 pm

                      Sorry in hindsight, you are picking on a specific line I used, and I forgot that is the way you like to argue Lanthanide. So apologies for not picking up on that sooner.

                      For the democratic primaries, apart for the ngo’s and journalist looking at data generated by media and parties themselves. There was no specific “election monitoring outfits”. If you discount journalist and ngo’s who looked at the data, there was no mandated, nor state funded organisation involved.

                      By my comment was a broad brush about exit polls and the fact they are used as a tool to monitor elections by organisation like the OSCE, UN and the countries like USA itself, when they monitor elections. In some case like the 2012 election the FBI did look at what the people at trustvote.org did bring to their attention, and specifically in Ohio , the use of exit polling data coupled with “watching the machines” was a part of that process – hence my video down below about Rove lossing it.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      3 August 2016 at 5:48 pm

                      “Sorry in hindsight, you are picking on a specific line I used, and I forgot that is the way you like to argue Lanthanide. So apologies for not picking up on that sooner.”

                      It only makes sense to argue on the things you’ve actually said. If you’ve said things in a misleading way, or said something in one way but actually meant something else, then it wouldn’t really be possible to argue with you at all because there’d be no meaning conveyed by your actual words.

                      “By my comment was a broad brush about exit polls and the fact they are used as a tool to monitor elections by organisation like the OSCE, UN and the countries like USA itself, when they monitor elections.”

                      Right, but exit polls by themselves, unless they are very convincing, isn’t enough to say that fraud has happened. They’re a statistical tool, and so are liable to statistical error.

                      The line on trustvote that the US government considers a variance of greater than 2% to be an indicator of problems in a vote is classic misleading stuff. Firstly, there was no link to actually back it up, and secondly, a national vote in another country is quite different from a primary vote for one party in one state in the US, in terms of size, and in terms of how reliable the exit polls in each instance really are going to be.

                      Now, if they presented evidence showing that the exit polling methods and process used in the democratic primaries were on par, or superior to those used in foreign elections, then this statement would be relevant and would warrant further examination. But they haven’t presented that evidence to back them up.

                      Or to use a crude analogy, it’s like homeopathy supporters touting the studies of clinical trials that were rejected from publication in the major journals due to inadequate methodological processes, and treating them as if they have the same value and relevance as studies that were published in the major journals. Yes, there might be compelling evidence in the rejected studies, but on the face of it the two things aren’t really comparable.

                    • adam …
                      3 August 2016 at 11:03 pm

                      Actually I’m using it as a door to open your mind to more going on.

                      The whole voting process was a joke. Arizona which made the news, was but one example. So lets take Arizona, less voting booths, problems with registration, and voting machines which did not pass audit.

                      The New York, the whole registration issue comes to head. Less booths to vote, and many votes just not counted. Indeed we have an ongoing court case over that.

                      Finally California a almost perfect storm. Less voting booths, registration problems, issues with untrained or poorly train election officials, the local california candidate getting almost no votes. Almost a million votes not counted, and they will not be counted.

                      And in all three exit polls put Bernie ahead. Actually in what I saw Bernie was ahead in the majority of exit polls after super tuesday – now you do the math. How is that within statistical variance?

                      Look I’m happy h.r.c won, (just another example of same old same old) as far as I’m concerned Bernie was just another establishment candidate. Don’t get me wrong I like some of what he said, but he was weak on Drones, and he was pitiful in other areas. Plus I’m not sure if he was anything more than a sheep dog for the democrats.

                      That said, I’m worried that third parties trying to expand the game, and get the debate about election reform front and centre will be stymied by election fraud.

                      At the end of the day, election fraud is a multidimensional process. And the reality is the democrats do it, and the republicans do it. We need every tool we have to stop it. And I think exit polls help keep politicians and political parties honest, it is just one tool in the bag.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      3 August 2016 at 11:24 pm

                      Just think of what hundreds of thousands of cheated Bernie supporters are going to do next. Including over a thousand political organisers/delegates who were ****’ed over at the DNC Convention.

                      Clinton secured a temporary win. And pumped up the pressure cooker that is America’s grass roots discontent on the way.

                • Phil …
                  3 August 2016 at 1:12 pm

                  “Exit polls ain’t perfect.”
                  sheesh anymore facile arguments?

                  Meh. No more facile and pathetic than ‘Start with the exit polls’.

                  Don’t downplay that only one was out, the majority were out and that is the problem.

                  I’m not downplaying it at all. Michigan was a terrible miss for polling firms. However, the vast majority of primary polls in the immediate run-up to each state election did a pretty good job of identifying both the winner and their margin of victory. The idea that the elections were rigged against Sanders, and polling (pre-vote or exit) somehow proves it is a simply absurd.

                  • adam …
                    3 August 2016 at 3:04 pm

                    Do you understand what exit polls are? And why people use them to monitor elections?

                    Because Phil, you seem to mixing up polls and exit polls – two very different things.

                    • Phil …
                      3 August 2016 at 5:22 pm

                      No, I am not mixing the two up. To clarify:

                      1) pre-election polls of the democratic primary races did as good a job of identifying the eventual winner of each state as would be statistically expected, and the margin of victory in each state was not materially or consistently biased in the direction of either candidate (despite your earlier, incorrect, assertion otherwise).

