2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Carolina Red said:
Oh my. Tell us more!
Click to expand...

Presumably the Apprentice people are looking at 10 years of behind the scenes footage, hot mike audio etc. If they are, there's a good chance there a hell of a lot more out there.
 
How come none of this was brought up during the primaries. GOP might had a chance to win if they did their homework at that stage.
 
Chavetz and a bunch of republicans pulling back endorsement saying 'How can I look my 15 year old daughter in the eye. feck you, you hypocrites, we've been telling you from Day 1 that Trump has always been this person. Bunch of assholes suddenly acting as if they have the moral compass on.
 
laqa8mvgh6qx.jpg
 
neelu91 said:
How come none of this was brought up during the primaries. GOP might had a chance to win if they did their homework at that stage.
Click to expand...

Would it have mattered? A weird madness took hold of the Republican party and they decided to nominate possibly the least electable candidate in living memory. Would one more video have swayed them?

Plus if I was a Democrat I'd be doing everything I can to hold this stuff back until it's too late for the Republicans. Let them nominate the candidate you dream about facing and then bury him.
 
I'm actually relieved, and although I knew this was going to happen, I was slightly scared it might not and It was too late. I suspect @Raoul feels the same, because both he and I have been banging on about a Trump meltdown for well over a year, near 18 months in fact, and thankfully he didn't disappoint. Left it a little late maybe, or the press did, but it's appreciated none the less. However, it's not anywhere near what I envisaged, so over to Donald J Trump.... take it away fecknutz!
 
Holy crap... The Rick Wilson guy kept tweeting...

Rick Wilson ‏@TheRickWilson
1/ Pence is not the option you think he is, DC folks. Trump's base will slaughter him if he's the Brutus. He's covered in Trump's filth.

2/ Trump is morally and temperamentally disqualified but his fanatics can't quit him

3/ the litigation will be epic, the riots worse. Get Kevlar, boys.
 
The distress of all the Republicans who backed Trump is both tragic and hillarious. Like watching a circus full of clowns trying to escape one of those tiny cars after it's overturned and caught fire.
 
sullydnl said:
Would it have mattered? A weird madness took hold of the Republican party and they decided to nominate possibly the least electable candidate in living memory. Would one more video have swayed them?

Plus if I was a Democrat I'd be doing everything I can to hold this stuff back until it's too late for the Republicans. Let them nominate the candidate you dream about facing and then bury him.
Click to expand...

He didn't get a majority of the primary votes, won on a plurality.

Their mistake was coddling him for too long (bush/Rubio camps though he'd fizzle out even at Jan), which solidified his 35% and a divided field with at least 4 candidates vying for the establishment vote.

A complete clusterfeck throughout. And people here are absolutely convinced anyone else of them would beat Clinton :lol:. She inherited the best electoral machineto date and has run an extremely tight and efficient campaign.
 
Boorish, self-entitled man says things which are boorish and self-entitled. He's being consistent, at least.
 
Donald Trump, Groper in Chief
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/09/opinion/sunday/donald-trump-groper-in-chief.html

Genius headline! :lol:

JILL HARTH’S first concern with Donald Trump’s hands wasn’t that they were small. It’s that they were everywhere.

Harth and her longtime boyfriend were in meetings with Trump to forge a business partnership. “He was relentless,” Harth recalled in an interview, describing how on Dec. 12, 1992, he took the couple to dinner and a club — and then situated himself beside Harth and ran his hands up her skirt, to her crotch. “I didn’t know how to handle it. I would go away from him and say I have to go to the restroom. It was the escape route.”
...
“You know, there’s going to be a problem,” Trump told Houraney, according to a 1997 sexual harassment lawsuit Harth filed against him. “I’m very attracted to your girlfriend.”

On Jan. 24, 1993, Harth and Houraney went to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida for a contract-signing celebration, bringing along some “calendar girls” at Trump’s request. He offered Harth a tour of the estate and then pulled her into the empty bedroom of his daughter Ivanka.

“I was admiring the decoration, and next thing I know he’s pushing me against a wall and has his hands all over me,” Harth told me. “He was trying to kiss me. I was freaking out.” Harth says she was desperately protesting, and finally managed to run out of the room and find the group again. She and Houraney left rather than stay the night, as they had intended.
...
That year, Harth continued to meet Trump for business — and, she says, he continued to try to jump her. “He’d say, ‘Let’s go in my room, I want to lie down,’ and he’d pull me along. I’d say, ‘I don’t want to lie down,’ and it would turn into a wrestling match. … I remember yelling, ‘I didn’t come here for this.’ He’d say, ‘Just calm down.’”

Harth says that she worried about being raped by a man who weighed twice as much as she did, and at one point she vomited as a defense mechanism. But she says that he was never violent and genuinely seemed to assume sexual interest on her part; often he was playful as she was frightened: “His mind was in a totally different place than mine,” Harth recalls. “He thinks he’s God’s gift to women.”
Click to expand...
What is even more sickening than Trump are his religious defenders.
 
langster said:
That backdrop as well :lol: It's awful, Looks like one of those cheap ass canvas pictures you buy from street vendors. He actually looked peanut brown too rather than orange, not a good look for him.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if it is a backdrop of Moscow such is the stupidity of his campaign team.
 
BREAKING: Samantha Bee recorded having extremely lewd conversation about men in 2016.


Samantha Bee must be having the time of her life. :lol::lol::lol:
 
They must have incredible amounts of dirt on him. Even if he miraculously claws his way back into the race, it looks like they'll just reveal another very stupid thing he's said and keep him swimming in her wake.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
It was reported months ago by HuffPo.

