Trump vs Clinton - the final 3 days

[claig]

Into the final lap now after over 1 year of entertainment, education and excitement. Donald J Trump is nearly there against all expectations.

Sarah Palin is an idiot.

Just liking everyone who is too stupid to know when it's time to be quiet seems a poor way to choose your role models claig.

Liking someone for their free speech even if everything that comes out of that person's mouth is dross doesn't seem particularly sensible to me.

You might as well admire a dog that doesn't stop barking.

It's just annoying.

Here is Katie Hopkins giving the BBC hell over Trump. The youtube poster doesn't like her and calls her a troll, but fails to see her courage.

Why do you think SP is a fighter? She may be many things, but I have no idea where you're getting that from.

She is ignorant and ignorance can be dangerous.

You've admitted you know little about her claig. You can't suddenly become her no.1 fan, from knowing nothing about her, that just sounds false.

'She is ignorant and ignorance can be dangerous. '

I don't care if she is ignorant and ignorance is not dangerous because other people can see it. Not everyone has to be clever or think the same. The quality that Sarah Palin has is that she is a fighter against political correctness which is why Trump wanted her endorsement right near the start. Her endorsement was huge for him because she is popular with real conservatives because she refuses to bow to the Guardians and political correctness and fights for free speech. After that he has not used her much, maybe because she is ignorant. But she is one hell of fighter and all real conservatives know that, just like Katie Hopkins.

'You can't suddenly become her no.1 fan,'

The BBC, the Guardian and all the rest mock Sarah Palin, just as they mock Katie Hopkins. That is precisely why we true conservtives love them both, just as we do Trump too because they all stand up for freedom against the bien pensant, the Establishment, the great and the good, the high and the mighty, the BBC and all the rest of them who try to tell us what we are allowed to think or what Germaine Greer is allowed to say or what Julie Bindel is allowed to say in a university with a safe space.

They also all mock Louise Mensch, who also has tremendous courage, even though I disagree with her over Trump etc. They only like people who agree with them and anyone else is mocked by them. they are not for real free speech and real free thought, they want "la pensee unique".

It doesn't matter if Louise Mensch says some stupid things, it is the good things she says that count and the fact that she is for free speech and opposes "la pensee unique" because without that we will end up with Blairism and the end of all our liberties and that will lead to Germaine Greer being banned from speaking in universities.

Well.... we've come full circle from when you first mentioned her, there's absolutely no point in discussing her any more... but her ignorance is dangerous, anti choice, anti abortion to the point that rape victims should be forced to bear the child of their rapist, anti sex education, anti feminist - she is repugnant.

OK, that is where we disagree. i disagree with her but I don't think she is dangerous or deplorable because she doesn't agree with me. Everyone has the right to their opinions in my view, even if we think they are stupid or wrong, it doesn't make them dangerous.

But we see it differently, we won't agree on that.

In the end that is what I love about America - free speech. The First Amendment, the right to disagree and say stupid and even offensive things because without that there is no freedom. What many conservatives fear is that Hillary and the Democrats will slowly strip those freedoms away via political correctness and campus safe spaces where you won't be allowed to say you disagree with the consensus.

Whatever else Trump will do and whatever way he will let us down, he will end that because the one thing we definitely know about him is that he is not politically correct.

Anyone can have views, their prerogative. Free country and all that. I can just choose to ignore those people whose views worry me. (racists, homophobes whatever...)

However when that person is putting themselves forward for a position of office whereby decisions they make will affect a country, yes it is dangerous. SP was in line to be VP for god's sake. With the views she has, it would have been worrying and dangerous. Ditto DT.

'I can just choose to ignore those people whose views worry me. (racists, homophobes whatever...)'

I agree

'However when that person is putting themselves forward for a position of office whereby decisions they make will affect a country, yes it is dangerous. SP was in line to be VP for god's sake. With the views she has, it would have been worrying and dangerous. Ditto DT.'

To me that is democracy. You can vote against them, call them stupid etc, but if the majority want that or want Blair or Gordon Brown or Brexit, then in a democratic state we have no right to stop that. We can democratically oppose it by voting against it, but we have no right to stifle the democratic will of the people.

And because a system has checks and balances and because even the majority of Republicans think that Sarah Palin is wacky, she will never be able to implement her views.

How can you "love" the person who said she didn't care about drowned children?

SerendipityPhenomenon, I disagreed with her. I don't like everything she says, some things I am disgusted by "cockroaches" etc, but I know that is not everything about her. I love the great things about her and dislike the bad, and overall I like her a lot. The fact that I dislike some things she has said doesn't make me dislike her.

I rather disagree that this election isn't entertainment, frankly you wouldn't believe it in a film. Gripping stuff...

