2016 presidential election campaign 2

josh wrote:

Debater wrote:

Indy Star has confirmed that Indiana Gov. Mike Pence is Trump's VP pick.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2016/07/14/report-pence-trum...

Down the line right-winger.

Though a lot of the far-right consider him a sell-out. Ann Coulter just said this was Trump's first (?) mistake.

Rev Pesky wrote:

JKR wrote:

Rev Pesky wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

The GOP must be at death's door to have ever allowed a freak like Trump get anywhere them. What a sad excuse for a human being he is...

The damage was done when the Republican party decided to allow the 'Tea Party' to operate within the Republican party. That drove a lot of so-called 'moderate' Republicans out of the party, and at the same time, partially replaced them with fringe right-wingers. Which set the stage for a Trump style candidacy. 

What should the Republican Party have done instead?

They could have told the Tea Partyer's to make their own party.

I think Tea Partiers will not make their own party because they don't want to split the right wing vote and allow the Democrats to win by default. Republicans also don't want the Tea Party to form their own party because they also don't want the the right wing vote to split and let the Democrats to win by default. This is what should be expected because the US has FPTP, a two party system.

I started talking about Trump and how he will beat Hillary early Feb.  She is terrible candidate in the general but her stregenths are playing agaisnt her chances.  Her "experience" and talk how she knows how government works is cursed her.  She stinks of priveage and the elite, if see ran 10 years I believe she would have won.  People just have had enough status quo and see is the status quo.  Nobody trusts her according to the polls.  And like mentioned in the above posts her only stragety to demonize Trump.  Demonizing trump is not a reason to vote for hillary, its stunning how fixated the democratic exstablishment was getting her nod for nomination. 

My greatest concern she is way to agressive in her forgien policy.  That talk about no fly zone over a part of syria, I think is a prelude to war with Russia.  

Pence becomes the most far-right running mate in modern history

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/pence-becomes-the-most-far-right...

Oh for goodness sakes!

SeekingAPoliticalHome wrote:

I started talking about Trump and how he will beat Hillary early Feb.  She is terrible candidate in the general but her stregenths are playing agaisnt her chances.  Her "experience" and talk how she knows how government works is cursed her.  She stinks of priveage and the elite, if see ran 10 years I believe she would have won.  People just have had enough status quo and see is the status quo.  Nobody trusts her according to the polls.  And like mentioned in the above posts her only stragety to demonize Trump.  Demonizing trump is not a reason to vote for hillary, its stunning how fixated the democratic exstablishment was getting her nod for nomination. 

My greatest concern she is way to agressive in her forgien policy.  That talk about no fly zone over a part of syria, I think is a prelude to war with Russia.  

 

Who cares who the VP candidate is?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/15/donald_trump_may_be_fr...

"when ABC’s Martha Raddatz tried to pin down Clinton’s advocacy of a no-fly zone in Syria. “ISIS doesn’t have aircraft, Al Qaeda doesn’t have aircraft,” Raddatz pointed out. “So would you shoot down a Syrian military aircraft or a Russian airplane?” Clinton’s reply was that “I do not think it would come to that. We are already de-conflicting air space.” When Raddatz persisted—“But isn’t that a decision you should make now?”—Clinton said that she favored the no-fly zone “because I think it would help us on the ground to protect Syrians.”

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/hillary-clintons-baffling-fo...

Who is exactly is the no fly zone deter to fly?Will russia be detered from bombing targets under the no fly zone.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/15/the-nice-terror-attack-is-why...

Silicon Valley's Hyper-Partisan Future

A major venture capitalist will speak in support of Trump, as dozens more decry him.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/07/the-tech-industry-...

The Asian carp of politics takes over Republican waters: Michael Enright

The old guard of the Republican Party won't stop Donald Trump at this week's convention

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trump-republican-convention-enright-1.36...

Wrong thread

Trump and his entourage remind of the thugs that are involved in the current Russian Olympic doping scandal. And just like the Russians the Trumps have their lackeys in the media spewing out their right-wing propaganda shit as well.