The sickening thing is that it takes a tape for people to no longer be able to turn a blind eye.
Click to expand...
I remember, just loved the headline used by NYT to bring the issue up again. :D
InfiniteBoredom said:
You think the GOP leaders don't see him for what he is? They chose to throw their lot behind him anyway.
Click to expand...
The hypocrisy of GOP members and Evangelical (mainly white) voters have reached new levels during this campaign. I hope that those Republicans who refused to endorse or support Trump from the beginning will get the recognition they deserve.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
I don't have a comprehensive article on hand, but for #3 look up 'Citizens United.' Basicaly, a conservative Supreme Court fecked elections in the US for years to come.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reference, I found some interesting stuff on them and the court case. I'm not sure though if they strive for what I meant. It looks as if what they have done follows the same scheme as 'classic' parties do: Rich donors fund campaigns, political films or ads. It's just that they've done it without being a political party.
What I meant, however, is that in order to run a campaign (whether in the primaries or in the actual presidential race), people need an awful lot of money. That either is an advantage for filthy rich candidates or a candidate must raise money. Inevitably, the latter leads to some degree of dependency - and that's what I was wondering about: If there's no debate about fixing this.
 
Crossie said:
Thanks for the reference, I found some interesting stuff on them and the court case. I'm not sure though if they strive for what I meant. It looks as if what they have done follows the same scheme as 'classic' parties do: Rich donors fund campaigns, political films or ads. It's just that they've done it without being a political party.
What I meant, however, is that in order to run a campaign (whether in the primaries or in the actual presidential race), people need an awful lot of money. That either is an advantage for filthy rich candidates or a candidate must raise money. Inevitably, the latter leads to some degree of dependency - and that's what I was wondering about: If there's no debate about fixing this.
Click to expand...

It's complicated. Public financing have been brought up occasionally (from both sides, GOP significantly less so), limiting campaign contribution etc... The biggest obstacle though, is that lobbying is protected under their First Amendment, so any attempt for a vigorous system shake up is opposed by moneyed interests.

It's a clusterfeck all round. The left crows a lot about repealing Citizen United, but it will effectively just reverse things back to pre-2010, and not even necessarily so, since Koch money have already done the damage.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
It's complicated. Public financing have been brought up occasionally (from both sides, GOP significantly less so), limiting campaign contribution etc... The biggest obstacle though, is that lobbying is protected under their First Amendment, so any attempt for a vigorous system shake up is opposed by moneyed interests.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I didn't know that. Let's pretend Americans overwhelmingly demand to amend that part of the 1st Amendment: What would it take to amend it? Would majority in both the Senate and the Congress suffice?
 
Crossie said:
Thanks, I didn't know that. Let's pretend Americans overwhelmingly demand to amend that part of the 1st Amendment: What would it take to amend it? Would majority in both the Senate and the Congress suffice?
Click to expand...
President, house majority, senate supermajority (60 votes), 3/4 of states agreeing to ratify.
 
Maybe you guys should keep Obama for one more year?:confused:
 
He's more or less done, isn't he? Can't see him recover from this one, the last ~2 weeks were very bad for him, didn't see that one coming...
 
So I just listened to that tape. Yep, some scandalous stuff to hear from a potential US president candidate. But the stuff he said about women letting you do anything to them when you're famous and a star is true though...
 
Hope this is the end for the possibility that a dumb nazi guy is becoming US president. Even if the problems in the US society stays. The whole world would take a breath. God if i imagine a Trump with nuclear weapons..unbelievable.
 
slig said:
Hope this is the end for the possibility that a dumb nazi guy is becoming US president. Even if the problems in the US society stays. The whole world would take a breath. God if i imagine a Trump with nuclear weapons..unbelievable.
Click to expand...
Yeah and? Do you genuinely think Trump would actually start nuking countries? He's a fool but that's just unrealistic to think.
 
VorZakone said:
Yeah and? Do you genuinely think Trump would actually start nuking countries? He's a fool but that's just unrealistic to think.
Click to expand...

Some actual statements of Trump's:
"When we have them, why can't we just use them?"
"I would never take using nuclear weapons off the table"
"I love war"
"Wouldn't it be great to attack first, and talk about our great victory later?"
 
VorZakone said:
Yeah and? Do you genuinely think Trump would actually start nuking countries? He's a fool but that's just unrealistic to think.
Click to expand...
Trump as a whole is unrealistic to think for me. But it happend... and to answer it in detail: yes i really do, hear what he is saying what he thinks, he wouzld definitly think "nah the whole IS thing, lets nuke them" Nah, this conflict with northkorea, my idea to end it is to nuke them. Men he even would nuke the journos who comes out with stuff over him if he could :lol: (the fact that i can use smilies in this stuff is a sign that after this new story i finaly can relax a bit now over this serious stuff)
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Some actual statements of Trump's:
"When we have them, why can't we just use them?"
"I would never take using nuclear weapons off the table"
"I love war"
"Wouldn't it be great to attack first, and talk about our great victory later?"
Click to expand...
Don't take all of his comments so literally. Trump would not be allowed to use nukes and he wouldn't himself dare it either.
 
I didn't think I'd ever defend trump. But people who say that he is describing sexual assault in the clip are just following an agenda. At no point he claimed to grab them by the pussy (his words, not mine), against the woman's will. Yes, a presidential candidate shouldn't say stuff like this. And yes, it sounds extremely pretentious. Is he objectifiying woman? Probably. But first all sexuality is about objectifying the other sex to a certain extent and second of all, it's still not the same as sexual assault.

I hate it, when people change the facts based on their beliefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.