                      2) Exit polls are subject to similar types of bias and error as pre-election polls. That’s just the nature of sampling. I have seen no evidence to suggest that the difference between exit poll results and the actual election results is anything other than normal variation.

        • swordfish 6.1.2.2
          3 August 2016 at 8:00 pm

          Phil : “What polling are you looking at? In head-to-head US nationwide match-ups during the democratic primary race (from Sanders’ campaign launch at the end of May 2015 to June 2016) there were 109 polls. Sanders led Clinton in just four of those, and by never more than three percentage points.”

          Calculated from Real Clear Politics
          Clinton vs Trump match-ups
          Sanders vs Trump match-ups
          Monthly Average Lead

          Month ……… Clinton Leads Trump ……… Sanders Leads Trump
          2016
          May …………………..C.. + 2…………………………………S.. + 10
          April ………………….C.. + 7…………………………………S.. + 14
          March ……………….C.. + 10……………………………….S.. + 17
          February …………..C.. + 4………………………………….S.. + 8
          January ……………..C.. + 3………………………………….S.. + 15

          • Phil 6.1.2.2.1
            4 August 2016 at 9:23 am

            We’re talking about two different things. You’re looking at the hypothetical match-ups between Republican X and Democrat Y. I’m looking at the actual polls of Clinton v Sanders, for the Democratic nomination… and the simple fact is Sanders was clearly the less popular choice for the nomination.

            You also know that Rubio, Kasich, Jeb!, and even Cruz all had better results (over part or all of the same time period) in hypothetical presidential match-ups against Clinton than Trump did, right?

            Should we be suspicious of Trump manipulating the Republican nomination process when he’s in exactly the same position as Clinton? No, because that would be absurd; Trump was clearly the more popular choice among Republicans.

            • swordfish 6.1.2.2.1.1
              4 August 2016 at 12:44 pm

              Yeah, I realise we’re looking at different categories of one-on-one match-up.

              But Redlogix was making a point about the respective popularity of Clinton and Sanders: “Everyone can see the polling that showed Sanders way more popular than Clinton”. I’m simply pointing to polling that confirms his argument – in the process highlighting a crucial dimension that you’ve ignored.

              Sanders was clearly able to attract significantly more Independent and erstwhile Republican voters than Hillary, while at the same time maintaining the allegiance of the vast majority of Clinton Democrats.

              • Colonial Viper …
                4 August 2016 at 5:26 pm

                His failure was his unwillingness to take corporate money in order to be a corporate shill.

              • Phil …
                5 August 2016 at 12:08 pm

                But Redlogix was making a point about the respective popularity of Clinton and Sanders: “Everyone can see the polling that showed Sanders way more popular than Clinton”. I’m simply pointing to polling that confirms his argument – in the process highlighting a crucial dimension that you’ve ignored.

                I’ve deliberately ignored the polling RedLogix pointed to, because that polling doesn’t directly matter for determining who was going to be the Democrat nominee. I totally accept that Sanders’ supporters could (and did) point to such polling as an argument in favour of Sanders’ candidacy, but it’s clear from the actual primary results (and the Clinton-Sanders head-to-head polling of those primaries) that not enough Democrat primary voters felt the argument in favour of Sanders was compelling.

                This is why I bought up Rubio and Co. They too were making the argument of being the ‘better bet’ for the GOP in the General election , but that wasn’t a compelling argument to Trump supporters.

                Supporters of losing candidates, in either party, simply don’t have a credible case to argue (w.r.t. the primary elections being unfair) on the basis of the hypothetical general election polling.

                (separate post to come on your last paragraph)

    • Pasupial 6.2
      3 August 2016 at 10:47 am

      George Hendry

      I think you mean; “Election Justice USA” (googling your USEJN name didn’t get me there). I had a look at their (99 page!) report on the weekend, and might have to have a glance at those “Redacted Tonight” shows. Although the reports focus is on the Democratic Primaries, this seemed not so much as Bernie boosters, as using it as a case study to demonstrate how:

      multiple instances of voter suppression and election fraud have occurred throughout the 2016 presidential primaries. Democratic and Republican candidates have been affected, but demographics favoring Senator Bernie Sanders (e.g., younger voters, independent/unaffiliated voters) have been most heavily affected. This evidence falls into four categories: 1) voter suppression; 2) voter registration tampering (switching of a voter’s party affiliation without their knowledge or consent); 3) illegal voter registration purges; 4) evidence for erroneous or fraudulent voting machine counts.

      https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6J1ecILnk3UUy1KZ2FUT29iQ1E/view?pref=2&pli=1

      Though some disagree and think it is all a diversion from the glory that is Hillary.

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/7/30/1554556/-Sham-Group-Election-Justice-USA-Set-Up-By-Dead-Enders-To-Smear-Hillary

      • George Hendry 6.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 11:46 am

        Kia ora Pasupial 🙂

        Thanks for following up. Not sure how I munged their name (fortunately, not so badly that you couldn’t find them) but it may have been due to following their work from several sources, of which I’ve cited the tidiest summaries I found.