Those emails especially. More to be released and half the internet is waiting on them but some juicy stuff so far.

Citibank chose Obama's cabinet, emailed a list of vetted people which matched almost 100% with the outcome. No wonder the bailouts went as they did.

Clinton was fully aware that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were funding ISIL even as she accepted donations to her foundation from them. Also even her top aides were shocked at her favours for donors to the foundation. All sorts of stuff like getting big businesses which donated dinners with the Chinese premier etc.

As to the foundation itself it seems to be treated as a slush fund by Chelsea clinton in particular and her husband. He lost his shirt betting on the market in Greece despite Hillary sending Chelsea classified documents to enable insider trading. also she used money from the foundation to fund her wedding... Not quite my idea of charitable even if she isn't the most admirable lass. Nothing so far which explicitly documents pay to play in terms of the foundation though they did an internal audit which basically said it was crooked and ran like a political organisation with lax procedures.

Lots of unsurprising stuff like the Clinton campaign illegally using affiliated organisation's money. Not too hot on US electoral law but those in the know reckon they're smoking guns. Also the mainsteam media seems to run as part of the democratic party. Journalists asking the Clinton campaign what questions they'd liked asked of republicans, leaking poll results and even rigging the questions to be asked at the debates.

There's clearly some stuff yet to come out, for instance that nutter the other night at the Trump rally is mentioned in several emails, which obviously well predate it.

It's the salacious stuff which has really got the internet ticking though. In particular Spirit Dinners and... Pizza. Spirit dinners refer to this millionaire wonk hosting a real wierdo 'artist' who claims not be a satanist. She has an odd way of not being one, what with a pentagram carved into her stomach, a twitter profile including the number 666 and various images of goats heads and blood soaked rituals which she passed off as performance art all the way through the 90s.

Spirit dinners seems to be some Aleister Crowley inspired ritual involving lots of blood and human bodily secretions of every kind. It's not even as though the wonk in question, Hillary's chairman, was unaware of the nature. In fact she reassured him that it is only art when done in an art gallery and actually means something when performed in private.

On to the pizza stuff, it's rather troubling. Either this millionaire fine dining gourmet cook is the world's thinnest pizza obsessed freak or they're talking in code. Now don't get me wrong, Trump's chaps and chapesses are rather quick to see satanism or foul play in just about anything though their use of certain terms like pizza does seem to be a code for something troubling.

For instance he left his hankerchief in someone else's apartment, who offered to return it as it had a 'pizza' related map on it. Also there is a photo of three rather young girls eating pizza, though the caption is ,"This is as good as it gets". To which he replies, "Nice!". It might refer to a party held where the organiser promised to bring three young children for their entertainment in the pool... Or he and his friends could all be pizza obsessed wierdos...

Most interesting for me was several proposals relating to policy, one of which was to tighten bribery laws.

Podesta's reaction was that whilst it was his favourite it was really dicey territory for Hillary. Now whether she's a crook or not, and yes many have gone to jail for long periods for far less than we know now, her campaign chief certainly thinks she's a crook.

Meanwhile with only a day or so to go everyone is expecting the most damaging and salacious emails to be released soon.

Not entertainment? You have to be kidding me.

'Not entertainment? You have to be kidding me.'

Absolutely, you couldn't make this up. If it was in a novel or movie you wouldn't believe it.

One of Clinton's staff has said that if a huge Wikileaks dump tomorrow or the day after comes out it will probably be "fake". There is talk that a huge one may be coming.

Some absolutely top analysts are saying that this FBI thing today actually helps Hillary because it deflects from any Wikileaks huge dump to come and also will put a bit of a spanner in the works of Trump trying to say thinsg are rigged against him if he loses. This analyst says he thinks Hillary is going to win it.

I am still hoping it will be Trump, but that is just hope.

Some posters on comments under newspaper articles are saying we were told today or yesterday that Hillary's maid was told to print out material that may have been classified etc and the FBI said initially it may take months to check the 650,000 emails and now they say there is nothing to change their original opinion.

As our freedoms go, no one even notices

"If You Even Mention Trump, You’re in Trouble

'Dilbert' creator Scott Adams saw his speaking career end as he publicly backed the GOP candidate

The intolerance of the Left has been on display for some time. Yet the vehemence with which the Left despises Donald Trump has put the hate machine into overdrive. If one supports Trump, it is tantamount to carpet-bombing every dog rescue kennel in America. If one speaks favorably of Trump, one is a racist-sexist-homophobic-transphobic-seal-clubbing hater.

And if one dares to praise Trump — it can damage a reputation irreparably.

