US Election 2016: DO NOT MY FRIENDS BECOME ADDICTED TO WATER

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Mexal said:

This is still an argument by people? Seriously. The math has been done. Hillary owns the pledged count by ~250 votes and she has more than 3 million vote lead. None of the math is Sanders favor or ever has been no matter how many times he says it is. I'll just add this John Oliver segment for anyone that believes Sanders would be ahead of Hillary without superdelegates.

 

I see otherwise intelligent people on Facebook and in other places saying that Sanders could win a third party write in campaign, even if he doesn't actively campaign. Some people are just delusional when it comes to Sanders' chances.

[The Anti-Targ]

The US politics thread seems to have gone a bit quiet and this is about Trump.

Do you think the money trump raised for the veterans would have gone to veterans groups if the News media hadn't started asking questions about where that fundraiser money had gone because it appeared like up until recently no veterans groups had received any money? Or was the process of distribution under way and it just takes time to get that money out to the target groups?

It is curious that many cheques got written on the same day which happened to coincide with increased media scrutiny.

[Shryke]

1 minute ago, The Anti-Targ said:

The US politics thread seems to have gone a bit quiet and this is about Trump.

Do you think the money trump raised for the veterans would have gone to veterans groups if the News media hadn't started asking questions about where that fundraiser money had gone because it appeared like up until recently no veterans groups had received any money? Or was the process of distribution under way and it just takes time to get that money out to the target groups?

It is curious that many cheques got written on the same day which happened to coincide with increased media scrutiny.

No. He only donated that money because the media started looking into the issue.

[Kalbear]

Yeah, that's my conclusion too. That the checks were made out on the day it became a story makes me think the money wasn't coming without the pressure. It is precisely the same kind of behavior that I've seen from the ex of my wife when claiming a payment was made. And he is a sociopath who is incapable of telling the truth. 

[Dr. Pepper]

Makes you wonder what he was planning on doing with the money.  What could he have done with the money?  Is there actually any legal obligation to give money raised for charity to charity?  I would imagine that if he's doing it while on the presidential candidate stage then he was probably doing this shit before and we might find out there are lots of charities that didn't get their promised donations from him.  

I guess we already knew this, but it seems officially confirmed that if Trump can get away with trying to screw over veterans, there's pretty much nothing he can do that will be too much or too far for his base.  

[all swedes are racist]

53 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

Makes you wonder what he was planning on doing with the money.  What could he have done with the money?  Is there actually any legal obligation to give money raised for charity to charity?  I would imagine that if he's doing it while on the presidential candidate stage then he was probably doing this shit before and we might find out there are lots of charities that didn't get their promised donations from him.  

I guess we already knew this, but it seems officially confirmed that if Trump can get away with trying to screw over veterans, there's pretty much nothing he can do that will be too much or too far for his base.  

Short answer (lawyers may correct as necessary): probably yes, but depends...

Haven't really been following or looking up gritty details, but (broad strokes here) any monies given to Trump Foundation or any other 501(c)(3) that were/are not given as restricted donations may be used or disbursed as the organization or its board see fit. Monies donated as restricted gifts must be used according to stated restrictions (programmatic or temporal), i.e. "This must be used for programs relating to veterans concerns". 

In fairness, (and bad political optics aside) discounting rather specific timely restrictions of gifts, the foundations in question have no obligation to use or disburse funds with any sort of timeliness-- in fact, as may be the case here, doing so with organizations that the foundation has no pre existing relationship with is probably rather poor practice. Any decent donor should expect a certain amount of vetting and due diligence, lest gifts end up going to Big Jims Forced Labor Camp for Veterans. 

Not saying this shit is necessarily not shady, but as I understand the facts, nothing illegal or even unethical seems to have occurred (now can someone please stab me in the eye with a shrimp fork for even vaguely defending Trump, sheesh) 

[Jaxom 1974]

12 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Actually, I hope my Charm Person spell plus my devil-may-care expression accomplishes that. 

I've never wanted a "like" button more.

[mormont]

8 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

I guess we already knew this, but it seems officially confirmed that if Trump can get away with trying to screw over veterans, there's pretty much nothing he can do that will be too much or too far for his base.  

At this stage, I think Trump's base largely consists of two groups:

- The true believers, people so desperate for a saviour that they can't psychologically deal with the idea that Trump might do something wrong. (Neither can Trump, of course.) These people will seize on any excuse, no matter how tenuous. to avoid the cognitive dissonance any evidence of wrongdoing might cause: media lies, conspiracies, or just straight up denial of the facts.

- The far larger group of people who have already factored in to their support the fact that their man is a shady narcissist and who support him anyway. These people will look at evidence of wrongdoing and simply shrug.

So yes, you're probably right. The good(ish) news is that Clinton has a lot of the second kind of support as well. So while there will be record-setting amounts of mud slung in the Presidential election, I doubt most of it will dramatically change the candidates' numbers.

[Guess who's back]

6 minutes ago, mormont said:

At this stage, I think Trump's base largely consists of two groups:

I support Trump because of his complete disregard for political correctness. We truly need someone like him, to get west away from the extreme liberal ideologies and obsession with oppression and privileges. 

[The Anti-Targ]

40 minutes ago, Guess who's back said:

I support Trump because of his complete disregard for political correctness. We truly need someone like him, to get west away from the extreme liberal ideologies and obsession with oppression and privileges. 

Sooooo you're in the first group?

[The Anti-Targ]

So the next thing on the Trump teflon train is the docs released from the Trump university law suit. Again I suppose this will have zero effect on his polling.

[The Marquis de Leech]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

So yes, you're probably right. The good(ish) news is that Clinton has a lot of the second kind of support as well. So while there will be record-setting amounts of mud slung in the Presidential election, I doubt most of it will dramatically change the candidates' numbers.