        Re your second reference, well they would wouldn’t they, without even leaning over I can smell the ad hominem on their breath. I prefer to go by the fact that EJUSA aren’t just making allegations but are taking their case to court.

  7. Repateet 7
    3 August 2016 at 9:08 am

    There are some idiots in New Zealand repeating that insane garbage from Trump and Stone.

  8. Nelson Muntz 8
    3 August 2016 at 9:54 am

    Um, didn’t you idiots accuse George W Bush of stealing the election when he won against what’s his name?

    Duh.

    • Pasupial 8.1
      3 August 2016 at 10:12 am

      “Duh” is not a reasoned argument (though may be indicative of your thought processes).

      In regards to the 2000 election, the Democratic party did not threaten civil war in response to that debacle. When the count was suspended in Florida by JEB (GWBush’s brother and then governor), they took the matter before the courts. When the decision went against them, Gore himself presided on the congress process that confirmed victory to Bush (there’s footage of that in Moore’s Farenheit 9/11 movie that I recall).

      I don’t particularly regard GWB’s legalistic win as a victory for democracy, but the FPP electoral college with which the USA is lumbered is a rather flawed system.

  9. Ad 9
    3 August 2016 at 10:11 am

    Trump is smart to concentrate on Florida. Not A Fool.

    It’s not as big as California in Electoral College votes, but it’s still – like Gore V Bush – the one that has enough in it to tip the balance. He’s also invoking the Gore V Bush vote count controversy that determined that Presidential race.

    We’ve still got 80 days to go, and Clinton still has high negatives. He has electrified his base, and doing the right thing by demonizing her (i.e. calling her “the devil”) when her negatives are already so strong.

    Hillary will still win the ground game simply through having the machine to harvest votes. But she will not win this phase other than through enabling her Democrat surrogates to distract the Tump team to death. She is no stand-up fighter.

    This electoral race is one more home-grown terrorist attack from victory to Trump. Regrettably.

    • Lanthanide 9.1
      3 August 2016 at 10:54 am

      It’s 96 days until the election.

    • Phil 9.2
      3 August 2016 at 11:04 am

      This electoral race is one more home-grown terrorist attack from victory to Trump.

      I disagree. Trump’s miserable handling of the Nice attacks, and his weird desire to make the Orlando tragedy all about himself, did not lead to the kind of improvement in polling or favourability that Republicans have banked on in the past.

      Or, to put it another way; Trump is terrible at capitalizing on situations that would normally work in his favour.

      • Ad 9.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 11:50 am

        Yes, I was over playing it there. After all I’ve been a Hillary supporter from the beginning.

        Just wanted to make sure no-one thought Trump being a dork would lose him the election.

        • Lanthanide 9.2.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 12:33 pm

          “Just wanted to make sure no-one thought Trump being a dork would lose him the election.”

          Eh, I dunno. He seems to be getting worse as he goes along. The 538 podcast said that Trump attacking veterans as he did was a bit of a standout moment for them, because *no one* does that, and veterans are largely a non-partisan topic.

          Pence had to publicly disagree with the things Trump was saying. Repeatedly doing that isn’t really a tenable election strategy.

          • joe90 9.2.1.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 12:54 pm

            Pence had to publicly disagree with the things Trump was saying.

            Pence couldn’t resist the temptation and tried to link the policies of Clinton and Obama to Humayun Khan’s death in 2004.

            https://www.facebook.com/mikepence/posts/10153921668637862

          • adam 9.2.1.1.2
            3 August 2016 at 1:20 pm

            Not sure I’d use the words ‘non-partisan’ to describe why no one attacks veterans. In the past – no one has been that stupid.

            A lot of veterans I have had the pleasure to talk, disliked trump for being authoritarian and possible proto-fascist. This last couple of weeks, he is now being called a facist by many veterans. Something which to them is as bad as a communist, and should have no place in the American Republic.

            trump has, to quote one guy I heard the other day say ‘screwed the pooch on this one’

            Watch the bleed to the libertarians, turn into a stampede of votes.

      • Lanthanide 9.2.2
        3 August 2016 at 12:29 pm

        Interview on Morning Report on Monday with a US correspondent, said that on Saturday morning the Wall Street Journal ran with a headline saying that the economic recovery was under-performing.

        Perfect ammunition for Trump. Instead, he was talking about how that guy’s wife didn’t speak at the convention, and also about how a nude photo of his wife wasn’t a big deal and that “in Europe it’s considered very fashionable”.

        • Colonial Viper 9.2.2.1
          3 August 2016 at 12:35 pm

          To be fair, I think the Murdoch rag put those photos out about Trump’s wife to try and disgrace him with conservatives, and he was obviously not going to let that move pass without comment.

          • Lanthanide 9.2.2.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 12:52 pm

            Both Murdoch himself, and the NY Post, are strong Trump supporters.

          • Phil 9.2.2.1.2
            3 August 2016 at 1:18 pm

            Maybe it’s just my perception of the guy, but Trump definitely seems like the kind of man who is totally ok with the world seeing everything his hot (in general public perception terms, not my personal view of Melania Trump’s physical attractiveness) wife is ‘offering’.

