Confirms to me my opinions on selective outrage and how extremely unfortunate that most
Of America only cares about the salacious soap opera stuff. These people prefer comedy over real issues. Therefore this election circus is precisely what America deserves.

An anti-Semitic nation. No compassion. Little regard for human life and Everyone out for themselves.

earthmansurfer wrote:I could see backing Hillary over Trump, as Walt said, she has the experience but we are comparing two apparently pretty corrupt individuals (I still fear a corrupt politician over a corrupt businessman). I am not shocked that she is hard working. Any person who wants this much power (Trump included), generally does all they can to get it, and since power corrupts, I'd imagine for all the wrong reasons. (Isn't there some kind of statistic regarding people in high positions of power e.g. CEO's and psychopathic behavior or something like that?) I wouldn't waste a stamp on an absentee ballot for either candidate. I'm just crossing my fingers that whoever gets in actually tries to do something for the people and not corporations.

I am still trying to solidify what you mean by pretty correct individual. Could you help me with that? Specifics? Not allegation? 8 years as senator, 4 as Secretary of State.

earthmansurfer wrote:Some of those emails are pretty damming and to not talk about them is sort of criminal, I mean it is news. Why can't they talk 50/50 about each candidate or close - I mean add some intelligence? Seems to be about companies, who own media conglomerates, creating public perception.

I've asked you this before. Please tell me what emails you are referring to and how they lead you to believe they were criminal? I've tried to search and can't find anything relevant regarding this latest batch. Help me with this. Specifics.

Knickoftime wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:Regarding your "stifling the source" question - well, if it is a big site (or TV channel) it is extremely effective propaganda to sway public opinion. Perhaps it is just designed to give a feeling of hopelessness on top of all else.

So as opposed to individual commercial entity playing to a specific demographic for commercial gain, you're suggesting Fox News and MSNBC are in fact in cahoots in some sort of uniform long-game strategy of dividing people so much that it creates hopeless and apathy?

I just said "perhaps", not a real strong belief, just something to ponder. But, now that you mention it, divide and conquer certain works...

gunsnewing wrote:First I see a grown woman crying hysterically on CNN about the injection of he word PUSSY. Then a few days later on SNL I see everyone laughing hysterically at the comments or of 60-70yr old man.

Confirms to me my opinions on selective outrage and how extremely unfortunate that most
Of America only cares about the salacious soap opera stuff. These people prefer comedy over real issues. Therefore this election circus is precisely what America deserves.

Looks like you got the talking points in your email gun...

You can find a few outliers like the video you mentioned, but no, this isn't outrage about the word PUSSY, its concern about the 60 year old man running for president as a 70 year who was bragging about sexual assault.

And by real issues, do you mean Hillary Clinton's health?

Real issues like those?

An anti-Semitic nation. No compassion. Little regard for human life and Everyone out for themselves.

Again, you're slurping up and regurgitating talking points from the right, who for years have made it their strategy to play off the fears of insecure, uneducated, male mostly older, almost exclusively white Americans.

I live in a community and walk in circles in which there is a lot of compassion, and regard for human life and while there is certainly no loss of personal ambition, but there is ample amount of empathy and sympathy to go around.

While many conservatives feel the liberal agenda is badly executed, much of it is in fact based on empathy. Conservatives may think liberals may try to uplift disadvantaged communities in the incorrect way, while they may think they're wrong about climate change, while they think they may misunderstand the sociological underpinings of inequity, they can't argue at the core of the liberal agenda is in fact, empathy.

I'm sorry that is not your experience and the community you're surrounding by has fed into your cynical worldview.

earthmansurfer wrote:For something so simple, why did Obama spend millions (I heard) defending where he was born?
I don't think he was really ever officially investigated for being a non US born citizen, was he?

earthman: What the hell are you talking about?

Spent millions? Link please.

Officially investigated? You mean for being the alien reincarnation of Akhenaton or whether he was born in Hawaii?

Are you even an earthman yourself? How do I know you weren't born on Uranus?

martin wrote:Very interesting

http://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:Very interesting

http://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-sidney-blumenthal-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635

Here is the money shot...

Either way, Trump spread the same story that the Russian government was pushing, whether by quoting propaganda whose origin he did not know or by using information that originated from Sputnik.

