Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Madiel]

Also, the whole notion of Clinton being some extraordinary liar... I could link to several different articles all examining the origins of this label and pointing out the serious factual flaws with its origins, but why bother? I could link to something like Politifact which makes assessments of each candidate, but why bother? Those living in a Republican echo chamber won't believe such articles and those not living in a Republican echo chamber don't need to read such articles. Facts are such boring things anyway.

[Karl Henning]

Well, I am sure that if the Republicans ever get around to forming a Benghazi investigation, evidence will emerge.

Oh?  They have, already?  And repeatedly?

[Karl Henning]

Then there's national spokeswoman (and reality TV star) Katrina Pierson, whose pre-Trump days include 2012 tweets asking if 9/11 was "an inside job" and lamenting that both President Obama's and Mitt Romney's fathers were born abroad. "Any pure breeds left?" she asked.

[Madiel]

Then there's national spokeswoman (and reality TV star) Katrina Pierson, whose pre-Trump days include 2012 tweets asking if 9/11 was "an inside job" and lamenting that both President Obama's and Mitt Romney's fathers were born abroad. "Any pure breeds left?" she asked.

Funny. I don't think I had ever heard her name until just a few minutes ago, when I read it on Politifact, because she asserted that Obama and Clinton were to blame for rule changes that caused the death of someone... 5 years before Obama became President.

Dates. SO BORING!

[Karl Henning]

To be hired for the El Tupé campaign, loyalty to the Leader (and, face it, being less smart) is all-important.  Facts do not matter.  You need a winning attitude.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Then there's national spokeswoman (and reality TV star) Katrina Pierson, whose pre-Trump days include 2012 tweets asking if 9/11 was "an inside job" and lamenting that both President Obama's and Mitt Romney's fathers were born abroad. "Any pure breeds left?" she asked.

John McCain?

[zamyrabyrd]

At the campaign's outset
If you would like a second medical opinion, I don't think that is unreasonable, per se.  It is worth pointing out that, at least, we have one professionally presented medical opinion here, which contrasts sharply with the I had five minutes to draw this up for the limo which was waiting on West 58^th Street "letter."

I don't trust anything coming out of the Clinton camp. I don't really give a damn about her either. I have been following reports of her character for years which means that you can pretty much believe the opposite of anything she says. The list is too long of her misdeeds, starting from when she was public prosecutor and laughed about getting a rapist off with a technicality. She enabled her husband's antics and harassed his victims. Her attitude around the Benghazi fiasco was disgusting. I would be happy never to have to see her mugs again.

[zamyrabyrd]

*rolls eyes*
Your expertise about how everyone else goes to the bathroom is marvellous.
When you talk about taking a "longer than normal" break from a political debate, implying darkly that there must be something wrong if someone takes longer, I couldn't help wondering what your definition of "normal" is. Is it based on male politicians standing at a urinal? Is it, in short, an inherently sexist notion of what one does in a bathroom?
I have no clue what Hillary Clinton does in a bathroom. I think the fact that you even raised it is quite bizarre, but the reason I mentioned the tennis story is that it is an illustration of how people look for some newsworthy explanation of a perfectly ordinary event.
Hell, if I had a chance for a bathroom break away from cameras and crowds I'd probably take as long as possible, not because there's anything noticeably wrong with my plumbing but because I'd just like a few extra minutes of peace and quiet away from the insane scrutiny of people who are examining my every head movement for "bobble". Part of it is just a strange American attitude to minutiae that I think is incomprehensible to an outsider, but that doesn't stop me from pointing out how ridiculous some of your statements seem.

Go ahead and make a big deal out of this and roll your eyes all you want.
As a performer, I am used to planning how I will feel around an event which means if I have a stomach bug or something, I don't eat the whole day before or maybe longer than that.  Recently I had an accompaniment gig, so ate very little the day before and hardly anything on the day of the performance. My head was perfectly clear that evening and I felt really good. Afterwards, I made up for lost time.  This is called self-awareness. Of course, anyone can be surprised with anything. About what happens to women once a month it is usually not a big deal. It doesn't need to be broadcast to all and sundry.
As for "head bobble", it doesn't happen to me or anyone I know. So what could be the explanation except in the area of neurology? If not, we should all be disabused of having to worry about it.

[zamyrabyrd]

Well, I am sure that if the Republicans ever get around to forming a Benghazi investigation, evidence will emerge.
Oh?  They have, already?  And repeatedly?

So why does she get off, scot-free?
Exponential teflon effect.

[drogulus]

So why does she get off, scot-free?
Exponential teflon effect.

    Is she getting off scot-free about anything, or just generally, like whatever she might have done, if she done it, she's getting off? Like the emails or meetings with foundation contributors or something something Benghazi Pt. VII, are these accusations about something that might lead one to think she is getting off scot-free substantively?

[Karl Henning]

So why does she get off, scot-free?
Exponential teflon effect.

If there was wrongdoing, why have not the repeated and sustained efforts of the GOP Congressmen prosecuted?  I don't know that you can effectively complain about "teflon" when the opposition have been at it again and again.

I get that she is unpopular, and historically unpopular.  But Trey Gowdy & al. (my quick Googling to check spelling reveals that he is an attorney, by gum) will never get anywhere trying to make mere unpopularity a prosecutable offense.  Indeed, one of the latest attempts backfired by making Hillary seem sympathetic.

