Trump flips just 1 state--he wins electoral map. Just now--same guy who predicted every single state in 2012. Also said there is a quiet Trump vote. He already called Florida for Trump. If Trump flips Michigan--its over.

BRIGGS wrote:Nate Silver on TV just now

Trump flips just 1 state--he wins electoral map. Just now--same guy who predicted every single state in 2012. Also said there is a quiet Trump vote. He already called Florida for Trump. If Trump flips Michigan--its over.

I guess that's why the Dow/Oil/USD are rallying massively because investors and hedge fund managers thinks Trump doesn't have a snow ball change in hell..

Horse race journalism... NY Times headline talks about "last sprint in tight race" ... CNN bottom third using sprint/race metaphors.

In the UK a candidate for parliament "stands" for office metaphorically, and literally when they announce the vote tallies at the end.

In the US it's all about "running" for office.

A linguistic difference belies a bigger issue.

DrAlphaeus wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:My basic position is that a Hillary presidency will mean war with Russia (amongst other nations). A few here have questioned that, but let's look at something very very basic:

Hillary supports a no fly zone in Syria. That is her basic position. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war
+
Hillary was for attacking Libya, against Obama's wishes. This is while she was SOS. Imagine when she is president?
+
A top US General (Joint Chiefs of Staff) has said:

“Right now… for us to control all of the airspace in Syria would require us to go to war against Syria and Russia,” See 20 second clip below.

We have no right to control the Airspace in Syria with Russia there as a "guest" of Syria. We can't do that, the military definitely doesn't want that, but Hillary does.

Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party presidential nominee and former US secretary of state, has said that if she becomes president cyberattacks against US interests will be treated "like any other attack" – and that includes military action.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/clinton-us-should-use-military-response-fight-cyberattacks-russia-china-1579187
+
Hillary later said Russia is behind the Wikileaks emails.
=
Do you see the clear picture? Please see the writing on the wall.

So, in my mind a vote for Hillary, is a vote for war.

I'd like to see some feedback here. This is what matters most, to all of us.

I agree with a lot of what akrud says here, at least in the sense that all out war with Russia — to think we survived the Cold War and a couple decades of a post-Cold War peace to finally get in an all out hot war... while it's not impossible to imagine, it's hard to fathom the insane decisions that would have to happen on both sides to get us there. Syria def looks like the proxy war of the future unfortunately. You have a rather generous definition of the word "war". Unless I read you incorrectly, you called the 2014 air strikes in Syria to rescue James Foley and other hostages a "war". Essentially any engagement of our military is war you are saying. The DoD used to be called the Department of War, so I suppose I can see your point. It's just a very, very broad one.

So in general I get your point EMS about your fears of Clinton, as you make it over and over. I am part of the political spectrum (I suppose) that has wagged its finger at Clinton for her hawkishness for 15 years. I also suspect a lot of that is like the "soft on crime" accusation of Democrats — head Republicans off at the pass with the war rattles — but maybe it's genuine or influenced by fireside chats with Kissinger, I don't know. But since you are so utterly opposed to Clinton, I just think you continually give Trump a pass. You conceded many pages ago that you don't share some of my specific concerns domestically as a Black man living stateside.

The original post by BRIGGS is about Hillary but it is also about BRIGGS exhorting ethnic minorities like Blacks and Latinos to give Trump a chance. For all of your posts maybe I missed where you gave some careful consideration what Trump's history in private enterprise, bombastic rhetoric including his birther obsession, labeling Obama and Hillary the founders of ISIS, and his very loose handling of truth and facts. You seem able to give Trump a pass — oh well he didn't mean this or that, and if he did, well, that's disappointing — and I wonder why you are willing to roll the dice on him. What is it about him you seem to trust?

There are a lot of rich people who stay out of the limelight, help out in the background. The limelight is Trump's primary source of nutrition. To say "well for him such a big wealthy guy to want to do this job and help the little guy" — maybe he just loves the spotlight and headlines so much and fears more than anything irrelevance and not being talked about that this whole presidential race timed with where we are as a society with media technology is why we are where we are.