“Dilbert” cartoon creator Scott Adams is experiencing this firsthand. Adams made several blog posts in August and September of 2015, which were astonishingly prescient, including calling Trump as the nominee and that he’d win in a landslide. He listed specific reasons why Trump qualified as a “master persuader.” One such observation was the “linguistic kill shot” Trump used to wipe out Jeb Bush, saying, “You are watching a master wizard rewire the public in real time.”

Big mistake."

www.lifezette.com/popzette/even-mention-trump-youre-trouble/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=im

The whole world watches and waits.

Well yes, Rush Limbaugh called it. Basically said that Comey would give her the all clear and therefore deflect attention from whatever Wikileaks was going to publish.

From the emails it is clear that the entire establishment is single mindedly focussed on getting Clinton elected. Google, Facebook, the banks, billionaires, the media. And bear in mind there are hundreds of billions of dollars at stake. Each side might be spending a billion or so but those greasy haired lobbyists effectively decide where government subsidies, bailouts and even foreign policy goes. The sums are astronomical.

All the stuff about her Latino maid ( people are checking on her legal status) is actually in the emails, I'll get Marina to print this out for you in the morning and stuff like that. She doesn't have security clearance and it would be a security violation even if she did. In fact even having her maid in one of the SKIFs would be a security violation.

Also in the emails Clinton asks Colin Powell for advice on how to get away with using private emails and phones. He goes to some length explaining how he'd tell the secret service that he was going to the hardware store and warns her not to get caught. Think this was dated 2009.

As for Trump himself I don't have a dog in the fight though the faux hate and condescension does irritate me.

Far funnier is the pantomime regarding the FBI Director Comey. One minute Trump supporters think he's the devil incarnate and the Clinton supporters pointing out what a good honest professional he is, only for the roles to rather quickly be reversed. Then reversed again, and again!

The whole thing feels a lot like Carter / Reagan to me. Both had very low personal ratings and there really wasn't anything to choose between them going into the last few days of the election. Reagan of course won a landslide unprecedented in American history as I think will Trump.

It's a little OTT all the stress on this post. I gather the OP was keeping it light hearted? Whoever wins will be a disaster tho (sorry Anericans) and it's too late to go back and get new nominees. The elite have decided who they want to run for president, so it's pretty much out of the average Americans hands.
So keeping the thread light who do you think will win? Personally I think Hills will win but I think she's a disaster. I have to add I think the voting is rigged. Anyway here we go: Hills for President.

Yes, Reagan won a landslide but he was essentially Establishment Republican even though the Bushes etc weren't keen on him. Trump is a real outsider and the Establishment fear him, so everyone is against him..

Do you listen to Roger Stone on youtube? You get the real inside baseball of what it is all about from him.

'Personally I think Hills will win but I think she's a disaster'

I am hoping it will be Trump. He gets huge crowds and there is low African American turnout for Hillary and expected large turnout for Trump. But, like you, I fear the fix may be in. The forces ranged against Trump are enormous, but the people may still see him over the line if the turnout is huge.

"The elite have decided who they want to run for president, "

Interesting you should say that...

Hillary yes, quite how she struggled so badly to beat Bernie even amazed her staffers. It was all rigged from the start and there is more than a hint that they had leverage over him when he started to surge. He never had a chance with the super delegates already decided yet took state after state off her.

On the Republican side it was Jeb Bush who was the anointed one. The Democrats were fully expecting another Clinton vs Bush. Trouble is Donald Trump destroyed him in the debates, and clearly targeted him for such knowing that he was the chosen candidate.

The Dems still had the fix in but after years of internal strife with the Tea Party the Republicans didn't have the same control.

"Yes, Reagan won a landslide but he was essentially Establishment Republican even though the Bushes etc weren't keen on him"

Reagan had been a democrat up until a few years before the election. He was a left field candidate as John Wayne ( believe it or not!) was groomed to be President.

As Reagan said, he didn't leave the Democratic party, the party left him.

New release out from the DNC!

twitter.com/wikileaks?lang=en-gb

Exciting stuff.....

Yes, but Reagan had been a Governor in California, had lost one campaign. People like Roger Stone, Ed Rollins etc worked on his campaign. The Establishment weren't too keen on Reagan because he wasn't fully under control. He was shot but fortunately survived. Bush was VP. But compared to Trump, Reagan was Establishment even though he was nothing like Bush. Trump praises Reagan, but Reagan's son says his dad would not have been too keen on Trump. Trump is off the ranch for the Establishment.

In fact, Trump compares himself to Reagan because Reagan was a Democrat who turned Republican and so is Trump. Trump uses that when Bush etc accuses him of not being a real conservative, he says he is like Reagan and they are then stumped because they all admire Reagan now.