  10. Colonial Viper 10
    3 August 2016 at 10:20 am

    Full Stone quote in context

    “Yeah, the elections are rigged for one entity or another. So, who are the perpetrators? The perpetrators are the people who manufacture and sell these machines. The most common electronic voting machine, which is really just a computer, is a company called Diebold,” Stone replied.

    “Diebold’s top executives and owners of the company are major donors to the Bush’s. Is this a major factor on how George W. Bush quite improbably beat John Kerry? An election that all truths on paper, Kerry should’ve won, and Bush should have lost,” questioned Stone.

    “I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly,” Stone said. “He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: ‘I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it. If I lose Florida, we will know that there’s voter fraud. If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.’”

    “If you can’t have an honest election, nothing else counts,” he continued. “I think he’s gotta put them on notice that their inauguration will be a rhetorical, and when I mean civil disobedience, not violence, but it will be a bloodbath. The government will be shut down if they attempt to steal this and swear Hillary in. No, we will not stand for it. We will not stand for it.”

    • Corvidae 10.1
      3 August 2016 at 10:43 am

      If we were to present everything in context, the terrorists win.

    • Lanthanide 10.2
      3 August 2016 at 10:56 am

      Right, so if HIllary wins, regardless of the actual vote outcome on the day (which, at the moment, has a fair chance of being a landslide), then the election was fraudulent.

      Only a victory for Trump would be seen as legitimate.

      Ironic that he’d say that Kerry should have won, and that he didn’t shows there was fraud. Since we’re in the same position now, where if Trump wins, it’s more likely that there was fraud in his favour.

      • GregJ 10.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 5:45 pm

        A landslide? Isn’t it a bit early to predict that?

        Electoral Vote shows the current polling translated to Electoral Votes as:

        Clinton 277; Trump 214; (Tied 47 – Ohio & Florida)

        Obama won in 2012 by 332 to Romney’s 206 – an election that is not regarded as a landslide (35th of 48 in terms of the popular vote margin).

        To rank as a landslide Clinton would have to win by 18% (Herbert Hoover defeated Al Smith in 1928 by a 17.41% margin which was the 10th biggest win in a Presidential Election). To get in the top 20 she would have to beat Franklin Roosevelt’s 9.96% defeat of Wendell Willkie in 1940.

        • Lanthanide 10.2.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 8:04 pm

          538’s Polls Plus model gives Hillary and 8% chance of winning a landslide, and 66% chance of winning overall.

          The now-cast gives Hillary an 18.8% chance of winning a landslide, and 86% chance of winning overall.

          IMO those are ‘fair chances’.

          Note that a landslide is considered to be winning the popular vote by 10% or more. It has nothing to do with electoral college votes.

          • GregJ 10.2.1.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 8:45 pm

            Popular vote percent is one way of deciding a landslide but votes in the electoral college (the actual way the result is decided) is another way – Clinton would have to surpass 400+ electoral votes to be in the class of the genuine landslides.

            Getting 80% (430ish) of the Electoral Votes would put her in the top 20 of presidential victories. That’s Reagan 1 & 2, Nixon 2, GWH Bush 1, all of Roosevelt, US Grant, Lincoln 2 territory.

            Not saying it isn’t possible (I can see a Trump campaign exploding spectacularly) but it’s far too early to be predicting that.

            • Lanthanide 10.2.1.1.1.1
              3 August 2016 at 10:05 pm

              “Not saying it isn’t possible (I can see a Trump campaign exploding spectacularly) but it’s far too early to be predicting that.”

              You can predict any event, with a given certainty.

              I didn’t say “Clinton will get a landslide”, I said “Clinton has a fair chance of a landslide”, and the definition of landslide I am using is 538’s, which they define as winning the popular vote by 10% or more.

              538’s Polls-Plus prediction gives it an 8% chance of happening. They give Trump 1.3% chance.

              • Colonial Viper …
                4 August 2016 at 5:28 pm

                Trump by an easy win IMO. Although yes I am aware that all the polls and trends are against him as 538’s analysis indicates.

    • Phil 10.3
      3 August 2016 at 10:59 am

      He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: ‘I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it.

      Except, you know… they don’t show it at all. But Trump has never let a little thing like facts get in the way of his campaign.
      http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/florida/

    • Wensleydale 10.4
      3 August 2016 at 12:47 pm

      Roger Stone is a professional shit-stirrer. He’d set a box of firecrackers off in a creche just for shits and giggles. He’s the kind of man who does things, not because they’re necessary, or serve some greater purpose — he does them out of morbid curiosity. He’s like an 8 year-old burning a slug with a magnifying glass.

    • adam 10.5
      3 August 2016 at 2:27 pm

      That’s worse in full context, it puts two restrains on the whole election.

      First, people can’t change their minds – not only stupid politics, but really stupid politics.

      Second, it discounts third parties – which I think may be what he is trying, because he is bleeding out to the libertarians almost a percentage point a day (OK OK i’m exaggerating) but the bleed to the libertarians, will turn into rush – if he keeps on doing what he is doing. And I can’t see him stopping. So he is going to hand it to the libertarians.

      Plus the muppet misses the fact that one of the problems for the republicans as they can be called election cheats on par with the democrats, actually on one aspect they are way worse, the whole make it hard for the voter to registrator program was a republican idea. So this is loss, loss for them.

