Trump

[Absolute_Zero]

My opinion since ~May... if it looks as though Trump might be able to win, something will magically surface in order to knock him back.

Rationale: the spooks etc, et al, don't seem at all comfortable with the notion of President Trump. Putin correctly sees the potential in Trump to undermine the cohesion and make up of NATO. Any candidate repeatedly asking an advising foreign policy expert as to why the U.S. can't use nuclear weapons [first use] is clearly ill-suited for power.

I suspect that if he mounts any kind of significant recovery, they'll do whatever it takes [again, maybe].

[pogo]

My opinion since ~May... if it looks as though Trump might be able to win, something will magically surface in order to knock him back.

This overlooks the fact that there is only one person working wholeheartedly to knock Trump back. Trump himself. He’s the one who entirely unprompted chose to attack the parents of a war hero. He’s the one who again unprompted decided to use his campaign to issue racial slurs against the judge overseeing his university fraud case. He’s the one who, presented with evidence he hurled sexist and racist abuse at a young Miss Universe, decided to double down and repeat some of that abuse and level further accusations at her.

Then this week in response to a tape of him promoting adultery and sexual assault he decides to drag up decades old allegations against Bill Clinton. No-one else is doing this to him. It is all his own work.

[Absolute_Zero]

My opinion since ~May... if it looks as though Trump might be able to win, something will magically surface in order to knock him back.

This overlooks the fact that ...

This overlooks the fact that he was clearly getting close [leading in some polls] despite all that and much, much more. Normal laws of political gravity don't apply so much with Trump and his support. It's anti-politics... whatever a politician wouldn't do is a-ok with them.

[pogo]

This overlooks the fact that he was clearly getting close [leading in some polls] despite all that and much, much more. Normal laws of political gravity don't apply so much with Trump and his support. It's anti-politics... whatever a politician wouldn't do is a-ok with them.

And what changed, to send his polls into freefall? His performance in the first debate. You can invoke shadowy forces and spooks, or whoever you want, all you like. The only person wrecking Trump’s chance is Trump.

There are shadowy forces involved in this election. There are Russian spooks hacking into Democratic and DNC servers, leaking e-mails to Wikileaks. There’s the dark money that bankrolls all Republican campaigns now, against Obama and against Clinton. But despite all its problems America is still a democracy. You can’t buy the general election. A billionaire like Trump is not guaranteed to win.

[Absolute_Zero]

There are shadowy forces involved in this election. There are Russian spooks hacking into Democratic and DNC servers, leaking e-mails to Wikileaks.

You're making my argument for me.

[pogo]

Er...

My opinion since ~May... if it looks as though Trump might be able to win, something will magically surface in order to knock him back.

Rationale: the spooks etc, et al, don't seem at all comfortable with the notion of President Trump.

You are implying the “spooks” would work against Trump. While fact is the only spooks involved are the Russian ones hacking Democrat servers and leaking what they find via the rapist Julian Assange.

Why do Russians want Trump to win? Because they know he would be a bad president, and in Putin’s narrow-minded zero-sum world anything that’s bad for the US is good for Russia. Or there could be even deeper reasons, such as deals between Putin and Trump. Far fetched? Perhaps, but he’s got to be hiding something in his withheld tax returns, something so bad he’s prepared to take the hit from not releasing them.

[Absolute_Zero]

Er...

My opinion since ~May... if it looks as though Trump might be able to win, something will magically surface in order to knock him back.

Rationale: the spooks etc, et al, don't seem at all comfortable with the notion of President Trump.

You are implying the “spooks” would work against Trump. While fact is the only spooks involved are the Russian ones hacking Democrat servers and leaking what they find via the rapist Julian Assange.

And you don't suppose that the US equivalent, independent of obvious national/international security concerns they already hold re Trump, are going sit idly by while Putin tries to engineer a result favourable to Russian expansionism?

[merman]

What galls me - and it's not the first time - is this post-debate nonsense of both sides claiming the win.

And then, if that was not bad enough, commentators saying, "Well, Hillary won - but she didn't land a knockout blow." They said the same about Obama and Gore, when they were clear winners in the debate (and of course Gore then had victory stolen from him).

[pogo]

That’s politics. But don’t forget initial polls after the first debate said Trump won. Then proper polls started coming in, matching the actual outcome. Seems the initial polls, all online ones, were hijacked by Trump supporters trying to make their man look good.

This one was closer, but still Trump lost. He needed to find someway to negate his first debate performance, he did not but instead found new ways to shoot himself in the foot. This detour into ancient history will only hurt him, help Hillary who ends up looking stronger and doubly the victim of it all.

A couple more highlights from it. Pence got mentioned: when asked if he agreed with his VP candidate, who criticised Assad and Russia in the VP debate, Trump said: “He and I haven't spoken and I disagree”. You are not supposed to disagree with the other half of your ticket in public, or cut them off like that. No wonder rumours are circulating Pence wants out.

The best bit was at the end, when they were asked about their opponents good point. Clinton mentioned Trump’s children, which was harmless and gave her the chance to be positive for a change. She had clearly prepared that answer. Trump hadn’t, and I think gave an honest reply. He praised Clinton’s staying power and tenacity. Which flatly contradicts his attack on her as too weak and frail. To be fair he has not used that recently, perhaps as he is the one sniffling through the debates, looking and sounding tired.

[merman]

New York Times op-ed summary of Trump's performance in the second debate:

https://www.facebook.com/mark.kochinski ... 2669002158

TLDR; he lied a lot.

[zip accident]

[snaff]

Now that the sexy chat scandal has blown over it looks like Trump is back in the lead.

[Cloudane]

In a couple of weeks it'll be like "Trump's advocation of the drowning of all kittens and alleged involvement in 3 school massacres have blown over and he's set to win again"

[funkstar]

Now that the sexy chat scandal has blown over it looks like Trump is back in the lead.

"Back"? He's basically never been in the lead.

[KlaxonCow]

The potential leader of the free world, folks.