News 2016 U.S. Presidential election - the highs and lows

shyvas said:

Two faced or just politics ?
Click to expand...

I assume you got that through the Daily Mail article? Interesting that you failed to cite, since then there would have been reference:

As for Michelle Obama's dig seen in the ad, she made the remark in August 2007, and the Obama campaign quickly pushed back on any interpretations that she was demeaning the Clintons or alluding to Bill Clinton's infidelity.

Right after making the 'house' comment, Michelle Obama began talking about her own family and making sure daughters Sasha and Malia weren't being overlooked as her husband pursued the presidency.

'So, so we've adjusted our schedules to make sure that our girls are first, so while he's traveling around, I do day trips,' Obama continued.

'That means I get up in the morning, I get the girls ready, I get them off, I go and do trips, I'm home before bedtime,' she said at the time.
Click to expand...
Michelle's 2008 call for 'role model family' used in anti-Hillary ad

Both Obama and Hillary have acknowledged through the years that 2008 was a hard fought campaign. Maybe you don't remember, but Obama asked Hillary to be Secretary of State right after he became President. That's what adults do - they pick the right person for the job.

You know what adults also sometimes do? They sometimes change their opinions about someone, especially as they get to know them better. I've developed excellent relationships with some people whom I didn't like initially. I doubt that I'm the only person on the planet to have done that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF
shyvas said:
I recorded it and could hear that something was wrong. I have kept the recording but have no time to watch it again atm. I will try and view it later on during the week.

I agree that it must have contributed to some stress and as usual nobody seemed to believe him.
Click to expand...

If he heard something off with the sound level in the hall, and it was distracting him, I would have thought that he would have had the chops to say "Lester, I think there's something off with the mic. Could somebody please check the sound levels?"

After all, Donald is hardly the shy, retiring type.

I suspect that it's more likely that someone in his entourage was sitting at a spot in the hall where the sound levels were off, mentioned it right after the debate, and he seized on it.

But let's take him at his word and say that it distracted him badly. What effect would such a distraction have on him as President if he's in an important negotiation with a world leader?!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF
I'm also sitting here wondering whether the mic is to blame for his week long attacks on the former Miss Universe? That's what has actually done the damage to him - his compulsive fixation on attacking her.

What a powerful mic, to get him to wake up at 3 a.m., four days after he met the mic, to let loose with his latest barrage of tweets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thefadedone and Amy SF
Mischief said:
I assume you got that through the Daily Mail article? Interesting that you failed to cite, since then there would have been reference:


Michelle's 2008 call for 'role model family' used in anti-Hillary ad

Both Obama and Hillary have acknowledged through the years that 2008 was a hard fought campaign. Maybe you don't remember, but Obama asked Hillary to be Secretary of State right after he became President. That's what adults do - they pick the right person for the job.

You know what adults also sometimes do? They sometimes change their opinions about someone, especially as they get to know them better. I've developed excellent relationships with some people whom I didn't like initially. I doubt that I'm the only person on the planet to have done that.
Click to expand...

You assumed wrong. However, I did google up Daily Mail and found another video. It seems like you didn't read my question on the op.

 
shyvas said:
You assumed wrong. However, I did google up Daily Mail and found another video. It seems like you didn't read my question on the op.
Click to expand...

I did read your question, and I answered it. Perhaps you've never changed your opinion of someone as you got to know them? That would explain your thinking that it's a binary choice - politics or two faced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF
Wolfie said:
Well you might say it's survival of the fittest right now. The social programs that Democrats love don't help a huge segment of the population.

I am a member of a local group that started to help those who fall through the cracks. It's not a political group and no one in it ever even discusses politics or who they are voting for. That's not one of the rules or anything, it just never comes up. And personally I think you'd see a lot more of people helping people if we weren't taxed so damn much we can barely make ends meet ourselves. The government wastes/mismanages so much ******* money it's disgusting. I think the private sector could do a better job.
Click to expand...