I don't know. Anyway, those are my two cents. If you want to consider the other aspect of the OP for a while — what Trump means for ethnic minorities (well, I think the Chinese get it, right BRIGGS?) maybe that would be a nice change of pace. Maybe try seeing if you can put yourself in a different perspective. I "get" to a certain point why people would favor Trump. Again, 10 years ago hating Trump would be like hating Mr. Wonderful on Shark Tank: he was a low-stakes reality TV character I had no ill will towards. You can use database Google Fu to see the various things I've said about his candidacy in this thread and another thread BRIGGS had about Trump being No. 2 in the GOP polls a year ago when BRIGGS said he didn't trust DT with nukes. If any of those points make an impression, would be cool to hear an acknowledgement of some common ground.

That's about all I got. Honestly don't have the energy to try to make adults do anything they don't want to do. If this thread represents our new reality of ideological hashtag blinders, I guess this thread has been good practice for a grim future.

Thanks for the reply.

I didn't mean to imply that dropping bombs to rescue someone is act of war. I was talking about more of a typical military operation. I guess it involves a bit of a grey area.

We will need diplomacy to hope Libya is only a proxy war. Russia is there and we are next door (or do we have a presence in the country too?). As long as one of us is in there, no proxy war. The country is basically destroyed, I can't imagine it going proxy. It seems too far past that. Hope it doesn't turn into hoping for proxy.

Not sure about his views towards black people or minorities. I know quite a few minorities support him and they generally go democrat. I might have seen a clip of Trump on that TV show, never watched it, don't even know the name. In private enterprise, he has always struck me as a "success" story (financially speaking). I imagined he could bring his private expertise here to a higher office and actually save the country money as he is not a politician, he is a business man. Don't know about the birther obsession. Hillary and Obaman and Isis - don't know about Obama, but I've read about how Hillary supported selling weapons to terrorist groups (Syrian rebels to fight Assad I think), which ended up in Isis' hands. I didn't look deeper, don't mention it so I don't really have an opinion yet. I'm actually in deeper than I want to be with information. Looking forward to post election.

I never got much into Trumps policy's. I did a search and can say I really like the following ideas and I'll keep it short. They are from another poster on reddit, but I think he pulled a few from the Gettysburg Address as many look familiar to me - I listed most, not all. I don't agree with nuclear energy so didn't list it below, Trump is pro. (more detailed here https://www.reddit.com/user/rationalcomment just look down a few posts to his list:
-Against the TPP treaty which threatens to destroy jobs and give more power to global corporations, while Hillary called it the “Gold Standard”
-Wants to impose term limits on Congress. 75% of Americans support creating term limits on Congress, and Congress has dismal approval.
-Ethics reform to limit lobbyism: wants to stop the link between corporate donors buying up politicians which is one of the biggest problems in our government. He has created a 5 point plan in order to achieve this, including expanding the "definition of lobbyist so we close all the loopholes that former government officials use by labeling themselves consultants and advisors"
-Lower taxes, while at the same time closing tax loopholes for Wall Street bankers such as carried interest. (calculator in link above)
-Wants to limit U.S. Hegemony via not being the world’s police. He is against nation building wars and wants to be mostly non-interventionist. Hillary on the other hand has a long record of war mongering and dominating in campaign donations from military/defense contractors.
-Wants to audit the Fed
-He’s very pro-2nd Amendment. Got the earliest endorsement from the NRA ever.
-While he is perfectly fine with allowing in legal immigrants, he has a strong anti illegal-immigration policy,...
-Will repeal common core Yeah!
-Pro-medical marijuana, and letting states decided whether to legalize Yeahhh
-Anti-Globalist: He takes a strong stance against the collusion of international financiers like George Soros with Washington insiders, and wants to make national interests take precedence over the profits of huge global corporations.
-Wants to end corporate inversion and discourage offshoring
-Understands the threat of Sharia Law and Radical Islamic Terrorism. Meanwhile Hillary holds very regressive left views on Islam and defends authoritarian Islamist states like Saudi Arabia (while proclaiming to be for women's rights).
-Plans to push for 6 weeks paid maternal leave as standard and allow families to deduct from their income taxes child care expenses. (Amazing this isn't already in the states)
-Wants to work together with Russia in stopping Jihadi's in Syria instead of being adversaries
-Wants to end healthcare monopolies by promoting competitive bidding
-Knows how f'd up the Saudis are like the rest of us, while Hillary takes in millions from them
-Knows NATO is obsolete and a decades-old relic that needs to be rejiggered to focus on terrorism instead of just continuing a Cold War with Russia and bombing countries

Some of the above are really changes we need, things that Hillary should get behind but she is PRO globalism. You be the judge of which and I know we can't have it all, but I do like the direction I see.
I can get behind a lot of this.

