Trump vs Clinton. Biggest debate in world history 2am tomorrow. Will you be there?

[claig]

The entire world's movers and shakers, swindlers and fakers, public money piss-takers will be watching in trepidation at what Trump will do to them. The entire world's great and the good, high and the mighty, shifty and flighty will be supporting Hillary. Will you be with the people supporting Trump?

Have you got the ice cream, the chocolate, the biscuits and the matchsticks to keep the eyelids open ready?

As a warm-up, here is Sky News's 30 minute documentary shown last night

"Trump. Could it really happen?"

Remind me when it was announced that Bill Clinton was a Presidential
candidate?

Exactly!

And remind me, when was it ok to attack a woman because her husband has had affairs? Because if we're going to do that, we could start with Trump's ex wives.

Or perhaps we could attack his current wife, because her husband was recorded boasting about groping and forcing himself on other women whilst she was pregnant. Must be her fault, right?

I wonder how this recent incident is going down in the Trump household?

'But not because he 'doesn't have the nerve', but because he knows full well that if he pushes it too much, they'll push back.

Of course, if he knew he was innocent and had no more dirt to reveal, he wouldn't have anything to be afraid of would he?'

But if that were the case, then the election would be almost fixed as if it was not a real contest. Elections can be fixed but I don't think this one is. Trump is alreasy losing so if it is a real contest, he will have to reveal far more shocking truths that outweigh what he has done.

If Trump loses this election, his business will suffer, his reputation will suffer etc. The media will finish him for having challenged the system and got close to beating it. That is why I think the contest is real and Trump wants to win. Mark Cuban, the billionaire who initially liked Trump and then switched to Clinton, has said that if Trump loses, he predicts that Trump will be broke in 7 years.

But if that were the case, then the election would be almost fixed as if it was not a real contest

Revealing evidence about the character of your opponent does not equate to fixing an election.

But nice sidestep of my question there.

'Revealing evidence about the character of your opponent does not equate to fixing an election. '

Trump is already losing the media battle. Nearly every paper and institution refuses to endorse Trump. If Trump wants to win and end the negative publicity then he will need a "gamechanger" in the 2nd debate as Ted Cruz's former campaign manager, who is not a fan of Trump, said because Trump is not strong on policy. So if the election is a real contest, then Trump will have no option but to show his hand, otherwise he will lose.

His advisers are worried that if he shows his hand, then he will also lose. So that is the decision Trump will have to make to try and stop the media's negative publicity.

I really do think it is all over but the shouting now.

The bigger question is, what will happen to the Republican Party? Just like the UK, the US functions better with an effective, professional opposition. Just the like the UK, they nearly won't have one.

The trouble is "elites" (that word is for Claig ) within the Republican party want different things than the mass of people who vote for them. Trump has made the fault line clear. Does the Republican Party take Trump's defeat as a signal that they were right all along and learn nothing? Or do they incorporate some of the things he has tapped into while leaving aside him and his horribly flawed character?

A very good, short article from the Atlantic:

www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/how-to-rebuild-the-republican-party/503282/

For those who want it in a nutshell, here is what he Republican elites want:

Repeal Obamacare; end the Medicare guarantee for people under age 55; offer big tax cuts to corporations and the richest taxpayers; pass constitutional amendments to stop abortion and same-sex marriage; back immigration reform that increases the flow of low-wage labor into the economy; take no action on climate change or other environmental concerns: that message has been tried and found wanting again and again since 2009, and it’s not going to appeal any more strongly after November. Whatever else Donald Trump did, he confirmed that a majority of Republican voters also want a message that secures health coverage, raises middle-class incomes, and enforces borders and national identity.

This is what the majority of their supporters actually want:

Trump saw that Republican voters are much less religious in behavior than they profess to pollsters. He saw that the social-insurance state has arrived to stay. He saw that Americans regard healthcare as a right, not a privilege. He saw that Republican voters had lost their optimism about their personal futures—and the future of their country. He saw that millions of ordinary people who do not deserve to be dismissed as bigots were sick of the happy talk and reality-denial that goes by the too generous label of “political correctness.” He saw that the immigration polices that might have worked for the mass-production economy of the 1910s don’t make sense in the 2010s. He saw that rank-and-file Republicans had become nearly as disgusted with the power of money in politics as rank-and-file Democrats long have been. He saw that Republican presidents are elected, when they are elected, by employees as well as entrepreneurs. He saw these things, and he was right to see them.

Shame on you Claig, he's admitted to sexually abusing women and still you stand up for him. In my book someone who supports Trump after all that is a vile piece of shit.

If the continual revelations about Trump's disgusting character help contribute to him losing the election, that is in no way a fix. That's not how election rigging works. Election rigging works by 'miscounting' votes, you know, like Bush did.

But I agree with EllyMay the real question is what will happen next. Has he done enough not only to lose the election, but to destroy his own party?