      Sheesh Colonial Viper are you buying this crap. Are you really going to go for the proto fascists over the neoliberal. Both are discredited ideologies, and supporting trump makes you look like you have lost the plot. Important word in that mix fascist, and we can actually call him that at this point.

      I get – “I can’t see how you can call yourself progressive and support h.r.c “- but equally, you can’t support trump and think yourself progressive either.

      • Colonial Viper 10.5.1
        3 August 2016 at 2:35 pm

        Gawd I’d pick the neoliberal in a heart beat if one were available.

        But not a neocon like Clinton. Especially one who is going to turn the Pacific into a flashpoint with China and Russia.

        I get – “I can’t see how you can call yourself progressive and support h.r.c “- but equally, you can’t support trump and think yourself progressive either.

        Who said that? I don’t call myself “progressive”, haven’t for a long time. Current day progressives are not radical enough to understand the challenges coming up in the next 30 to 40 years, let alone how to meet them.

        I support Trump for a very few reasons that I have explained before. He’s not going to take the world to war against China and Russia for the sake of justifying more contracts for Lockheed Martin and Boeing. And he’s going to scrap/reneg on deals like the TPP, which will be excellent for NZ.

        • adam 10.5.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 2:58 pm

          You have a lot of if’s there.

          You need to look at the republicans and what they are saying on the senate and house floor in relation to China and Russia. On par with or exceeding h.r.c, so I think you are wildly optimistic he will be somthing different. Or he will be able to do anything apart from fulfil contracts. His ideology, fascism needs ‘war economy ‘ to underpin it more than h.r.c, she has way more options.

          TPP won’t fly, because it won’t be backtracked on by h.r.c. She does not want to be a 1 term president. And she knows this issue will galvanise the next candidate against her – with a gift of millions of votes come the end of four years. She may be a hard core neoliberal, but she also wants to be a 2 term president.

          • Colonial Viper 10.5.1.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 3:16 pm

            I don’t give a rats arse if some two bit one term Republican congressman from Louisiana says on the floor of the House that he wants to drop America’s stockpile of chemical and nuclear weapons on Moscow and Beijing.

            Because it’s only the Commander in Chief sitting in the Oval Office who can pull the trigger.

            And I’d far prefer Trump to be in there rather than the neocon warmonger and war profiteer Hillary Clinton.

            Having said that, sure, I understand that POTUS only has limited powers, is more often than not just a front person, and the Deep State is in charge.

            • adam 10.5.1.1.1.1
              3 August 2016 at 4:51 pm

              You do understand that only the senate and the house of representatives can declare war?

              That aside, do you understand how fascist economics works? You actually get that fascism needs a war economy to work, or abject brutalisation of it’s own populus like the Franco regime did, for their economy to actually function?

              So you’re comments about war monger h.r.c I don’t disagree with. I just think you are kidding yourself if you think a real fascist like trump will be any better, and if history is any guide – He will be worse, because the economy won’t work unless he has war, or brutalising a section of his own society, or indeed does both.

              • Colonial Viper …
                4 August 2016 at 12:23 am

                Turn up your political radar and clear the noise off your screen.

                Trumps not a “fascist” for fucks sake, he’s a liberal New York Big Apple RINO.

                Who doesn’t get lobbyist money from Lockheed Martin, Raytheon or Boeing, unlike that female neocon candidate who actually is a war economy profiteer.

                “He will be worse, because the economy won’t work unless he has war, or brutalising a section of his own society, or indeed does both.”

                You are full of it. Trump is tslking about cutting back military expenditure in order to rebuild America’s crumbling third world infrastructure. Thats why so many outside of the 10% richest counties are choosing him.

                Fuck I’m so over this. Trump easy victory Nov.

        • te reo putake 10.5.1.2
          3 August 2016 at 3:18 pm

          I’m not sure that Trump (or Clinton) scrapping the TPP will be good for NZ, CV. Trump’s complaint is that its not favourable enough for the US. ie it should be less favourable for the rest of the signatories. His stance seems to be renegotiation so the USA can gouge even more or a return to tariffs such as those that have kept our dairy exports out of their domestic markets in the past.

          Either way, Trump is not batting for NZ.

          • Colonial Viper 10.5.1.2.1
            3 August 2016 at 3:28 pm

            Renegotiating the TPP to include property restrictions is exactly what Andrew Little wants to do so Trump is providing an opening here.

            • Phil 10.5.1.2.1.1
              3 August 2016 at 5:29 pm

              Renegotiating the TPP to include property restrictions is exactly what Andrew Little wants to do so Trump is providing an opening here.

              Without wanting to be graphic about it, this comment is akin picking through a pile of your own poo in order to find an undigested piece of corn and adding it back to your soup.

              • red-blooded …
                3 August 2016 at 10:04 pm

                Particularly since CV has always been so rabidly anti-Little and has repeatedly ridiculed the commitment to renegotiate the policy on foreigners buying existing housing.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  3 August 2016 at 10:46 pm

                  Only the US has power to reopen negotiations on the TPP. Andrew Little has the power to whinge about it in the Dominion Post on page 3.

