US Election: It's a post-TrumpDay world

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

7 minutes ago, BloodRider said:

I though that had changed by the time of God Emperor of Dune.  In that book, wasn't there only the Paul / Worm hybrid who horded all the spice in his desert oasis?  

Been a long time since I went that deep into Dune.

That was the Leto II/worm hybrid.  He wasn't making new spice but was ultimately the only way new spice could be made in the future.

[BloodRider]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

That was the Leto II/worm hybrid.  He wasn't making new spice but was ultimately the only way new spice could be made in the future.

I think I remember now.  Didn't he die in a big spice-gasm?

[Kalbear]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Now there's some revisionist history. 

How so? She didn't release them right away, but she's released basically all of them at this point. 

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Except in one of those two scenarios he can call her dishonest and say she's hiding something. That can be damaging to a candidate who is notoriously lacking in transparency and polls terribly on honesty and trustworthiness. And when you tie the transcripts and the emails together it makes the attack all the more powerful.

But again, so what? The idea that the attack will need to be super powerful seems odd. You get that there is no way to insulate Clinton from all the attacks that are about to come out, right? That Trump is going to not go with one specific one or even one attack ad - he's going to throw everything at her.

I think you're right - it makes the attack more potent. I just think that it doesn't matter when going up against Trump. 

[Kalbear]

 

Quote

 

With Kasich dropping out and Sanders doing his best to damage the party and candidacy to which he does not belong, I'm afraid we're going to lose the opportunity to do the same thing in this pre-convention period to Trump.

Sanders should drop out.

 

I kind of agree, but again - Clinton's ads and social media and focus have been 100% on Trump. While Sanders is continuing to attack her, she continues to completely ignore him. Now that he's been given the nominee status this will only increase. And there's really nothing that Sanders can do at this point to win. Point in fact, Clinton campaigning on what a good candidate she is to beat Trump probably is just as effective in getting people to vote for her as going against Sanders and forces Sanders to essentially ignore his own platform and go on the 'see, I can ALSO beat Trump!' thing, which weakens his attacks. 

I don't think that it's going to be so bad.

Something else I've noticed is that Trump has done better since he's been a lot quieter. He's had fewer rallies and public speaking events, he's had no debates, he's even had a teleprompter speech. That's going to change here soon, especially with the convention. And that's when he's likely going to be most vulnerable. Clinton had a field day with the 'woman card' thing a week ago and raised more money than Sanders on a monthly basis for the first time this campaign; more things like that should be in the future.

[Mudguard]

9 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

How so? She didn't release them right away, but she's released basically all of them at this point. 

 

Clinton has only released about half of the emails from the email account that she used to conduct all her work.  The other half she deleted.  Her claim is that the emails she deleted were all personal emails, but I find this assertion questionable given the fact that people have already identified from other parties emails from Clinton that Clinton has failed to turn over.  

There's a lot of material there for Trump to work with.  The email story has died down, so maybe it's run it's course.  Not sure how successful Trump will be at reigniting it.  

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

Clinton has only released about half of the emails from the email account that she used to conduct all her work.  The other half she deleted.  Her claim is that the emails she deleted were all personal emails, but I find this assertion questionable given the fact that people have already identified from other parties emails from Clinton that Clinton has failed to turn over.  

There's a lot of material there for Trump to work with.  The email story has died down, so maybe it's run it's course.  Not sure how successful Trump will be at reigniting it.  

Okay - she's released all the ones that I guess she has. As stated before, it would have been better of her to simply have deleted all of them like Bush did and then said 'my bad'.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

How so? She didn't release them right away, but she's released basically all of them at this point. 

Iirc, at first she refused to release her emails/make the server public.

11 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

But again, so what? The idea that the attack will need to be super powerful seems odd. You get that there is no way to insulate Clinton from all the attacks that are about to come out, right? That Trump is going to not go with one specific one or even one attack ad - he's going to throw everything at her.

Maybe I've been unclear. The attack alone wouldn't be a super powerful single death blow, but one of many that will hurt her credibility, and this one in particular will hit home with disgruntled Sanders supporters. You can't insulate her from attacks, but on this specific one, it loses all it's ability to damage her in the general if there is nothing serious in the transcripts. Sanders will bemoan them if she releases them now, but that's about it and it doesn't matter since she has the nomination all but locked up. However, if she refuses to release them during the general it gives Trump another angle to hit her on. In politics, it's a mistake to give your opponent ammunition against you if you can defuse it yourself.

26 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I think you're right - it makes the attack more potent. I just think that it doesn't matter when going up against Trump. 

No one attack will take down Clinton, but the death from a thousand cuts strategy is a real challenge she could face. If she was facing a good candidate instead of Trump I'd be very worried right now. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

14 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

There's a lot of material there for Trump to work with.  The email story has died down, so maybe it's run it's course.  Not sure how successful Trump will be at reigniting it.  

It should have run it's course by now, but the investigation is going so slow. I doubt she'll ever be charged with anything, but the possibility of that happening during the general still looms and is extremely problematic.

[Mudguard]

Looks like Clinton is moving the goalposts with respect to her conditions for releasing her speech transcripts now that it's just her and Trump.  She initially stated that she would release the transcripts when everyone else released their transcripts.  Now she wants Trump to release as many years of tax returns that she's released plus his speech transcripts before releasing her own transcripts.