If so, then they are victims of their own greed. They saw Trump as their way to win the White House, and were willing to bend their own principles and ignore, excuse and turn a blind eye to so much to get there. Shame on them all.

Good post, EllyMayClampett

The Republican elite are "bought and paid for" as Trump says and therefore they will have to ditch Trump and go back to business as usual in the cosy cartel. The problem is that their voters won't like it and that is why Republican elite stsyle commentators like George Will on Fox have handed their membership card in and worried that Trump spells the end of conservatism as they have known it for decades.

"Conservative columnist George Will leaves the Republican Party over Trump's 'Mexican' judge comments and Paul Ryan's endorsement of The Donald"

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3661076/Conservative-columnist-George-leaves-Republican-Party-Donald-Trump-s-Mexican-judge-comments-Paul-Ryan-s-endorsement.html

A similar thing has happened here. Cameron and the modernisers are being written out of history by Theresa May who realises that the conservative faithful did not like their brand of conservatism and she is changing the Conservative party to a a more populist people's party.

'They saw Trump as their way to win the White House, and were willing to bend their own principles and ignore, excuse and turn a blind eye to so much to get there. Shame on them all.'

No the Republican elite were all against Trump, he did a hostile takeover of the Republican Party as an outsider and the Wall Street donors who funded his 16 Establishment opponents were unable to stop him because they couldn't control the popular vote.

You need to understand it is not attackibg hc because her husband had an affair it is because she knew and enabled because power. The Clinton campaign simply doesn't get the mindset of her opponents.

Trump is challenging what he calls a corrupt, rigged, insider system.

Here in the UK, we had Jimmy Savile and his crimes and it appears that the Establishment helped cover up some of his crimes. That is shocking, that the system could be corrupt and rigged to conceal those crimes.

I don't think they will ever get it. People are damn stubborn and if trust is lost in the process then it's gone for good unless there is change.

But claim look at the backlash. Even tiny Blair thinks it's the right time to make a comeback.

Claim=claig

'Even tiny Blair thinks it's the right time to make a comeback.'

That shows how desperate the Establishment is to regain control. Blair is the best they have. But if Trump wins, it is curtains for cronies worldwide.
If Trump loses, then the status quo will continue and the Establishment will breathe a sigh of relief and get back to business as usual on steroids.

I definitely think that the burdens and benefits of globalisation have not been distributed fairly throughout societies in the developed world. Working class voters (that is people who rely on income from a steady job) want to be protected from the sharp-end of this great levelling out. Political parties who find a principled and decent way to do this will prosper. Those ignore this fundamental desire will fail to hold power at all.

Here in the UK, we had Jimmy Savile and his crimes and it appears that the Establishment helped cover up some of his crimes. That is shocking, that the system could be corrupt and rigged to conceal those crimes.

I agree, and if Trump genuinely was against this type of establishment cover up, I would applaud him. But I'm sorry to say that I think he is party to some very similar behaviour - just look at his comments supporting Epstein and his slavery and rape of underage girls.

It's funny you should mention Savile because he was exactly who came to mind when Trump was describing how he would just go in and kiss women straight off. That's exactly what some of Savile's victims described him as doing, and it reminded me of that. I'm not suggesting for one second that DT is as bad as JS, but it's very telling that his description of his own actions brought that to mind.

I meant to add, the only way a complete train wreck like Donald J Trump got this far was because the established parties just kept ignoring this ever growing clamour to be protected.

People were looking for a champion, someone to protect them, not a paragon. Confident people look for paragons to represent them. Marginalised people look for strong champions.

So, they were willing to forgive DJT all of his many, many flaws because he seemed to be the only guy who would fight for them.

'the established parties just kept ignoring this ever growing clamour to be protected.'

The reason is that they are not allowed to do anything else. As Trump says "they are bought and paid for" by the corporations and Wall Street who want TTIP, TPP, NAFTA and even wars that Trump stands against. The political class manage the people rather than listen to them. It took a billionaire to take the Establishment on and give them a run for their money and he is still practically neck and neck with Establishment Hillary of the Wall Street speeches despite everything that the media have thrown at hi to try and stop him, and if he has the courage and nerve to reveal the real truth about the dark underbelly of the rigged system in the 2nd debate, then Trump could still win because lots of people know that the system is corrupt and rigged against them.

is not attackibg hc because her husband had an affair it is because she knew and enabled because power.

That's true and she shouldn't have stood by him.

But...
It's a misogynistic view that places on the same level the perpetrator (Bill and Trump) and those around him.
Even worse when possible Hillary's support of her husband is seen as worse than assaulting women and admitting to it.

"I definitely think that the burdens and benefits of globalisation have not been distributed fairly throughout societies in the developed world."

You're probably right.

Tax dodging billionaires like Donald Trump and Lord Rothermere are among the ones who have benefitted the most and contributed the least.

It's funny that they paint themselves of the disadvantaged and poor, who mostly pay their dues.

It's funny that they paint themselves as champions of the disadvantaged and poor, who mostly pay their dues and receive the least benefit.