The majority of people here are in the 28% tax bracket (or less). While no one wants to pay taxes, that amount isn't so much that it results in most people being unable to make ends meet. (IMO, that has less to do with taxes, and more to do with people spending beyond their means on luxury items. But that's a discussion for another thread)

The gov't waste money, it's true, but reducing it's cash flow will not fix the problem. Cutting the specific waste is what's needed. Of course, some people believe that various social programs are wasteful spending, but a lot of people rely on them for temporary assistance. In those cases, instead of cutting the program altogether, it would make more sense to go after the cheaters, exploiters, and lifers. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater approach is not the solution.
 
I don't get why those supporting 3rd party candidates assume that the ones who aren't just don't know about them. Yes, we do know about them, which is why we are not voting for them. It isn't a matter of the media ignoring them or whatever other excuses are being made, it's that we do not think they are qualified to be president. It's not that we think we would be throwing away our vote if we voted for them, it's because we don't want them anywhere near the White House or running the country.
 
I certainly don't assume that. I was strictly speaking for myself. I didn't know much about either Stein or Johnson. I'm just trying to explore all the options as I would prefer to vote for Hilary because I think she's the most qualified and not because it's a matter of not wanting to vote for DT.
 
KLS52 said:
I certainly don't assume that. I was strictly speaking for myself. I didn't know much about either Stein or Johnson. I'm just trying to explore all the options as I would prefer to vote for Hilary because I think she's the most qualified and not because it's a matter of not wanting to vote for DT.
Click to expand...
I was talking about the Stein and Johnson supporters who claim we are only voting for Clinton or Trump because we either don't know who the 3rd party candidates are, or because we are afraid to vote for them because we feel we'll be throwing away our vote, so we are voting for the lessor or two evils. While I'm sure some are doing that, they seem to ignore that a lot of us actually like who we are voting for whether that's Clinton or Trump.
 
So we're starting to get a look at Trump's taxes despite Trump: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/u...e-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.
Click to expand...

I suspect that he's going to be asked some pretty pointed questions about his financial dealings in the next several weeks.

Also, who wants to take on a bet that he will have a meltdown over the publication of this information, despite the fact that he keeps insisting that he'll "release his tax returns as soon as the audit is completed"?
 
Last edited:
But here is Trump's Twitter history on taxes:


Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
HALF of Americans don't pay income tax despite crippling govt debt...http://plu.gd/qLa

1:59 PM - 23 Feb 2012

Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
The hedge fund guys (gals) have to pay higher taxes ASAP. They are paying practically nothing. We must reduce taxes for the middle class!

4:54 PM - 5 Sep 2015
Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
Mitt Romney,who totally blew an election that should have been won and whose tax returns made him look like a fool, is now playing tough guy

5:13 PM - 24 Feb 2016

Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
Facebook billionaire gives up his U.S. citizenship in order to save taxes. I guess 3.8 billion isn't enough for (cont) http://tl.gd/hdnk92

2:12 PM - 14 May 2012


Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
The @washingtonpost loses money (a deduction) and gives owner @JeffBezos power to screw public on low taxation of @Amazon! Big tax shelter

9:18 AM - 7 Dec 2015

Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
Yesterday was @BarackObama's favorite day of the year--he collects our taxes to redistribute.

9:12 AM - 18 Apr 2012


Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
@BarackObama who wants to raise all our taxes, only pays 20.5% on $790k salary.http://1.usa.gov/HFZJKH Do as I say not as I do.

1:19 PM - 13 Apr 2012

Follow
Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
To the geniuses at 'Americans United for Change': the more you tax me the less people I employ. Get it?
1:59 PM - 7 Aug 2012
Click to expand...
Trump has a long history of Tweet-shaming on taxes

Donald, oh Donald.
 
At this point Trump is like the obnoxious unpopular kid in high school running for student body president who is so desperate to keep his failing campaign alive that he panders to the bully vote in the hopes that there are enough bullies in the school to elect him.
 
Top Bottom