Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Karl Henning]

The Six-Foot Portrait of Himself Trump Bought With Charity Money, Revealed

The fabled portrait of Donald Trump that he reportedly used $20,000 in charity money to buy was finally revealed Tuesday.

And it's very orange.

[Karl Henning]

Don't Let the FBI Decide the Election

There are several reasons why law enforcement agencies should not make sensitive political disclosures in close proximity to an election. The first is that investigations are not convictions, and such revelations necessarily create a presumption of guilt around the target of the disclosures. Another is that the FBI is given immense power to scrutinize the lives of American citizens, but that power is meant to help punish or prevent crimes, not to empower the Bureau to pursue its own political interests. Otherwise intelligence services would become a constituency elevated above the citizenry itself––with politicians currying their favor in order to ensure those agencies used their powers to their benefit and against their opponents. FBI agents are granted extraordinary authority to defend the Constitution, not to use investigations to manipulate American politics as they see fit.

Yet it should be no surprise that some at the FBI feel empowered to do just that. Fifteen years of war have eroded America's civic culture, its incomplete commitment to religious and racial pluralism, and its concern for civil liberties. The Central Intelligence Agency tortured terrorism suspects, and not one official of any rank was held accountable, and not one court decision has determined their behavior was illegal. When the Senate investigated its actions, the CIA spied on Senate aides and then lied about doing so. The National Security Agency was revealed to have engaged in a massive warrantless spying operation that included surveillance on American citizens. But changes to NSA surveillance powers have been meager. Unarmed black men are killed in disproportionate numbers by police officers who are shielded by a legal standard that exonerates police officers who say they feared for their lives, no matter how absurd the circumstances.

[Spineur]

Just saw that a sample of 600 people was used for the latest Blomberg pool

Quelle farce !

[Karl Henning]

The Conservative Case for Voting for Clinton

[...]

Yes, I fear Clinton's grudge-holding. Should I fear it so much that I rally to a candidate who has already explicitly promised to deploy antitrust and libel law against his critics and opponents? Who incited violence at his rallies? Who ejects reporters from his events if he objects to their coverage? Who told a huge audience in Australia that his top life advice was: "Get even with people. If they screw you, screw them back 10 times as hard. I really believe it"? Who idealizes Vladimir Putin, Saddam Hussein, and the butchers of Tiananmen as strong leaders to be admired and emulated?

Should I be so appalled by the Clinton family's access-selling that I prefer instead a president who boasts of a lifetime of bribing politicians to further his business career? Who defaults on debts and contracts as an ordinary business method, and who avoids taxes by deducting the losses he inflicted on others as if he had suffered them himself? Who cheated the illegal laborers he employed at Trump Tower out of their humble hourly wage? Who owes hundreds of millions of dollars to the Bank of China?  Who refuses to disclose his tax returns, perhaps to conceal his business dealings with Vladimir Putin's inner circle?

To demonstrate my distaste for people whose bodies contain mean bones, it's proposed that I give my franchise to a man who boasts of his delight in sexual assault? Who mocks the disabled, who denounces immigrant parents whose son laid down his life for this country, who endorses religious bigotry, and who denies the Americanism of everyone from the judge hearing the fraud case against Trump University to the 44th president of the United States?

I'm invited to recoil from supposedly fawning media (media, in fact, which have devoted more minutes of network television airtime to Clinton's email misjudgment than to all policy topics combined) and instead empower a bizarre new online coalition of antisemites, misogyists, cranks, and conspiracists with allegedly ominous connections to Russian state spy agencies?

Is this real life?

To vote for Trump as a protest against Clinton's faults would be like amputating a leg because of a sliver in the toe; cutting one's throat to lower one's blood pressure.

[...]

We don't have to analogize Donald Trump to any of the lurid tyrants of world history to recognize in him the most anti-constitutional personality ever to gain a major-party nomination for the U.S. presidency. I cannot predict whether Trump would succeed in elevating himself "on the ruins of public liberty." The outcome would greatly depend on the resolve, integrity, and courage of other leaders and other institutions, especially the Republican leaders in Congress. To date, their record has not been reassuring, but who knows: Maybe they would discover more courage and independence after they bestowed the awesome powers of the presidency than they did while Trump was merely a party nominee. Or maybe not.

What we should all foresee is that a President Trump will certainly try to realize Washington's nightmare. He must not be allowed to try.

That Donald Trump has approached so near the White House is a bitter reproach to everybody who had the power to stop him. I include myself in this reproach. Early on, I welcomed Trump's up-ending of some outdated Republican Party dogmas—taking it for granted that of course such a ridiculous and obnoxious fraud could never win a major party's nomination. But Trump did win. Now, he stands within a percentage point or two or at most four of the presidency of the United States.