This is not funny. It is terrifying. The Russians engage in a sloppy disinformation effort and, before the day is out, the Republican nominee for president is standing on a stage reciting the same manufactured story as truth. How did this happen? Who in the Trump campaign fed him false allegations at the same time they were being advanced in a Russian disinformation campaign? (The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)

yeah, in a nutshell:

http://secondnexus.com/politics-and-economics/wikileaks-falsified-documents-trump-russia/

Here’s what happened. The documents Wikileaks published over the weekend were emails out of the account of John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman. Sputnik, the Russian online news and radio service, pounced on the documents almost as soon as Wikileaks released them, and claimed to have found an incriminating email from “Blumenthal” that seemed to be, Eichenwald wrote, “the smoking gun finally proving Clinton bore total responsibility” for the attack on Benghazi in 2012. Sputnik even declared the email was likely the “October Surprise” Wikileaks had alluded to earlier in the week.

But the statement Sputnik quoted––”Clinton was in charge of the State Department, and it failed to protect U.S. personnel at an American consulate in Libya. If the GOP wants to raise that as a talking point against her, it is legitimate.”––came from a 10,000-word editorial piece Eichenwald wrote for Newsweek about “the obscene politicization of Benghazi” that Blumenthal had emailed to Podesta. The Russians, Eichenwald continued, “carefully selected” and repurposed a paragraph that happened to mention that there were “legitimate” criticisms about Clinton and Benghazi, “all of which had been acknowledged in nine reports about the attack and by the former secretary of state herself.” They then ascribed those words to Blumenthal.

Nalod wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

martin wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Anyone who didn't know what they were getting into with D Trump had eyes closed. Look at my posts I know full well he is a narcissistic obnoxious boisterous person. I do not agree with some of the more aggressive outlandish stances but I do agree with half or partial types of agreements. The guy had cahones and vision-- just to extreme but those things get negotiated out. To vote for Hillary Clinton is voting to agree to accept a person who is obviously corrupt a fake of enormous magnitude a terrible choice as first female potus a person who has been in top level government for 30 years. I mean a Bush or a Clinton will have been President for most of the life we have lived. I think the US has gone in the wrong direction for a long time. We owe a lot of money I feel our military and morale is weak we have problems on multiple fronts I'm not a Donald Trump lover but I do not agree with having Hillary Clinton as president . I think I'm free to believe what I think is in the best interests of everyone even if the choice is fatally flawed

I don't think you know one iota of what Trump represents, what policies he has proposed, what meaningful things he could do for this country, what things he has done in the past.

I think you see a guys who is bullish on himself and tries to project an alpha male personality and you like it. That's it in a nutshell.

I don't think you have done any homework on what Hilary has done but have taken what you have seen on Fox or the like and taken that as fact. Very similar to Gun's Fact on Fox line.

It's the same reason you think Trump will win Connecticut.

BRIGGS, Hilary has not been in the top level of Gov't for 30 years, that's just the line Trump used in the last debate and which reverberated with you and you just repeated it. Trump marketing just sold you a bill of goods. Hilary has been a Senator and Secretary of State. Total of 12 years. Where do you get 30?

Stop being fooled so easily, you are better than that.

What don't I understand Martin?
I don't understand the cost that 20 mm illegal immigrants have on our health care system? Why should I pay taxes and not them?
I don't understand the peril the US is falling into with Russia and other countries by taking an antagonistic thought process to foreign affairs
I didn't see people stomping and burning the Us flag while they waived Mexican flags above it IN the US
I didn't see a rise in racial tensions the last 8 years?
I didn't see U S debt rise 12 trillion $ in the last 8 years.
I didn't see a rise in unlawful conduct in the US?
I guess no one noticed that your medical costs went way up yet your medical service went way down?
I guess no one notices the increase in drug consumption in the US?
I guess no one notices the lack of respect police have for the government and no one has noticed that Trump has close to a 100% backing of police endorsements in the Us?
No one has noticed the people in the uber cities got nothing from an African American President over the last 8 years
I don't care what D Trumps views are on women nor do I give a fck what Hillary thinks of men. Any man here who hasn't referred to a women by the term past in their life is a self righteous bser. I'm not looking for this guy to date my daughter I'm looking for him to help create some foundational order lacking especially when it comes to our military and immigration policies . We should absolutely not have an open borders open immigration policy here. We need serious work in our own house. You go elect Hillary and watch her actions or should I say inactions

You didn't see muslims celebrating on rooftops when the towers fell either.
What was the economy condition exactly 8 years ago? How can we use that as a baseline? It was on the brink of something very bad happening.

Briggs,

I doubt you'll change your mind. The sleaze factor aside, there are some major fundamental issues I have.

1. Is generally construed he will have smart people around him to compensate for his lack of political experience. My fear is he won't listen, nor do I trust his ability to comprehend the task at hand. He speaks for a generation of frustrated people but his overconfidence tells me he is not prepared for the job. His team of Ailes, Rudy and others are not exactly the dream team.

2. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/10/trump-constitution/503540/?utm_source=feed

I agree with you Briggs on the issue that the Reagan/Bush, Bush/Quale, Clinton/Gore, W./Chaney, and Obama/Biden is all in need of change. The problem is the system does not promote change. Citizens united empowers lobby groups and we have legions of minions in the house and senate who don't lead but instead pander to their constituents to maintain their employment as a so called public servant! With party money at stake to support them, they have to adhere to the party line. Pat McCrory, Gov. of North Carolina is a perfect example.

The Republican party has attracted the white uneducated voter who has not faired well in the economy. This manifests an ugly underbelly that reeks of entitlement because of race.

That said, if the republicans stayed away from "Christian values", which it encroaches on separation of church and state, and Abortion, what does it have to offer to attract voters? Does the Tea Party movement also have elements of racism? It did to me.
Entitlements are a very small portion of where our tax dollars go, so why did that have such great traction? Because a larger % of minorities use them?

Look at recent events the last few years in Kansas and Louisiana. Tho states that lowered tax rates on the very top end in hopes it would trickle down. The mainly white voting population and many of them on the government payroll for "handouts" voted for republicans as do many with similar demographics. Those states are in worse shape because of it.

I am disgusted with my State politics where HB2 in North Carolina is more important than issues such as rampid drug use in areas of low employment, low teacher pay has seen schools lose educators, and not attracting jobs where other states are winning them. State Government should be providing security, social assistance (drug counseling), education, public transportation (roads/Bridges) and stimulative investment to attract business. Instead by over reaching with HB2, it enters in transgender argument, discrimination in the workplace to eliminate workers right for protection, and wage control for the bigger cities!!! The aftermath has been huge decline in business!!!! This, like the Amendment ONE four years ago are to rally white conservative voters and get them to vote. This back fired 4 years ago, and might be the very thing that destroys McCrory!!!! This man had the election all to himself before.
Why do all this? In fact, federal gov. slaps this stuff down time and time again. We spend millions in legal fees to defend it!!!

I use the above as examples of what the republican party goes awry by trying to consolidate power but not effective stewardship. By focusing on consolidation of power it hurt our economy BIG TIME!!!

It is my conclusion that while the issues are many, Trump is far from the man able to deliver on much of what he says. The revolution must start at the local level and work its way up. Because nationwide we elect hacks like Rubio and Cruz who are empty legislators we end up with fewer and fewer good choices to elect from. A principled man like Kasich who lacks the charisma is overlooked while Trump succeeded with empty sugar calories.

Nalod is with "Her" because I can't be with "Him".

Last three days I finally cleaned out my inbox and just blew away blocks of old mails I was never going to read or respond to. Most were cc or group based mails, but if you are in a lot of groups, say for the sake of transparency, these mails add up. Any way, in the last 2 days I have deleted 18,000 emails at work. People are like wow! 30k emails! its a massive cover up!

Real issues? Guns... you feed into the sensationalism more than anyone. You are exactly what Trump needs more of. You are the same guy that killed Bill Clinton for Monica in the whitehouse yea? All these guys who say that Bill disgraced us all... these are the same guys backing Trump right now. Its really become surreal. Trump doesn't even care about the truth or reality. He's on TV now, just roll with it.

A month ago I was pro Gary Johnson based mainly off his proposed policy. Don't like guns or education but he gets a lot of other big ones and guns/education is mostly at the state level anyway. Turns out Gary is a phuckin dope. So that kinda kills that. I haven't researched Jill (yet) but Im not sure I see the point. So my focus has been on Hillary/Don. I don't trust Hillary at all. My personal belief is she is very power focused. I think she is a poor mix of a huge desire to be the first female POTUS followed by some overcompensating with our roles in global conficts, starting with Syria. I am not terribly worried about the donations from middle eastern countries... Perhaps promises were made, maybe things that were promised were always on the table. I don't know, but taking their money is fine with me. Better it goes to a crooked Clinton than someone that wants to blow us up. So I am no fan of Hillary, either the person or the politician although I had admittedly little to judge on personally. That being said Trump is an abomination. Most of what he says is simply made up. When he does comment on policy what he says and he does don't jive. He talks about bringing back wealth and how that will generate revenue but he hasn't paid federal taxes in an eon. His businesses under perform. He has a long track record of racism and using the laws of the land to stiff people he owes money to. He's a non stop and unapologetic liar. What is the draw? At least with earthmansurfer his concerns stem from Hillary, as opposed to actually being pro-trump. I get it. I have disliked politicians in the past, but I have never been dismayed by their followers. I see Trump signs and I am honestly dismayed that someone could nail that sign in front of their house.

earthmansurfer wrote:

martin wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:Yeah, things certainly looking down for Trump after that release of the recording.