Quote

Clinton also detailed what it would take for her to release the transcripts of paid speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs and others, something Sanders has made an issue of. Clinton said she had nothing to hide in them, but that she would only release them if Trump releases as many years of tax returns as she has in addition to the transcripts of his own paid speeches.

Clinton moving the goalposts immediately after Trump wrapped up the nomination makes it seem that she really, really doesn't want to release the transcripts.  I think there would have be strong polling evidence that this specific issue was hurting her significantly before she releases the transcripts.

[Kalbear]

Yeah, so here's the first attack against Trump via Clinton - and it's entirely made up of Republican quotes.

[TrackerNeil]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Probably, but far from definitely.  I'm not suggesting that Trump will likely beat Clinton. I'm just laying out the most likely path for it to happen. 

So on a funnier note, what poor soul is going to get stuck being Trump's VP? Is his daughter 35 yet?

I could make a joke, but I say Jan Brewer will be on the list. She has governing experience, was an early endorser, and is sufficiently hostile towards non-white people. Check, check, and check. 

[Mudguard]

5 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, so here's the first attack against Trump via Clinton - and it's entirely made up of Republican quotes.

That ad must have been pretty easy to put together.  There's enough material out there to make a full length film.  With Trump as the nominee, I'm pretty certain that this campaign will be one of the ugliest ever.  Clinton herself has a lot of baggage, so there's going to be plenty of working material for both sides.

[Jace, Extat]

37 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, so here's the first attack against Trump via Clinton - and it's entirely made up of Republican quotes.

That was a goodie. One thing that stood out to me, does Mitt Romney seem a whole lot more 'presidential' now than he ever did while running or was I just super wasted back in 2011-2012?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

37 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

I could make a joke, but I say Jan Brewer will be on the list. She has governing experience, was an early endorser, and is sufficiently hostile towards non-white people. Check, check, and check. 

But you did make a joke 

Whoever it winds up being, they will have to toe his line in the VP debate. Sucks for the.

 Also, I'm going out on an early limb and predicting Clinton selects Deval Patrick.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

37 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

That ad must have been pretty easy to put together.  There's enough material out there to make a full length film.  With Trump as the nominee, I'm pretty certain that this campaign will be one of the ugliest ever.  Clinton herself has a lot of baggage, so there's going to be plenty of working material for both sides.

Pretty is an understatement. It will be. Both candidates have high negative ratings and aren't afraid to clobber their opponent. Obviously Clinton won't be as nasty as Trump, but you can be certain that no punches will be pulled during this campaign. 

9 minutes ago, Pony Queen Jace said:

That was a goodie. One thing that stood out to me, does Mitt Romney seem a whole lot more 'presidential' now than he ever did while running or was I just super wasted back in 2011-2012?

He's a lot more likable when he isn't hyper scripted. Go and watch his promotion for that fake boxing match he did a year or two ago.

[Shryke]

53 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

Looks like Clinton is moving the goalposts with respect to her conditions for releasing her speech transcripts now that it's just her and Trump.  She initially stated that she would release the transcripts when everyone else released their transcripts.  Now she wants Trump to release as many years of tax returns that she's released plus his speech transcripts before releasing her own transcripts.

Clinton moving the goalposts immediately after Trump wrapped up the nomination makes it seem that she really, really doesn't want to release the transcripts.  I think there would have be strong polling evidence that this specific issue was hurting her significantly before she releases the transcripts.

What I been saying for ages. Those things aren't coming out. There's no reason for her to release them unless something really drastically changes. No upside, plenty of potential downside.

[TrackerNeil]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

But you did make a joke 

Whoever it winds up being, they will have to toe his line in the VP debate. Sucks for the.

 Also, I'm going out on an early limb and predicting Clinton selects Deval Patrick.

I think Patrick would be a good choice, as would Julian Castro. In fact, Castro or Perez would be a nice contrast to Donald Trump's racism. People are talking about Kaine, but I don't know what he brings that the others wouldn't.

[lokisnow]

Perez is the best choice I think.

[Shryke]

I was listening to an episode of the podcast "Keeping it 1600" and they were talking about VP picks and Obama's 2008 campaign and all that.

And one of them describes Evan Bayh as the perpetual name on everyone's list and "the most vetted human being alive". 

[Tears of Lys]

8 hours ago, Kalbear said:

That would  kind of make sense, but it's Clinton. Clinton cannot trust the media any more. She has found that her best defense is to simply stall for as long as possible, because no matter what they are going to attack her - so why give them any actual substantive fuel? 

I'm not saying that this is the correct course of action, but it's what is in Clinton's mindset. Clinton doesn't need to release anything, it almost certainly doesn't have anything particularly damning, but she's not going to take a risk and she's not going to give people information. 

See, that kind of thing is what makes **me**, at least, uncomfortable about her. It sounds like the very worst of mindsets that a politician can have.  It reminds me of presidents like Nixon, for example.  "Them" vs. "Us."  Circle the wagons.  Stall and obfuscate.  Don't trust "the media."   This particular situation may not be one where these tactics are too, too terrible, but if this attitude carries on into more serious territory, well, I'd really hate for this country's first woman president's term of office to be marred.   If you can't defend your decisions and/or actions in the glare of media attention and be willing to live with the fallout, you're not suited for holding public office.  The decisions you make are too damn important. 

I really wish Bernie were doing better in this race.  Sigh.