Having failed to act promptly at the outset, it's all the more important to act decisively before it's too late. The lesson Trump has taught is not only that certain Republican dogmas have passed out of date, but that American democracy itself is much more vulnerable than anyone would have believed only 24 months ago.

[...]

I appreciate that Donald Trump is too slovenly and incompetent to qualify as a true dictator. This country is not so broken as to allow a President Trump to arrest opponents or silence the media. Trump is a man without political ideas. Trump's main interest has been and will continue to be self-enrichment by any means, no matter how crooked. His next interest after that is never to be criticized by anybody for any reason, no matter how justified—maybe most especially when justified. Yet Trump does not need to achieve a dictatorship to subvert democracy.

[San Antone]

The Conservative Case for Voting for Clinton

Not convinced of anything other than the author's complete lack of understanding what is motivating most Trump voters in this election.  David Frum, who is a card carrying member of the elite brigade, appears to be blinded by Inside-the-Beltway-Thinking.

[San Antone]

Don't Let the FBI Decide the Election

No one is.  What the FBI is doing is providing information for voters to use in their decision making process.  This kind of headine/article is the product of the hubris and political class mindset (elites actually think they are able to influence regular people, those whom they actually look down on and think are too stupid to think for themselves) that is fueling Trump's candidacy.

[San Antone]

Good take on what is driving Trump's numbers

Although the words "status quo" will not appear on any ballots this election cycle, voters will nonetheless be forced to make the binary decision between doubling down on the status quo by voting for Hillary Clinton, or pivoting toward meaningful change and a course correction for the country by voting for Donald Trump.

There is a foundational disconnect between Washington, DC and the rest of America. Washington, DC operates on a different plain - with its own special rules and carve-outs and exemptions and backroom deals. Many in Washington believe that the rules and laws crafted in DC ought not apply to the people who occupy the well-connected inner circles of the Washington Establishment. This pervasive mindset - it's a pathology, really - in Washington, DC is what accounts for the fact that everyday Americans are struggling to live under Obamacare and comply with its oppressive rules and regulations while Congress enjoys a special exemption from the law. It also explains the years-long IRS scandal, in which government employees engaged in an insidious and unconstitutional targeting of American citizens based on their political beliefs. And, to date, no one has been held accountable for the IRS's extraordinary abuse of power.

Washington, DC is a city, after all, that sees nothing amiss about the fact that lying under oath, committing perjury, and tampering with evidence in criminal investigations are serious offenses in the rest of the country, but are so commonplace in DC, they hardly warrant a slap on the wrist.

[Karl Henning]

Not convinced of anything other than the author's complete lack of understanding what is motivating most Trump voters in this election.  David Frum, who is a card carrying member of the elite brigade, appears to be blinded by Inside-the-Beltway-Thinking.

I'm not convinced that anything will convince you;  if you really believe El Tupé is harmless, God bless you.

"The message cannot be true, because I think poorly of the messenger" isn't an actual argument, either.

[Karl Henning]

No one is.  What the FBI is doing is providing information for voters to use in their decision making pricess.

That's right: providing half-information to stir the political stew the week before an election.  I guess you're okay with it, if you believe that it works to your candidate's advantage.

[San Antone]

That's right: providing half-information to stir the political stew the week before an election.  I guess you're okay with it, if you believe that it works to your candidate's advantage.

You were fine when the FBI gave Clinton a pass for her reckless behavior and private server (many of his high ranking agents were not OK with his decision).  Back then Comey was your hero.  Now that he has followed-up to Congress with the latest develoment, he is your enemy. 

We have chosen to vote for different candidates, true - and you are equally immune from changing your vote for Clinton - whom I consider more dangerous than Trump.

[San Antone]

Clinton being called to account for her Benghazi debacle

[Karl Henning]

You were fine when the FBI gave Clinton a pass for her reckless behavior and private server (many of his high ranking agents were not OK with his decision).  Back then Comey was your hero.

Would you care to re-phrase that?

That inaccurate irrelevancy aside, you are eliding my point, which is the timing, the politicizing of the bureau.  Your elision of the point is a concession.

[Karl Henning]

The map still looks like bad news for El Tupé:

We've also seen a series of new polls of Pennsylvania, another hugely important firewall state for Clinton — and they all show her ahead. CNN/ORC shows her up 4, Susquehanna shows her up 2, Monmouth shows her up 4, and Franklin & Marshall shows her up 11.