Maybe you are right about Trump wanting limelight. But my feeling is he see's the shambles that is this country. The corruption. Speaking of, look at the banking system. Whoever gets in, I am not sure we can last another 2 years without drastically doing something to save the economy and get the banking system, their Infationary steal bomb (called Quantitative Easing).

For sure there is common ground here. I've not been claiming Trump to be a savior. I don't know but I like a lot of what he says. My point has been "An extreme fear of Hillary." really, yeah, simplistic but honest. To be fair, if I am "pro" Trump, I might as well show where I support him, however briefly and I did above, at least for a start. I have worries about Trump as it is all an unknown. And my biggest worry is the nuke comments. That worries me but the context that I heard about it in, sort of put me at ease (but still.)

I'm beat, so let me know if I skipped anything. I'll get to it tomorrow...

earthmansurfer wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:My basic position is that a Hillary presidency will mean war with Russia (amongst other nations). A few here have questioned that, but let's look at something very very basic:

Hillary supports a no fly zone in Syria. That is her basic position. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war
+
Hillary was for attacking Libya, against Obama's wishes. This is while she was SOS. Imagine when she is president?
+
A top US General (Joint Chiefs of Staff) has said:

“Right now… for us to control all of the airspace in Syria would require us to go to war against Syria and Russia,” See 20 second clip below.

We have no right to control the Airspace in Syria with Russia there as a "guest" of Syria. We can't do that, the military definitely doesn't want that, but Hillary does.

Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party presidential nominee and former US secretary of state, has said that if she becomes president cyberattacks against US interests will be treated "like any other attack" – and that includes military action.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/clinton-us-should-use-military-response-fight-cyberattacks-russia-china-1579187
+
Hillary later said Russia is behind the Wikileaks emails.
=
Do you see the clear picture? Please see the writing on the wall.

So, in my mind a vote for Hillary, is a vote for war.

I'd like to see some feedback here. This is what matters most, to all of us.

I agree with a lot of what akrud says here, at least in the sense that all out war with Russia — to think we survived the Cold War and a couple decades of a post-Cold War peace to finally get in an all out hot war... while it's not impossible to imagine, it's hard to fathom the insane decisions that would have to happen on both sides to get us there. Syria def looks like the proxy war of the future unfortunately. You have a rather generous definition of the word "war". Unless I read you incorrectly, you called the 2014 air strikes in Syria to rescue James Foley and other hostages a "war". Essentially any engagement of our military is war you are saying. The DoD used to be called the Department of War, so I suppose I can see your point. It's just a very, very broad one.

So in general I get your point EMS about your fears of Clinton, as you make it over and over. I am part of the political spectrum (I suppose) that has wagged its finger at Clinton for her hawkishness for 15 years. I also suspect a lot of that is like the "soft on crime" accusation of Democrats — head Republicans off at the pass with the war rattles — but maybe it's genuine or influenced by fireside chats with Kissinger, I don't know. But since you are so utterly opposed to Clinton, I just think you continually give Trump a pass. You conceded many pages ago that you don't share some of my specific concerns domestically as a Black man living stateside.

The original post by BRIGGS is about Hillary but it is also about BRIGGS exhorting ethnic minorities like Blacks and Latinos to give Trump a chance. For all of your posts maybe I missed where you gave some careful consideration what Trump's history in private enterprise, bombastic rhetoric including his birther obsession, labeling Obama and Hillary the founders of ISIS, and his very loose handling of truth and facts. You seem able to give Trump a pass — oh well he didn't mean this or that, and if he did, well, that's disappointing — and I wonder why you are willing to roll the dice on him. What is it about him you seem to trust?

There are a lot of rich people who stay out of the limelight, help out in the background. The limelight is Trump's primary source of nutrition. To say "well for him such a big wealthy guy to want to do this job and help the little guy" — maybe he just loves the spotlight and headlines so much and fears more than anything irrelevance and not being talked about that this whole presidential race timed with where we are as a society with media technology is why we are where we are.