Fired Trump Aide Gets The Knives Out For Paul Manafort Over Plagiarized Speech 

scandal.http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/lewandowski-staff-accountable-mela...

Report: George W. Bush Told Inner Circle He Worries About Being 'Last GOP Prez'

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/george-w-bush-worried-last-gop-pre...

While it was only a few sentences, it was so blatant, with the structure of the sentences sufficiently unique, that I feel it was an intentional sabotage by whoever was commissioned to write the speech.

To nobody's surprise, Trump is official.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/07/paul_ry...

mark_alfred wrote:

While it was only a few sentences, it was so blatant, with the structure of the sentences sufficiently unique, that I feel it was an intentional sabotage by whoever was commissioned to write the speech.

In fact the speech writer was a long time Trump employee.

Staffer 'apologizes'

Quote:

With Donald Trump's campaign reeling from charges of plagiarism, a speechwriter for his company took the blame and offered to resign...

...The speechwriter, however, made it clear that Melania Trump knew that the passages she read to an enthralled convention Monday night had come from Michelle Obama.

"A person she has always liked is Michelle Obama," the speechwriter, Meredith McIver, said of Mrs. Trump in a statement Wednesday from the campaign. "Over the phone, she read me some passages from Mrs. Obama's speech as examples. I wrote them down and later included some of the phrasing in the draft that ultimately became the final speech."

...The pushback from the Trump campaign was hard. At one point, campaign co-chairman Paul Manafort blamed Hillary Clinton for the controversy, though he offered no coherent theory on how she could have orchestrated it.

...McIver was described in the statement as an "in-house staff writer at the Trump Organization."

McIver started at the Trump Organization in 2001, according to her profile on the website of a booking agency called the All American Speakers Bureau.

Not much you can add to that. What a circus.

sherpa-finn wrote:

Actually, the bigger horror about Melania's speech last night is that she got Rickrolled. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ&feature=youtu.be

 

And here is the proof. 

I can't find a link to it now, but I'm pretty sure I remember reading in the last 24 hours that an outside speech writer had been hired to write this speech. It was a man, who was named in the story I remember reading, but I can't recall his name. He was described as an experienced political speech writer. Anyway, he claimed that the passages from Michelle Obama's speech weren't in the draft he submitted, and was paid for.

So now, we hear that an in-house speech writer is taking the fall. I guess that means that she took the draft that was written by the professional, "sexed it up" by adding the plagiarized bits, and passed that on to poor Melania. Doesn't sound all that credible to me. Maybe more like, Melania took the speech from the professional to this local resource, and asked for the bits she admired from Obama's speech to be added.

Anybody else remember this report?

Isn't this a distraction?

Nobody is talking about Trump's sexism and racism anymore. Nobody is talking about SCOTUS. Nobody is talking about Mike F'ing Pence. They're talking about an issue that nobody actually cares about, at least not in the greater scheme of things.

And, as sad as it is, even if ethics would move votes (which is questionable in the first place), it strains all credibility that Clinton (email server) and her husband's (treatment of women) ethics would be more appealing to the swing voter than Trump's wife's lifting a few lines from Michelle Obama.

I can't believe that Trump is an idiot like he's claimed to be, because he is playing everyone who is against him like a well-tuned fiddle.

Cruz booed off the stage but has his eye clearly on 2020

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-07-21/for-ted-cruz-and-m...

Can you someone please go to the NYTimes and get the transcript of Trump being interviewed on foriegn policy.  CNN pundits are going nuts over Trumps comments that does not believe american expectionalism.  I was always talking that hillary being warmonger compared trump.  That interview will be interesting.  I already used my 5 articles for the month.  We should butt out of the affairs of other nations like Turkey.  That statement is causing some interesting friction on cnn.

SeekingAPoliticalHome wrote:

Can you someone please go to the NYTimes and get the transcript of Trump being interviewed on foriegn policy.  CNN pundits are going nuts over Trumps comments that does not believe american expectionalism.  I was always talking that hillary being warmonger compared trump.  That interview will be interesting.  I already used my 5 articles for the month.  We should butt out of the affairs of other nations like Turkey.  That statement is causing some interesting friction on cnn.