This election (like most modern US elections, but even more so this time) will depend on turnout. Trump might be loathed by minorities, but those minorities actually need to vote.

It really wouldn't surprise me if Hillary ends up re-purposing some of the old anti-Barry Goldwater ads from 1964 ("the stakes are too high for you to stay at home").

[DireWolfSpirit]

Just a gut feeling but I dont think the Donald is worth a faction of what he claims. I'm thinking he uses a fair amount of accounting gimmikry to arrive at his net worth, by using (goodwill) to over inflate his brand value. Its been a while since my accounting classes, but I think thats whats going on. He looked totally butthurt today and was lashing out at the media, I think what was really killing him was writing the check for a milli really hurt his purse. No way is this guy a billionaire imo.

The Cali race has tightened considerably and Bernie and Hillary are now within the polling margin of error according to the most recent poll MSNBC reported on. MSNBC had a great show tonight on Maddow. The substitute host did a lengthy memory lane segment on the vicious primary battle Brown and Clinton waged in "92". Which in turn suegewayed into the backhistory involved with Gov Browns endorsement of Hillary this week. Great story and reporting if you got the chance to catch it. Some ineresting parallels to this race.

[DireWolfSpirit]

1 hour ago, Guess who's back said:

I support Trump because of his complete disregard for political correctness. We truly need someone like him, to get west away from the extreme liberal ideologies and obsession with oppression and privileges. 

Could you give me an example of how Trump would help get the West away from obsession with oppression? Also, could you explain how you see the West as obsessed with oppression, not sure I know what that entails?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Guess who's back said:

I support Trump because of his complete disregard for political correctness. We truly need someone like him, to get west away from the extreme liberal ideologies and obsession with oppression and privileges. 

Trump does disregard political correctness, but in exchange for that you have to accept a know-nothing pathological liar who would happily screw you out of your life savings. Is that really a healthy trade off?

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Just a gut feeling but I dont think the Donald is worth a faction of what he claims. I'm thinking he uses a fair amount of accounting gimmikry to arrive at his net worth, by using (goodwill) to over inflate his brand value. Its been a while since my accounting classes, but I think thats whats going on. He looked totally butthurt today and was lashing out at the media, I think what was really killing him was writing the check for a milli really hurt his purse. No way is this guy a billionaire imo.

The Cali race has tightened considerably and Bernie and Hillary are now within the polling margin of era according to the most recent poll MSNBC reported on. MSNBC had a great show tonight on Maddow. The substitute host did a lengthy memory lane segment on the vicious primary battle Brown and Clinton waged in "92". Which in turn suegewayed into the backhistory involved with Gov Browns endorsement of Hillary this week. Great story and reporting if you got the chance to catch it. Some ineresting parallels to this race.

That was one poll. This, by the way, IS a way that media manipulates you. 

Three polls have Clinton with a 10+ lead. One has her with a +2 lead. Media reports that the race is tightening and that she's getting nervous. Does not report on veracity of poll, other three polls, or anything other than that narrative.

[Fez]

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So the next thing on the Trump teflon train is the docs released from the Trump university law suit. Again I suppose this will have zero effect on his polling.

Trump is the most unpopular major party nominee in US history, he is hardly 'teflon.' And while Clinton is the second most unpopular major party nominee in US history, the only reason the race is close is because a substantial minority of Sanders supporters currently say they do not support her. That will change after Sanders exits the race and endorses her, whenever that may be, and Clinton will once again have a large lead over Trump.

The fact that she generally leads Trump even now, though often by a small margin, at the nadir of her polling (Trump has consolidated Republicans as much as he can; Clinton is still in a primary), speaks to just how unpopular Trump is and how badly the constant stream of bad press about him actually does hurt him.

[Altherion]

16 minutes ago, Fez said:

Trump is the most unpopular major party nominee in US history, he is hardly 'teflon.'

Yes and no. You are right about the media damaging him, but the damage is much, much less than one would have expected. I can think of half a dozen things he has said any single one of which would have completely sunk most politicians of the modern era, but he has won the primary and, at least for the moment (yes, Clinton should shortly get a boost from finishing off Sanders), is statistically tied in the general election polls.

[Fez]

11 minutes ago, Altherion said:

Yes and no. You are right about the media damaging him, but the damage is much, much less than one would have expected. I can think of half a dozen things he has said any single one of which would have completely sunk most politicians of the modern era, but he has won the primary and, at least for the moment (yes, Clinton should shortly get a boost from finishing off Sanders), is statistically tied in the general election polls.

I don't know. I was hopeful but doubtful that at least some establishment Republicans would go third-party this election (sidenote, really Kristol, David French?!), but Trump was always going to get most Republicans to support him. And he has gotten most of them. We live in an era of close presidential elections; I expect Clinton to win big in November, but even a 55%-45% win, which is a blowout of epic proportions these days would be nothing compared to some of the elections in the past. That's just the way it goes, nearly everyone is too tribal about politics to ever consider the other side, no matter who their side is putting forth.

However, the fact that Trump can't manage better than a tie with Clinton at this juncture, and that he's still only getting mid-80s percentage support from Republicans after he's clinched tell me that his statements have done serious damage to him. They also damaged him in the primaries, he never did reach the level of support you'd expect from a presumptive nominee until after his competition flatlined. 

[The Marquis de Leech]

55%-45% would be equivalent to Eisenhower over Stevenson in 1952 (or Roosevelt over Wilkie in 1940), which was a landslide by any measure. The issue these days is that that sort of victory wouldn't translate into an equivalent blowout in the electoral college.