It's easy to get an arena full of conferees to chant Lock her up!  But what is the offense?  And if it is a real offense, why isn't it being litigated?

[Karl Henning]

I don't trust anything coming out of the Clinton camp.

From you, that's fair enough. (From El Tupé, it would niff of conspiracy theory.)  Offhand, I should guess that the candidates are not required to pursue a "more independent" medical evaluation until they take office.  (Of course, I am speaking speculatively, and would welcome correction.)

That said, the doctor's letter which you don't trust from the Clinton camp at least has the virtue of being the work of a responsible professional.

And there you have the dilemma of the present contest in a nutshell:  neither of them is likeable, neither is at all the best their respective has to offer.  But of the two, only one is an unqualified bigot who doesn't have the emotional discipline of a two-year-old.

[Rinaldo]

Facts are such boring things anyway.

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

[drogulus]

    Vote for Hiltery!

     I think Mrs. Beast will make a tolerably good President. We should be glad that one candidate in this crazy election can be tolerably good.

     I count it as something quite positive that so many people on both sides of the aisle respect her. Many seem to like her. You don't have to be a clown to be a deal maker, and in politics it's probably a disadvantage.

     

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias."

     I don't think that quite captures the state of affairs. I think liberals have a stronger reality bias. When anti-vaxxers crop up on the left who shoots them down most effectively if not science based liberals? Liberals don't have to selectively accept or reject scientific claims on ideological grounds like climate deniers who somehow haven't gotten around to gravity or the germ theory.

[Rinaldo]

I don't think that quite captures the state of affairs.

Well, back in 2006..

[Madiel]

So why does she get off, scot-free?
Exponential teflon effect.

Gee, your head is a fascinating place. Is that what you'd say if someone was acquitted in a criminal trial? Why did they get off?

Maybe it was because THEY REALLY WERE NOT GUILTY?

I mean that's the obvious possibility, but your entire tone suggests you're one of those people who thinks that the purpose of a prosecution and trial is to confirm the conclusion you've already reached with your legal expertise, which you keep on your shelf next to your extensive medical qualifications.

[Parsifal]

Gee, your head is a fascinating place. Is that what you'd say if someone was acquitted in a criminal trial? Why did they get off?

Maybe it was because THEY REALLY WERE NOT GUILTY?

I mean that's the obvious possibility, but your entire tone suggests you're one of those people who thinks that the purpose of a prosecution and trial is to confirm the conclusion you've already reached with your legal expertise, which you keep on your shelf next to your extensive medical qualifications.

Yes, there was "whitewater" which was investigated for something like 10 years by various special prosecutors, etc. After reading many newspaper articles I never figured out what she was even accused of.

[Christo]

an unqualified bigot who doesn't have the emotional discipline of a two-year-old.

That's exactly what president Peña Nieto saw; he should have told us.

[André]

Head bobbing: a search on google and internet (thanks, Al Gore and Sergey Brin), revealed that head bobbing is often a symptom of a condition called essential tremor. The net even lists famous people who had it, including... 2 US presidents. And generals (Douglas MacArthur), Supreme Court Justices (Sandra Day O'Connor),  writers, actors, etc. Like Katharine Hepburn (you can see that clearly in some of her most famous movies like Guess Who's Coming to Dinner) and, yes, a canadian PM (Conservative John Diefenbaker, whose head shaking became particularly violent when fired up by the opposition  . We, canadians of a certain age remember the bobbing and trembling jowls vividly. BTW the man was sharp as an eagle).

See ? It's all on the net. You look for what you intend to find and you sure as h... will find it. An old french saying goes like this: when you want to kill your dog, you shout:  'rabies!'

Believe me, 4 years of a determined Trump scares me more than 4 years of a head bobbing Clinton.

[zamyrabyrd]

And there you have the dilemma of the present contest in a nutshell:  neither of them is likeable, neither is at all the best their respective has to offer.  But of the two, only one is an unqualified bigot who doesn't have the emotional discipline of a two-year-old.

Likability and health aside, the one with an official endorsement from Planned Parenthood is despicable. She is no friend of women if she supports THAT. As for emotional control, her rages and acting out are famous, even physically attacked her husband in the WH.

One can't help noticing that most of the discussions of the candidates here have avoided the real issues. The dinosaur in the room is the socialist recasting of the US, that has been going on for a long time, so much that it is not even noticed anymore. The Clinton's tried with their version of universal health care that didn't succeed but under Obama was shoved down everyone's throat.

Hillary wrote her college thesis on Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals on How to Create Socialist State". If this were sheer academic interest then she would not have set out to religiously implement them overtly or covertly. She doesn't have anything to say by way of real policy, except empty slogans that more or less reflect distribution of wealth (of course not hers), no real patriotism, and no appreciation of the nuts and bolts of capitalism since her money comes from graft and donations.

Donald Trump is no saint but as an outsider he has the advantage of not being beholden to special interest groups who need to be paid back once he gets into office. The mafia-like web of the Bushes and their cohorts that had been going on for about a century has been blown aside hurricane style. None of the RINOs (emasculated Republicans in name only) had to puddle jump to self-censor anything they said for fear of making waves. Along comes someone who earned his own money independently, doesn't need to give a damn about who is going to be offended, that immigrants should be vetted, that they should not come over in hordes and get away with rape and murder. If there were only ONE incident, it would be enough.

The notion of Hillary being Lady President makes my skin crawl.