Here you go:

CLEVELAND — Donald J. Trump, on the eve of accepting the Republican nomination for president, said Wednesday that if he were elected, he would not pressure Turkey or other authoritarian allies about conducting purges of their political adversaries or cracking down on civil liberties. The United States, he said, has to “fix our own mess” before trying to alter the behavior of other nations.

“I don’t think we have a right to lecture,” Mr. Trump said in a wide-ranging interview in his suite in a downtown hotel here while keeping an eye on television broadcasts from the Republican National Convention. “Look at what is happening in our country,” he said. “How are we going to lecture when people are shooting policemen in cold blood?”

During a 45-minute conversation, he explicitly raised new questions about his commitment to automatically defend NATO allies if they are attacked, saying he would first look at their contributions to the alliance. Mr. Trump re-emphasized the hard-line nationalist approach that has marked his improbable candidacy, describing how he would force allies to shoulder defense costs that the United States has borne for decades, cancel longstanding treaties he views as unfavorable, and redefine what it means to be a partner of the United States.

He said the rest of the world would learn to adjust to his approach. “I would prefer to be able to continue” existing agreements, he said, but only if allies stopped taking advantage of what he called an era of American largess that was no longer affordable.

Giving a preview of his address to the convention on Thursday night, he said that he would press the theme of “America First,” his rallying cry for the past four months, and that he was prepared to scrap the North American Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and Canada if he could not negotiate radically better terms.

He even called into question whether, as president, he would automatically extend the security guarantees that give the 28 members of NATO the assurance that the full force of the United States military has their back.

For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are the most recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”

He added, “If they fulfill their obligations to us, the answer is yes.”

Mr. Trump said he was pleased that the controversy over similarities between passages in a speech by his wife, Melania, to the convention on Monday night and one that Michelle Obama gave eight years ago appeared to be subsiding. “In retrospect,” he said, it would have been better to explain what had happened — that an aide had incorporated the comments — a day earlier.

When asked what he hoped people would take away from the convention, Mr. Trump said, “The fact that I’m very well liked.”

Mr. Trump conceded that his approach to dealing with the United States’ allies and adversaries was radically different from the traditions of the Republican Party — whose candidates, since the end of World War II, have almost all pressed for an internationalist approach in which the United States is the keeper of the peace, the “indispensable nation.”

Republican Convention Night 3: Analysis

Here’s how we analyzed the third night of the Republican National Convention, which featured Mike Pence, Ted Cruz and more.

“This is not 40 years ago,” Mr. Trump said, rejecting comparisons of his approaches to law-and-order issues and global affairs to Richard Nixon’s. Reiterating his threat to pull back United States troops deployed around the world, he said, “We are spending a fortune on military in order to lose $800 billion,” citing what he called America’s trade losses. “That doesn’t sound very smart to me.”

Mr. Trump repeatedly defined American global interests almost purely in economic terms. Its roles as a peacekeeper, as a provider of a nuclear deterrent against adversaries like North Korea, as an advocate of human rights and as a guarantor of allies’ borders were each quickly reduced to questions of economic benefit to the United States.

No presidential candidate in modern times has ordered American priorities that way, and even here, several speakers have called for a far more interventionist policy, more reminiscent of George W. Bush’s party than of Mr. Trump’s.

But Mr. Trump gave no ground, whether the subject was countering North Korea’s missile and nuclear threats or dealing with China in the South China Sea. The forward deployment of American troops abroad, he said, while preferable, was not necessary.

“If we decide we have to defend the United States, we can always deploy” from American soil, Mr. Trump said, “and it will be a lot less expensive.”

Many military experts dispute that view, saying the best place to keep missile defenses against North Korea is in Japan and the Korean Peninsula. Maintaining such bases only in the United States can be more expensive because of the financial support provided by Asian nations.

Mr. Trump’s discussion of the crisis in Turkey was telling, because it unfolded at a moment in which he could plainly imagine himself in the White House, handling an uprising that could threaten a crucial ally in the Middle East. The United States has a major air base at Incirlik in Turkey, where it carries out attacks on the Islamic State and keeps a force of drones and about 50 nuclear weapons.