I don't know. Anyway, those are my two cents. If you want to consider the other aspect of the OP for a while — what Trump means for ethnic minorities (well, I think the Chinese get it, right BRIGGS?) maybe that would be a nice change of pace. Maybe try seeing if you can put yourself in a different perspective. I "get" to a certain point why people would favor Trump. Again, 10 years ago hating Trump would be like hating Mr. Wonderful on Shark Tank: he was a low-stakes reality TV character I had no ill will towards. You can use database Google Fu to see the various things I've said about his candidacy in this thread and another thread BRIGGS had about Trump being No. 2 in the GOP polls a year ago when BRIGGS said he didn't trust DT with nukes. If any of those points make an impression, would be cool to hear an acknowledgement of some common ground.

That's about all I got. Honestly don't have the energy to try to make adults do anything they don't want to do. If this thread represents our new reality of ideological hashtag blinders, I guess this thread has been good practice for a grim future.

Thanks for the reply.

I didn't mean to imply that dropping bombs to rescue someone is act of war. I was talking about more of a typical military operation. I guess it involves a bit of a grey area.

We will need diplomacy to hope Libya is only a proxy war. Russia is there and we are next door (or do we have a presence in the country too?). As long as one of us is in there, no proxy war. The country is basically destroyed, I can't imagine it going proxy. It seems too far past that. Hope it doesn't turn into hoping for proxy.

Not sure about his views towards black people or minorities. I know quite a few minorities support him and they generally go democrat. I might have seen a clip of Trump on that TV show, never watched it, don't even know the name. In private enterprise, he has always struck me as a "success" story (financially speaking). I imagined he could bring his private expertise here to a higher office and actually save the country money as he is not a politician, he is a business man. Don't know about the birther obsession. Hillary and Obaman and Isis - don't know about Obama, but I've read about how Hillary supported selling weapons to terrorist groups (Syrian rebels to fight Assad I think), which ended up in Isis' hands. I didn't look deeper, don't mention it so I don't really have an opinion yet. I'm actually in deeper than I want to be with information. Looking forward to post election.

I never got much into Trumps policy's. I did a search and can say I really like the following ideas and I'll keep it short. They are from another poster on reddit, but I think he pulled a few from the Gettysburg Address as many look familiar to me - I listed most, not all. I don't agree with nuclear energy so didn't list it below, Trump is pro. (more detailed here https://www.reddit.com/user/rationalcomment just look down a few posts to his list:
-Against the TPP treaty which threatens to destroy jobs and give more power to global corporations, while Hillary called it the “Gold Standard”
-Wants to impose term limits on Congress. 75% of Americans support creating term limits on Congress, and Congress has dismal approval.
-Ethics reform to limit lobbyism: wants to stop the link between corporate donors buying up politicians which is one of the biggest problems in our government. He has created a 5 point plan in order to achieve this, including expanding the "definition of lobbyist so we close all the loopholes that former government officials use by labeling themselves consultants and advisors"
-Lower taxes, while at the same time closing tax loopholes for Wall Street bankers such as carried interest. (calculator in link above)
-Wants to limit U.S. Hegemony via not being the world’s police. He is against nation building wars and wants to be mostly non-interventionist. Hillary on the other hand has a long record of war mongering and dominating in campaign donations from military/defense contractors.
-Wants to audit the Fed
-He’s very pro-2nd Amendment. Got the earliest endorsement from the NRA ever.
-While he is perfectly fine with allowing in legal immigrants, he has a strong anti illegal-immigration policy,...
-Will repeal common core Yeah!
-Pro-medical marijuana, and letting states decided whether to legalize Yeahhh
-Anti-Globalist: He takes a strong stance against the collusion of international financiers like George Soros with Washington insiders, and wants to make national interests take precedence over the profits of huge global corporations.
-Wants to end corporate inversion and discourage offshoring
-Understands the threat of Sharia Law and Radical Islamic Terrorism. Meanwhile Hillary holds very regressive left views on Islam and defends authoritarian Islamist states like Saudi Arabia (while proclaiming to be for women's rights).
-Plans to push for 6 weeks paid maternal leave as standard and allow families to deduct from their income taxes child care expenses. (Amazing this isn't already in the states)
-Wants to work together with Russia in stopping Jihadi's in Syria instead of being adversaries
-Wants to end healthcare monopolies by promoting competitive bidding
-Knows how f'd up the Saudis are like the rest of us, while Hillary takes in millions from them
-Knows NATO is obsolete and a decades-old relic that needs to be rejiggered to focus on terrorism instead of just continuing a Cold War with Russia and bombing countries

Some of the above are really changes we need, things that Hillary should get behind but she is PRO globalism. You be the judge of which and I know we can't have it all, but I do like the direction I see.
I can get behind a lot of this.