  11. Sabine 11
    3 August 2016 at 10:53 am

    Could people just imagine being so put of by this clown that they will not vote for him because he is just so fucking repulsive?

    And maybe just may Bernie Sanders should have run as an independent instead of on the democratic ticket?

    But yeah, i personally saw Clinton eat babies for breakfast without sauce. Like really. Shes the devil incarnate. Worse then the establishment that brought her forth, worse then all the men she learned her trade from. Worse then the men that started all the wars over the last 30 years.

    Baby eater, cutter of male bits and piece, witch, horrible wife, useless mother, demon who should burn on the stake.

    That should about sum it up?

    • Garibaldi 11.1
      3 August 2016 at 11:08 am

      Yes Sabine, that pretty well covers both Trump And Clinton!

    • Robertina 11.2
      3 August 2016 at 11:18 am

      lol. Whereas little man Trump only exploits babies for sarcastic laughs:
      http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-kicks-out-baby-rally-226566

      That controlling comment at the end: ”I think she really believed me that I love having a baby crying while I’m speaking”.

    • Colonial Viper 11.3
      3 August 2016 at 11:31 am

      Baby eater, cutter of male bits and piece, witch, horrible wife, useless mother, demon who should burn on the stake.

      She turned Libya from being the richest, most socialist, secular country in Northern Africa into a Islamist hell whole war lord anarchy.

      • Psycho Milt 11.3.1
        3 August 2016 at 11:58 am

        She did? And here’s me thinking the uprising against Gaddafi and resulting civil war had something to do with it. Were all those Libyan fighters really US troops who’d removed their insignia, like Putin did in the Crimea?

        • Colonial Viper 11.3.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 2:28 pm

          She did?

          “we came, we saw, he died” – Hillary Clinton

          • Psycho Milt 11.3.1.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 4:31 pm

            That was pretty funny, but as evidence that Libya was plunged into chaos by Hillary Clinton rather than by an uprising against Gaddafi and resulting civil war, it’s not exactly compelling

        • One Two 11.3.1.2
          3 August 2016 at 3:25 pm

          ‘Moderate Rebels’

          The same tactic repeats in multiple countries, over many years and still there are people who can’t keep up!

          Well Done

      • Sabine 11.3.2
        4 August 2016 at 7:29 am

        she did?

        No Obama? Not the senate? Not the congress?

        SHE DID?

        what is she? queen of the US of A?

        really she did it all by herself, and all the other geezers and geezerettes in Congress, Senate and the White House just let her?

  13. weka 13
    3 August 2016 at 11:16 am

    At the risk of sounding like CV, the risk of whatever will happen post-Clinton win (irrespective of the rhetoric from today), could be reduced if Clinton addressed class and poverty issues in a meaningful way. Trump is proto-fascist. Clinton is something else and its not pretty and comes with its own set of responsibilities.

    • GregJ 13.1
      3 August 2016 at 6:23 pm

      The issue for Clinton on domestic policy though is whether the Dems gain control of the Senate (at the moment on polling they won’t). With a Republican congress (House & Senate) she’ll be reduced to using Executive Orders to make administrative change domestically and protecting Obama’s domestic legacy (Healthcare in the main) through the use of veto. That will only really leave her Foreign affairs. Effectively she’ll be a lame duck in her 1st term and that may well mean a one term presidency (actually if Trump wins I think he’ll only be a 1 term President as well).

      It gets worse for her as the mid-terms generally are bad for Democrats (Democrats vote in Presidential years but stay home in mid-terms). Also the Democrats will be defending a lot of Senate seats in the 2018 mid-terms (this year it is the Republicans that have more Senate seats in play – which means they may lose some but probably not enough to lose the Senate).

      I would note that these may well have been the same problems if Bernie had won the nomination. The best long term legacy of the Sanders campaign will be if they can get more left-leaning Democrats elected into the House & Senate and work to take back control. In that sense a Trump Presidency may work better for the Democrats in the long term (assuming he doesn’t destroy the world or the US in the interim).

  14. joe90 14
    3 August 2016 at 11:50 am

    The man really is an idiot.

    Mr. Khan who has never met me, has no right to stand in front of millions of people and claim I have never read the Constitution,

    https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/setting-the-record-straight

    • North 14.1
      3 August 2016 at 6:53 pm

      At 10.47 this morning Sabine owned Colonial Viper whom at 10.48 this morning became Colonial Vapour.

      [You’re on the money, North, however pwned/owned and the like are not conducive to good debate. There are other ways to congratulate Sabine on what will probably turn out to be the official winner of Comment o’ the Day. TRP]

      • Colonial Viper 14.1.1
        3 August 2016 at 7:02 pm

        A question posed by Breitbart is whether Khizr Khan’s law firm, KM Khan Law Office, actually derives profit directly from Muslim immigration to the United States making him more than just an innocent conscientiousness objector to Trump’s policy?

        Breitbart suggests that Khan did, in fact, stand to profit from his viewpoints shared at the DNC and point to his website bio which lists “EB-5 Investments & Related Immigration Services” as a specific area of practice. Oddly enough, since these reports have surfaced the website of Mr. Khan’s law office has been taken down.

