Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[San Antone]

A True November Surprise: The Clinton Campaign at Obama Justice: Emails on WikiLeaks Show a Top Federal Lawyer Giving Hillary a Quiet Heads Up (WSJ)

The 'leftover people' may deliver a win for Trump (Boston Globe)

Election Update: Why Clinton's Position Is Worse Than Obama's (FiveThirtyEight)

The case against Hillary Clinton (NY Daily News)

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

When a few European members of GMG cast aspersions against me or others, nearly half of the US electorate, who will vote for Donald Trump - I can't help but laugh to myself.  Liberals, especially foreign Liberals, appalled by Trump's popularity is one bright spot in this otherwise dreary election.

Europeans should certainly be able to understand the rise of Trump, since populism and nationalism are on the rise over there too: see Brexit, and the gathering strength of nationalist parties on the Continent. Were the 52% of Britons who voted for Brexit all gun-totin' rednecks with an IQ of 90?

"Trumpism" is a global phenomenon with local variations.

[Madiel]

One of the reasons I'm looking forward to the thread dying is that several of the most frequent contributors seem to be unaware that creation of news feeds was automated quite some time ago. There are apps for that.

[Brian]

Were the 52% of Britons who voted for Brexit all gun-totin' rednecks with an IQ of 90?

One thing Brexiters and Trumpies have in common: they're older.



Meanwhile, among voters aged 18-39, Clinton leads by 24 points; among those over 40, Trump has a small lead.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/the-demographic-groups-fueling-the-election/

[Madiel]

One thing Brexiters and Trumpies have in common: they're older.



Meanwhile, among voters aged 18-39, Clinton leads by 24 points; among those over 40, Trump has a small lead.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/the-demographic-groups-fueling-the-election/

Which is not really surprising. A slogan like "Make America Great Again" (or heck, make the UK great again) is going to resonate more with those that essentially miss the America of their youth. He's selling the (in my view misleading) idea that they can go back.

The young, on the other hand, are more likely to be interested in further change. Not reversion.

[San Antone]

A recent New York Times headline: "Peter Thiel Defends His Most Contrarian Move Yet: Supporting Trump." Isn't it time people started defending their support for Hillary Clinton?

Why aren't Hillary's backers made to explain how they can vote for a candidate who promised not to trade access for money while she served as Secretary of State, but then did it anyway?

Who vowed to reveal all monies collected by the Clinton Foundation from foreign entities while she was in office but failed to do so?

Who has lied innumerable times to the American people and who has time and again revealed herself as lacking a moral compass?

Whose campaign has engaged in dirty tricks, colluding with the DNC and with the media?

Shouldn't we question those who are putting their money behind Hilary Clinton, the first person to run for the presidency while subject of a criminal investigation? Whose natural instincts are to lie, about matters serious and inconsequential? Whose greed outweighs incandescent ambition?

Who offers voters nothing but enraged disparagement of her opponent?

It's a reasonable question that should be asked: how can anyone with good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton?

RTRH

[Mirror Image]

I can't wait for the thread to die, frankly.

Me too.

[Madiel]

Sanantonio, your contribution to this thread has devolved into saying:

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

In the frankly deluded belief that this will make a difference. Or constitutes discussion.

[San Antone]

Trump Will Ignite an American Economic Boom

After the election of Ronald Reagan in 1981, the U.S. Economy experienced one of its greatest booms in history. The growth rate averaged nearly 4 percent for seven years 1982–89. And the stock market rose from less than 1,000 on the Dow to more than 10,000 over the next two decades. This was a period of wealth and job creation that the nation and middle class had seldom seen before. All the liberal critics wrongly said it could not and would not happen.

Now the question is: Could it happen again in this era of massive government debt, meager growth, and flatlined incomes for the middle class? The answer is "yes." With the right set of policy fixes, we can see a return to wage gains, higher profits (which means a bull run on stocks), and rapid growth in output.

Since the end of the recession, economic growth has averaged an anemic 2 percent, producing the weakest "recovery" since the Great Depression. Over the past year, growth has slowed to an even more anemic 1.5 percent. This is barely staying out of recession. America can do much better.

One thing is sure: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have almost diametrically opposite economic plans. Clinton will raise taxes. Trump will cut them. Clinton has vowed to defend President Obama's "legacy" and double down on job-killers such as Obamacare.

Trump is offering big changes, and I believe they could accelerate the economic growth rate from 1.5 percent to 4 percent for the next five years. That is the equivalent of adding another Texas to the U.S economy. How would he accomplish this?

RTRH

[Brian]

Sanantonio, your contribution to this thread has devolved into saying:

In the frankly deluded belief that this will make a difference. Or constitutes discussion.

He's one of those who lives in a world with a different set of facts from our world. Persuading him that some of those views are specious, unsound, or extremely unlikely at best (e.g. the "Economic Boom" post directly above, a view contradicted by ~400 major economists in a recent open letter) would take years of full-time effort. Simply not worth it.

[Mirror Image]

Sanantonio, your contribution to this thread has devolved into saying:

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

"See?!"

In the frankly deluded belief that this will make a difference. Or constitutes discussion.

LOL!  That's really what David's posts look like at this juncture.

[San Antone]

I am honored to be the bête noire of this thread.   

Actually, I see myself offering merely the other POV among Karl's postings and others of like mind.  You guys have me out numbered by probably ten to one.  And yet you whine about the one nay-sayer.

[Karl Henning]

One of the reasons I'm looking forward to the thread dying is that several of the most frequent contributors seem to be unaware that creation of news feeds was automated quite some time ago. There are apps for that.

I crave your pardon.

[Brian]

I am honored to be the bête noire of this thread.   

I mean, I feel like we all have to be the contrarian voice at least once, if we are to think of ourselves with any dignity. It's just that in my case on GMG, that means defending Johann Strauss 

[Karl Henning]

Just found an interesting piece, How the Swing Voter Went Extinct.


Link available on request   

[San Antone]

I mean, I feel like we all have to be the contrarian voice at least once, if we are to think of ourselves with any dignity. It's just that in my case on GMG, that means defending Johann Strauss 

A most worthy contrarian activity!

[Karl Henning]

Charles Krauthammer acknowledges that WikiLeaks is a sleeve of Putin's propaganda.  So if any of y'all think of WikiLeaks as a "hero," Счастливо!

[Karl Henning]

Does Krauthammer still count as "a real Republican" and/or "a real Conservative"?  Asking for a friend . . . .

[(poco) Sforzando]

One thing Brexiters and Trumpies have in common: they're older.

Fortunately I consider myself young at heart.

But my 91-year-old father has said he would be "nauseated" at the thought of a Donald Trump presidency.

I would only fear for the future of this country as I never have in all my 68 years. If Trump wins, a buffoon and lecher who has no knowledge of or respect for the Constitution, and who will disappoint his followers the most as soon as he abandons them. If Clinton wins, an experienced and knowledgeable if flawed candidate whom Republicans will hound with threat of indictments and impeachment from day one. At this point I can only see the inevitable and irrevocable decline of a once-promising and often great nation.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I mean, I feel like we all have to be the contrarian voice at least once, if we are to think of ourselves with any dignity. It's just that in my case on GMG, that means defending Johann Strauss 

Now, now, zamarabyrd is every bit as contrarian as the city in Texas. It's ten to two, not ten to one.

And Brahms also defended Johann Strauss, so there. So does a musicologist friend of mine who calls him the greatest composer who ever lived. Moi, I am as nauseated by his waltzes as my father is by the prospect of a Trump presidency.