Mr. Trump had nothing but praise for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the country’s increasingly authoritarian but democratically elected leader. “I give great credit to him for being able to turn that around,” Mr. Trump said of the coup attempt on Friday night. “Some people say that it was staged, you know that,” he said. “I don’t think so.”

Asked if Mr. Erdogan was exploiting the coup attempt to purge his political enemies, Mr. Trump did not call for the Turkish leader to observe the rule of law, or Western standards of justice. “When the world sees how bad the United States is and we start talking about civil liberties, I don’t think we are a very good messenger,” he said.

The Obama administration has refrained from any concrete measures to pressure Turkey, fearing for the stability of a crucial ally in a volatile region. But Secretary of State John F. Kerry has issued several statements urging Mr. Erdogan to follow the rule of law.

Mr. Trump offered no such caution for restraint to Turkey and nations like it. However, his argument about America’s moral authority is not a new one: Russia, China, North Korea and other autocratic nations frequently cite violence and disorder on American streets to justify their own practices, and to make the case that the United States has no standing to criticize them.

Mr. Trump said he was convinced that he could persuade Mr. Erdogan to put more effort into fighting the Islamic State. But the Obama administration has run up, daily, against the reality that the Kurds — among the most effective forces the United States is supporting against the Islamic State — are being attacked by Turkey, which fears they will create a breakaway nation.

Asked how he would solve that problem, Mr. Trump paused, then said: “Meetings.”

Ousting President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, he said, was a far lower priority than fighting the Islamic State — a conclusion the White House has also reached, but has not voiced publicly.

“Assad is a bad man,” Mr. Trump said. “He has done horrible things.” But the Islamic State, he said, poses a far greater threat to the United States.

He said he had consulted two former Republican secretaries of state, James A. Baker III and Henry Kissinger, saying he had gained “a lot of knowledge,” but did not describe any new ideas about national security that they had encouraged him to explore.

Mr. Trump emphatically underscored his willingness to drop out of Nafta unless Mexico and Canada agreed to negotiate new terms that would discourage American companies from moving manufacturing out of the United States. “I would pull out of Nafta in a split second,” he said.

He talked of funding a major military buildup, starting with a modernization of America’s nuclear arsenal. “We have a lot of obsolete weapons,” he said. “We have nuclear that we don’t even know if it works.”

The Obama administration has a major modernization program underway, focused on making the nuclear arsenal more reliable, though it has begun to confront the huge cost of upgrading bombers and submarines. That staggering bill, estimated at $500 billion or more, will land on the desk of the next president.

Mr. Trump used the “America First” slogan in an earlier interview with The New York Times, but on Wednesday he insisted he did not mean it in the way that Charles A. Lindbergh and other isolationists used it before World War II.

“To me, ‘America First’ is a brand-new, modern term,” he said. “I never related it to the past.”

He paused a moment when asked what it meant to him.

“We are going to take care of this country first,” he said, “before we worry about everyone else in the world.”

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

does not believe american expectionalism.

I said recently, and I'll say again:  sometimes a typo says so much more.  :)

I am going cognitive decline, because of my brain tumor.  My spelling and word order problems are getting really obovious.  I am going have invest to good spell checker and grammar checker.  It quite embrassing to make errors that grade 5 child could avoid.  And no i am not dumping on you MR.Magoo :)

SeekingAPoliticalHome wrote:

Can you someone please go to the NYTimes and get the transcript of Trump being interviewed on foriegn policy.  CNN pundits are going nuts over Trumps comments that does not believe american expectionalism.  I was always talking that hillary being warmonger compared trump.  That interview will be interesting.  I already used my 5 articles for the month.  We should butt out of the affairs of other nations like Turkey.  That statement is causing some interesting friction on cnn.

Try right clicking on the link to the article, and selecting "Open link in incognito window" in Chrome, or "Open link in new private window" in Firefox. This will defeat most article counters. BTW, pasting whole articles here on babble is not encouraged, since it could get rabble.ca in trouble for copyright infringement.