        Oh dear it seems like the pro structural status quo types are getting found out.

        http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-02/khan

        By the way North, please avoid using flamewar language on The Standard.

  15. One Two 15
    3 August 2016 at 11:57 am

    The evil of two lessers..

    The lesser of two evils..

    Yeah, keep arguing amongst yourselves while the puppet masters continue with the agenda regardless of who is POTUS

    Surely you people can see whats going on?

  16. adam 16
    3 August 2016 at 12:01 pm

    Does anyone remember this?

    Apart from being classic, the fix had been in by the Republicans – but a group stopped this and guess who those folks sitting with the F.B.I were? Don’t say anonymous. It was way more boring bunch of lawyers and others who actually like democracy and went on to electoral reform organisations.

    Look I think h.r.c. and the dnc rigged the democratic primaries, and quite frankly I’m happy about it. More power to the GREENS when rubbish like this happens.

    The bottom line folks is that the republicans and the democrats are going to try and rig this election.

    And if the exit polls are out by more than 2% – then I think either side have a right to be mad.

    Actually I think it is time the UN monitored the USA elections, it’s that bad.

  17. Lanthanide 17
    3 August 2016 at 12:55 pm

    Latest Trump mis-steps:

    Donald Trump is refusing to support House Speaker Paul Ryan and longtime Sen. John McCain in their upcoming Republican primaries.
    …
    Trump’s refusal to back the incumbents is a breach of political decorum that comes just two weeks after a convention designed to showcase party unity.

    http://nypost.com/2016/08/02/trump-declines-to-support-ryan-mccain-for-reelection/

    Donald Trump may have driven an even larger wedge between military veterans and his presidential campaign on Tuesday with an offhand comment in the midst of an otherwise touching moment with a military veteran.
    While telling the story of a lieutenant colonel who presented him with his Purple Heart medal as a vote of confidence, Trump quipped: ‘I always wanted to get the purple heart. This was much easier.’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3720180/Trump-makes-light-military-sacrifice-veteran-gives-Purple-Heart-wanted-purple-heart-easier.html

    If he carries on like this, there’s a reasonable chance that the Republican party will dis-own him. Pence could quit.

    • joe90 17.1
      3 August 2016 at 1:01 pm

      He’s still digging.

      When the interviewer brought up Trump’s position on border security, Trump said, “It’s a very big subject for me. And border security’s very big. And when you have radical Islamic terrorists probably all over the place, we’re allowing them to come in by the thousands and thousands. And I think that’s what bothered Mr. Khan more than anything else.

      https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/trump-my-position-on-keeping-terrorists-out-is-what-bothered?

    • Colonial Viper 17.2
      3 August 2016 at 1:29 pm

      Trump’s refusal to back the incumbents is a breach of political decorum that comes just two weeks after a convention designed to showcase party unity.

      McCain attacked Trump this week, and Ryan dodged giving Trump a full endorsement at the Convention, so what do you expect? Talk about breaching “political decorum” all you like as long as you mention that Ryan and McCain have done the same.

      • Lanthanide 17.2.1
        3 August 2016 at 2:03 pm

        I’m not blaming anyone in particular, I’m just pointing out that the party isn’t united, and if Trump continues his antics then he may find the rest of the party becomes openly hostile to him – at the moment they’re tolerating him through gritted teeth.

        Also, reconciliation isn’t a one-way street.

        • Colonial Viper 17.2.1.1
          3 August 2016 at 2:24 pm

          Other commentators have said that Trump is the end of the GOP as we know it and I am inclined to agree.

          • Phil 17.2.1.1.1
            4 August 2016 at 9:42 am

            For once, CV, you and I are in total agreement.

            The Republican party has spent the best part of a decade actively stoking the fires of discontent among a relatively uneducated and misinformed section of the American public. I don’t think they ever expected the strategy to explode so spectacularly in their faces.

            “Where to from here?” is a great question.

            I think the worst-case scenario, for the GOP establishment, is one where Trump narrowly loses to Clinton and the Republican activist base doubles-down on authoritarian rhetoric – I mean, this was an activist base wildly applauding the parts of Trump’s convention speech where he proposed big-government stimulus. That’s about as “un-GOP” as you can possibly get.

            Best case scenario, again for the GOP establishment, is Trump being hammered. I think that sends a clear message to the pro-Trump faction that they are not tolerable to the voting public.

            • Andre 17.2.1.1.1.1
              4 August 2016 at 9:55 am

              Trump getting hammered could open the door for Cruz 2020 to run hard with the idea that they lost because they weren’t conservative enough.

              • Phil …
                4 August 2016 at 10:18 am

                That strategy would have some merit for a Cruz-like candidate.

                Trump is, ideologically, all over the map – there are plenty of examples of him advocating positions which are alien to ‘traditional conservatives’.

        • Phil 17.2.1.2
          4 August 2016 at 9:53 am

          I’m just pointing out that the party isn’t united, and if Trump continues his antics then he may find the rest of the party becomes openly hostile to him

          Up until now, “down ballot” Republican Senators and Representatives have been in the middle of primary races to get on the ballot for the November elections. Now that those races are coming to an end and candidates are settled, we’re much more likely to see Republicans break from Trump.