Trump hasn't led a single poll of Wisconsin all year, and he hasn't led any Pennsylvania polls since July.

New polling has been more mixed for Clinton in states like Florida, North Carolina, and Nevada — but those states aren't part of her firewall. If she's still on track to win Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, then she's still likely on track to win the election.

[Herman]

What the FBI is doing is providing information for voters to use in their decision making process.

The only information we got is that Abedin and Weiner Boy shared a laptop and its contents, which is hard to believe, and I would fire Abedin on the spot for this. Who is she? Amanda Knox?

Grownups, at least the ones I know, don't share "electronic devices". After all, there are plenty of those for sale.

However, the FBI, or rather Mr Comey has not offered any information whatsoever about what's in those emails on that laptop, probably because it's still in Carlos Danger Quarantine.

[Karl Henning]

"Concern" about Clinton's email scandal basically disappeared after a day

Because Clinton's use of a private email server has been an ongoing news story (and other stories involving email and Clinton allies have gotten lumped in under the heading of "Clinton email scandal"), Marquette's pollsters were asking voters how concerned they were about it even before the letter from FBI director James Comey was released — and about half of likely voters agreed they were "very concerned."

The day of Comey's letter, that spiked to 60 percent. But in the days following that, only 48 percent of voters said they were "very concerned" about Clinton's emails — if anything, fewer voters than were bothered before the new emails were revealed.

[San Antone]

Would you care to re-phrase that?

That inaccurate irrelevancy aside, you are eliding my point, which is the timing, the politicizing of the bureau.  Your elision of the point is a concession.

The timing was unavoidable.  You would have preferred that Comey waited until after the election to inform Congress (when he risked being accused of suppressing information for political purposes).  I am glad he resisted those pressures and simply acted when he had the information.

[San Antone]

The map still looks like bad news for El Tupé:

We've also seen a series of new polls of Pennsylvania, another hugely important firewall state for Clinton — and they all show her ahead. CNN/ORC shows her up 4, Susquehanna shows her up 2, Monmouth shows her up 4, and Franklin & Marshall shows her up 11.

Trump hasn't led a single poll of Wisconsin all year, and he hasn't led any Pennsylvania polls since July.

New polling has been more mixed for Clinton in states like Florida, North Carolina, and Nevada — but those states aren't part of her firewall. If she's still on track to win Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, then she's still likely on track to win the election.

The polls are tightening, if you wish to turn a blind eye to that, so be it.  Btw, Wisconsin has been a solid Democrat state for a long time (Obama won it easliy in 2012, 52 - 45, that with Paul Ryan a popular Wisconsin official on the ticket), the fact that Trump is making it a race is newsworthy.

The only poll that means anything is the one that will be held on Nov. 8th.

[Herman]

Speaking of lovely stories. How about the thi Monday's WaPo revelation that Trump showed up, uninvited, at a benefit for Children with Aids, and sat on the stage, on a benefactor's chair, without giving any money to that charity?

He just wanted to appear as someone who sponsored Children with Aids, but didn't give a flying f*ck, wiping his ass not just with those children, but also with people who did give money to help.

The man is a pariah in circles of people who give  -  admittedly the elite, but that's the elite of people with moral standards and a conscience.

[San Antone]

"Concern" about Clinton's email scandal basically disappeared after a day

Because Clinton's use of a private email server has been an ongoing news story (and other stories involving email and Clinton allies have gotten lumped in under the heading of "Clinton email scandal"), Marquette's pollsters were asking voters how concerned they were about it even before the letter from FBI director James Comey was released — and about half of likely voters agreed they were "very concerned."

The day of Comey's letter, that spiked to 60 percent. But in the days following that, only 48 percent of voters said they were "very concerned" about Clinton's emails — if anything, fewer voters than were bothered before the new emails were revealed.

Good news for you.  So, the tightening polls cannot be attrributed to this "red herring" story.  I am happy to learn our democracy is not in jeopardy.

[Parsifal]

I just read this in the Snopes book I have been reading and it is relevant, imo, to this thread - and something I also believe.

"They'll always be wrong. They think they are fighting Clarence Snopes. They're not. They're not faced with an individual nor even a situation: they are beating their brains out against one of the foundation rocks of our national character itself. Which is the premise that politics and political office are not and never have been the method and means by which we can govern ourselves in peace and dignity and honor and security, but instead are our national refuge for our incompetents who have failed at every other occupation"

William Faulkner, The Mansion

If you knew more about Donald Trump you would realize that he is essentially Flem Snopes, transposed from Frenchman's Bend to Queens, New York.