I am just curious what you all think of the timing of the release to coincide with the wiki-leaks release?
I mean, there are some juicy emails (which I've only briefly scanned) in there and the only thing on the news is the P word from Trumps mouth, lol.
Even if you support Hillary, do you not want reports on these emails?

Another thing that worries me, the large social media website Reddit - look at the front page of r/politics. It is just not representative of that site.
For over a month now it is just pro Hillary. To the point of mods removing anything negative against her that rises to the front page. I did a post testing
and it was attacked immediately and then pulled for a laughable reason (as are most).
There is no way that 15 of 16 posts on the front page are pro Clinton, just not mathematically possible when you look at the breakdown.
Any posts regarding the email leaks that gain traction are removed for various reasons. With Trump, everything goes.

Since this is a Pepsi or Coke race to me anyway, I'm curious, is the above 2 things, just coincidence or are things really this bad?

When you have Hilary and Trump in a 2 person race, I am 110% behind Hilary. As a stand alone politician, I have my hesitations about her, but those hesitations are by no means even in the same universe as what most expect. Side note: I have a few friends who work in the State Department who have both worked closely with Hilary and semi-closely with her, so I have that perspective. The biggest feedback I got was that she was a hard working mutha ****a and a bad ass woman who has been molded by everything we have seen in the public with her own personality (i.e. her early civic duty work and the normal paranoia of being scrutinized waaaaaayyyy too much).

I would LOVE reports on those emails, but I also think they are waaaaaaayyyyyy overblown and amount to very little. I've tried to read as much as I can on the new dumps - reports on the emails, not actually readying the emails myself (just don't have the time) - and I can't even seem to find anything that is remotely interesting. There is no there there.

And it's been that way with other topics, Benghazi especially. Even the private email thing seems like a side note to me (a yellow flag versus a red flag). All of these are mere fishing expeditions that everyone against Hilary are pursuing because it is her and not founded on real suspicions of wrongdoing. If any other politician was put through the same type of scrutiny, they would fail miserably. Every one of them. If most any PERSON was put through that same scrutiny, both red and yellow flags would pop up all over the place.

As an example of this: The whole of the RNC during the George Bush presidency was on their own private email server. 22 MILLION emails were deleted from public record. These are not private emails between private citizens, there are public gov't records that were deleted. Over an 8 year timeframe. What did that amount to? Pretty much nada. Investigations? People in jail? What's going on?

Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice both used private emails for their gov't communication. So let's take Hilary's email use into that perspective.

What we are starting to see is the correction on the part of the media and other places that are righting a ship that has long gone off track.

I could see backing Hillary over Trump, as Walt said, she has the experience but we are comparing two apparently pretty corrupt individuals (I still fear a corrupt politician over a corrupt businessman). I am not shocked that she is hard working. Any person who wants this much power (Trump included), generally does all they can to get it, and since power corrupts, I'd imagine for all the wrong reasons. (Isn't there some kind of statistic regarding people in high positions of power e.g. CEO's and psychopathic behavior or something like that?) I wouldn't waste a stamp on an absentee ballot for either candidate. I'm just crossing my fingers that whoever gets in actually tries to do something for the people and not corporations.

Some of those emails are pretty damming and to not talk about them is sort of criminal, I mean it is news. Why can't they talk 50/50 about each candidate or close - I mean add some intelligence? Seems to be about companies, who own media conglomerates, creating public perception.

What does comparing anyone to George Bush get us? lol Seriously, because they didn't prosecute the former head of the CIA, that is supposed to give me some solice? These people, for the most part, don't go to jail. I mean Grandpa Bush was given a slap on the wrist for trading with the enemy (Hitler) during WWII. Let's compare what they do to what normal people like us get sent to prison for. But nothing new there.

I am curious to see where this election really does go, but what a let down (again). Remember when Obama talked about change before he got in office. Do you remember how long that lasted? It lasted till he basically selected his cabinet, Bush people and such, there was no change coming. This feels like a (poorly) scripted soap opera.

I do hope for the best, after all we are a world power and can really affect the world in a beautiful way. (e.g. ending war on cannabis/drugs). Slowly...

I agree with your point of view. There is something really wrong here. Anyone who has a dog in this fight loses regardless of who wins. For the first time I feel as if there are no winners.

Here here!