    • joe90 17.3
      3 August 2016 at 1:30 pm

      Trump appears to want another financial disaster too.

      Trump on economy stats"If they get real bad, I hope it happens fast…They'll all blame me"https://t.co/E7JsYrYTCe pic.twitter.com/bfUdnKc45P— Steven Dennis (@StevenTDennis) August 2, 2016

      "You'll end up winning and your first day, the economy crashes because of some incompetent people before me. Ay yay yay!"-Trump.— Steven Dennis (@StevenTDennis) August 2, 2016

    • joe90 17.4
      3 August 2016 at 2:56 pm

      Wheels are falling off….

      longtime ally of Paul Manafort, Trump's campaign manager: "Manafort not challenging Trump anymore. Mailing it in. Staff suicidal."— John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) August 3, 2016

      A Trump campaign source, in reax to this, tells me "it's all true" and "way worse than people realize." https://t.co/nvioNcjMCJ— Ali Vitali (@alivitali) August 3, 2016

      • One Two 17.4.1
        3 August 2016 at 3:29 pm

        Trawling the net to satiate your Trump fetish still got the better of you, eh Joe

        Chin up

      • Colonial Viper 17.4.2
        3 August 2016 at 3:30 pm

        I guess we’ll see Trump’s campaign disintegrate in the next month then.

        • Lanthanide 17.4.2.1
          3 August 2016 at 5:39 pm

          It’s not like the RNC was powerful display by a party that’s ready to sweep into a dominating position.

          The DNC obviously had issues, but it was light years ahead in professionalism.

          • Colonial Viper 17.4.2.1.1
            3 August 2016 at 7:12 pm

            Check out Republican vs Democratic donations this year. The RNC has been receiving fuck all money. Even the Koch Bros are considering donating to Clinton instead of Trump.

            • marty mars 17.4.2.1.1.1
              3 August 2016 at 9:36 pm

              It isn’t stopping him so why worry.

              • Colonial Viper …
                3 August 2016 at 9:38 pm

                Big money organisations queuing up behind Clinton

                • marty mars …
                  3 August 2016 at 9:55 pm

                  So, he’s a billionaire isnt he and so are his mates. He’s sweet.

                  • Lanthanide …
                    3 August 2016 at 10:07 pm

                    He initially said he wouldn’t take any donations or use anyone elses money. That stance lasted about 2 months, when he started asking people for donations.

                    He’s made personal loans to his campaign – in other words, he expects to be paid back, by the donations from his gullible suckers voters.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      3 August 2016 at 10:42 pm

                      Look at the charts, peeps. Clinton is pulling in corporate money 20 to 1. Why? Because Clinton has proven through the billion dollar Clinton Foundation that donating to the Clintons pays off.

                      Amusing to see you guys back the big money candidate of the arms dealers and investment banksters.

                    • marty mars …
                      4 August 2016 at 8:17 am

                      Build a wall cv and get over it. This whole post is about dickhead trump and what a denierdim he is your hero lol

  18. Robert Atack 18
    3 August 2016 at 6:41 pm

    Obama could be in for a 3rd term ?

  19. Liberal Realist 19
    3 August 2016 at 7:18 pm

    Everything coming out of the US MSM is now in echo chamber ‘groupthink’ territory.

    Trump has proven time and time again that he’ll say anything or insult anyone to shift or dominate the news cycle. This to me seems like the new normal, from the GOP right anyway.

    As for the Dems, well as far as I’m concerned the rhetoric from the Dem establishment is such that it should keep us all awake at night. The demonisation of Putin and the linking of Trump’s stupid comments pertaining to the DNC hack are just a footnote on a long list of blatant outright lies. These lies are setting the West on a very dangerous path toward confrontation with Russia.

    I offer the below clip of an interview with American scholar of Russian studies Stephen Cohen, on CNN (otherwise known as ‘Clinton News Network’). In less than 5 minutes Cohen exposes CNN & the rest of the US MSM as Clinton cheerleaders through and through, beating the drum for war. Cohen acknowledges where this narrative is being driven from (the Clinton Campaign) and why it has to stop.

    Cohen says it how it is and by dam the paradigm is dangerous, for all of us. We’re almost at 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis territory now…

    Watch it for yourself…

  20. One Two 20
    4 August 2016 at 1:09 am

    http://www.rogerstone.com/

    ‘The Clintons War on Women’

    Did they sue?

  21. joe90 21
    4 August 2016 at 9:42 am

    Voices from Trump rallies. (nsfw language)

    “Kill her.”

    “Trump that bitch!”

    “Build a wall — kill them all.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us/politics/donald-trump-supporters.html

    • joe90 21.1
      4 August 2016 at 10:31 am

      ♪ USA … ♫….

      Full quote from the opening prayer at today's Trump rally in Daytona beach, FL pic.twitter.com/jpiCPr49ys— David Martosko (@dmartosko) August 3, 2016

      We know that this party is evil. We pray that all the Democrats and all the libertarians and all the socialist progressives will have an awakening experience.

      Prayer before Trump rally calls media "den of vipers," crooked", "biased", "the stench of evil."(Dude, we're like *right here*)— Steven Lemongello (@SteveLemongello) August 3, 2016