Maybe you are right about Trump wanting limelight. But my feeling is he see's the shambles that is this country. The corruption. Speaking of, look at the banking system. Whoever gets in, I am not sure we can last another 2 years without drastically doing something to save the economy and get the banking system, their Infationary steal bomb (called Quantitative Easing).

For sure there is common ground here. I've not been claiming Trump to be a savior. I don't know but I like a lot of what he says. My point has been "An extreme fear of Hillary." really, yeah, simplistic but honest. To be fair, if I am "pro" Trump, I might as well show where I support him, however briefly and I did above, at least for a start. I have worries about Trump as it is all an unknown. And my biggest worry is the nuke comments. That worries me but the context that I heard about it in, sort of put me at ease (but still.)

I'm beat, so let me know if I skipped anything. I'll get to it tomorrow...

I mentioned Syria but you mentioned Libya... Syria is what I'm talking about in terms of a proxy war between the US and Russia. In Syria, Russia gets a naval port on the Mediterranean, which is something I don't hear mentioned much in terms of what Russia gets out of this.

Man, you don't seem to know much about Trump if you don't even know the name of his show! It was called The Apprentice and had a "Celebrity" version, hence the Dennis Rodman/Arsenio/Gary Busey jokes you may have heard over the past year? Living abroad, I understand... I lived abroad for a year 2000-01 and came back and was like "Who the hell is Linkin Park and why are they so popular?" Haha. Here's a suggestion though: leave the Clinton obsession alone for a while and find out more about the guy who doesn't scare you and try to see why others are scared.

Please look into the birther stuff. I mean if you don't understand how he even got in the political conversation in the first place, you don't really get much about it and woefully ignorant of his outlandish lies and innuendo.

Fear is being overblown on both sides to various degrees IMHO, but if you never got into Trump's policies much — or what passes for them i.e. "build the wall and make Mexico pay for it" — then doesn't sound like you have been judging it for yourself and instead just taking the word of these "researchers" — which amount to a bunch of Twitter personalities and redditors of dubious credibility.

You are doing yourself a grave disservice if you think you are informed if you don't know the basics about this man you'd prefer as President of the United States. Your self-education in these matters has a massive blindspot.

earthmansurfer wrote:

holfresh wrote:

earthmansurfer wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Briggs is the EarthmanSurfer?

LOL, I'm the "for peace" guy, remember.
That would be a nice feet being that I'm in Germany (or at least posting on German time). And to change the styles so much, I guess possible, hmmm.

And what do you think will happen in Germany if Trump weakens NATO like Putin wants..Putin is buzzing fight jets off the UK as we speak...Trump didn't want to admit or didn't know Putin took over Crimea or invaded Ukraine...

I will answer the same for Trump as for Hillary here. Let the experts in the military and your cabinet help with these decisions.
You know, how Hillary pressured Obama into Libya as Secretary of State. Hopefully with a better support team than Obama had (chosen).

I am just playing the odds regarding war, I think with Hillary it is a greater chance. Trump I can see being devisive at home and that can lead to a different war. He
needs to get things under control, but Hillary has already shown us what she is capable regarding war and she has FAILED MISERABLY. Really, look at the mess that Libya
now is and the generals told her this would happen. Voting for Iraq and Afghanistan was just sad, and I know others did it. Let's get some peaceful people in there.
We have the tech, we have the military power to defend ourselves. Let's stop invading other countries and make America great again. That would be great for the world.

We are not the world police. The Ukraine and that area, right next to Russia is not our business. Bring the world into this. Let's discuss it, no more war.

Well as secretary of state she would be one of the experts in the cabinet advising the president on going to war. Guess you just contradicted yourself again.

And please elaborate on what qualifies generals as experts on deciding whether we should wage war or not? Their expertise is military not political. War is waged for political reasons including national security.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/07/those_insanely_long_early_voting_lines_were_a_result_of_republican_voter.html?wpsrc=sh_all_mob_em_ru

H1AND1 wrote:This is disgusting

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/07/those_insanely_long_early_voting_lines_were_a_result_of_republican_voter.html?wpsrc=sh_all_mob_em_ru

This is how republicans win elections.