US Election Discussion Post 24/10/16

Written By: - Date published: 5:48 am, October 24th, 2016 - 31 comments
Categories: us politics, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags: , ,

This week we are trialling something new. In order to free up Open Mike and Daily Review for other conversations we are asking that all discussion, posting of links etc on the US election goes in the daily dedicated thread rather than OM or DR.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

There will continue to be author-written posts on the US election as well, usual rules apply there too.

31 comments on “US Election Discussion Post 24/10/16 ”

  1. Ad 1

    Did the Democrats conspire with the Republicans deep within the Deep State to enable them to put up the only candidate who could possibly lose to Hillary Clinton?

    • Andre 1.1

      Remind me again, who are the Deep State? Skulls and Bones? The Illuminati? The lizard-people?

      In any case it’s a stunning triple-double-bluff for the secret rulers to put up one of their own as the spoiler.

      • Ad 1.1.1

        Deep State is The Man.
        That’s all we’ll ever know. 🙂

        • mike 1.1.1.1

          Oh no!
          Not a man again!
          Why does everything have to be blamed on a fucked up chauvinist narrow minded shouting violent dumbo man!?

          Oh well, that’s life

    • Manuka AOR 2.1

      Paul Krugman too, makes that case. Brief excerpt:
      there’s one thing Mrs. Clinton brought to this campaign that no establishment Republican could have matched: She truly cares about her signature issues, and believes in the solutions she’s pushing.

      I know, we’re supposed to see her as coldly ambitious and calculating, and on some issues — like macroeconomics — she does sound a bit bloodless, even when she clearly understands the subject and is talking good sense. But when she’s talking about women’s rights, or racial injustice, or support for families, her commitment, even passion, are obvious. She’s genuine, in a way nobody in the other party can be.

      So let’s dispel with this fiction that Hillary Clinton is only where she is through a random stroke of good luck. She’s a formidable figure, and has been all along.
      http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/opinion/why-hillary-wins.html?_r=0

      http://www.rawstory.com/2016/10/paul-krugman-the-real-reason-clinton-is-winning-is-not-what-the-pundits-tell-you/

  2. Andre 3

    The third debate.

    • Karen 3.1

      Hilarious!

    • emergency mike 3.2

      Nice. Once again Trump proves to be beyond parody – hard to see much difference between Baldwin’s imitation and the real deal. Johnny Depp’s more in depth effort is also pretty spectacular.

  3. mosa 4

    After years of interfering and manipulating the outcome of other countries general elections and democratic processes the Americans are clearly unhappy when it happens to them.

    With possible Russian interference in the presidential campaign and Hillary clearly outraged at this “political interference” in Americas democratic process it is clearly uncomfortable for her and the establishment that a foreign power is undermining the mother of democracy and Americans right to a safe vote without (foreign) political interference.

    Its ok to manipulate Americans from within their country that’s perfectly acceptable and when necessary to further their own influence, a foreign state and its citizens.

    They are to arrogant to realise that as unpleasant as the Russian actions have been that it is never acceptable to distort the democratic process and outcomes of other sovereign states in favour of their own foreign policy objectives.

    • Garibaldi 4.1

      Mosa , in the latest Wikileaks barrage there is the proof that the Democrats have conspired to push the anti Russia line. Those stupid yanks are going into “Mc Carthyism 2”. There is no proof that the Russians did the hacking… just good old ott American propaganda doing ‘ overtime ‘ again.

    • xanthe 4.2

      no evidence of russian interferance . so far a lot of inuendo and “experts suggest” but beyond that nothing.
      apart from that I support your drift here. America has an abysmal record of upholding democracy globally

  4. AsleepWhileWalking 5

    Catherine Austin Fitts coined the term “Shriek-o-meter” to express the herd of MSM swarm attacks on individuals. How fitting!

    She says she hasn’t heard the Shriek-o-meter louder than the recent attacks against Trump.

    • fender 5.1

      That’s strange your link disappeared ASW, here it is , though with this: “..If you look at the inhumanity rolling down on the average family, whether it’s heavy schedules of vaccines that cause autism….” crap she could be going off the “Shriek-o-meter” herself.

      Here’s a more rational argument for voting for Trump

  5. joe90 6

    The sense of entitlement is strong in this one.

    this is a photo of my homey grant with trumps kid at in-n-out & trumps kid is drinking lemonade outta the free water cup… pic.twitter.com/Npuqte5e2b— Kush Vonnegut (@xwnklmnx) October 20, 2016

    People are trolling Eric Trump for apparently getting caught putting lemonade in a free water cup https://t.co/h0nvUiAk4a pic.twitter.com/lxODYYZ41k— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed) October 21, 2016

  6. Manuka AOR 7

    Naomi Klein and Glenn Greenwald discussing the ethics of Wikileaks’ Podesta emails:

    http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/10/20/naomi-klein-and-glenn-greenwald-tackle-ethics-wikileaks-podesta-emails
    Klein wondered whether The Intercept might be betraying some of its core principals—most prominently, its privacy advocacy—by not taking note of the moral issues raised by such indiscriminate email dumps.

    “Personal emails—and there’s all kinds of personal stuff in these emails—this sort of indiscriminate dump is precisely what Snowden was trying to protect us from,” Klein said. “That’s why I wanted to talk with you about it, because I think we need to continuously reassert that principle.”

    “Certainly Podesta is a very powerful person, and he will be more powerful after Hillary Clinton is elected, if she’s elected, and it looks like she will be,” Klein added.

    “But I’m concerned about the subjectivity of who gets defined as sufficiently powerful to lose their privacy

    Their discussion is also published as a podcast:
    http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/naomi_klein_criticizes_glenn_greenwalds_20161019

  7. Andre 8

    Interesting brief historical backgrounder on the Electoral College system if you’re a politics tragic.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/302230-the-electoral-college-back-in-the-spotlight

  8. joe90 9

    They’re not going away.

    BREAKING: my client Jill Harth and I respond to Trump's insults and threats yesterday. Spoiler: not backing down. pic.twitter.com/iHhUdD3ZsU— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) October 23, 2016

  9. AsleepWhileWalking 10

    In case you missed it (easy to do when nobody on MSM will touch this) here is the best piece of investigative reporting of the 2016 election.

    This is James O’Keefe, possibly the next target for political assassination or at least an extensive IRS audit, undercovering violence incited at Trump rallies. The DNC hired people to do it, with Hillary’s knowledge.

    Naasty + worthy of the tag, “you couldn’t make this shit up”.

    • Andre 10.1

      You’re only about the fifth person to post that, starting from several days ago.

    • McFlock 10.2

      Giving people the opportunity to be themselves isn’t inciting anything.

      Asking people to assault protestors and promising to pay the legal fees definitely is

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.