-
May I recommend the blog of this guy
-
Basically plagiarizing Scott Adams
Persuasion -wise
On the health issue - its a matter of perception, not facts. Trump, just comes across as having a hell of a lot more vitality than Clinton (whatever the facts may be) Clinton's collapse is really, really bad thing to happen for her because of how it makes people feel about her. Confirmation bias and all that. Plus the way it was handled reinforces her dishonesty image.
People don't really care about tax returns. Trump is a businessman, of course he will legally be avoiding tax as much as possible, whereas Clinton made money in a public position (pay for play, Goldman Sachs speeches). People hate that far more.
Personally , I fear a Clinton Presidency more because (as Wikileaks confirms) she is a war hawk Neo-con. Trump seems to be more of an isolationist. Mostly against the Iraq war, wants cooperation with Russia. Its an easy choice for me.
-
@Frank said in US Election Thread 2016:
Personally , I fear a Clinton Presidency more because (as Wikileaks confirms) she is a war hawk Neo-con. Trump seems to be more of an isolationist. Mostly against the Iraq war, wants cooperation with Russia. Its an easy choice for me.
He's talked about nuking ISIS & stopping supporting NATO & you think she's more of a threat?
He is actively talking up the US using nukes for the first time in 70 years FFS & the co-operation with Russia involves handing them the right to annex & overthrow democratic countries... and she's the threat. A woman who has already been secretary of state & somehow didn't nuke anyone.
Re the tax returns, his whole run is the idea he is a great businessman & will run the US like a business. And that he is in no ones pocket because he is rich. He's gone bankrupt 4 times & his tax returns would show just how successful he is. And also how much money he has in Russia & how much that money would go up if sanctions re Ukraine were pulled. IE the sneaking suspicion is he (and Putin) have a huge incentive for a president Trump purely from a financial point of view. As for the idea no one cares re the rate he pays, they do (it was huge re Romney), he appeals to the working class as "their guy", if it turns out he paid 3% tax last year that story is gone.
That's why the tax returns are a big deal.
-
Hillary has made her bed (or dug her grave?) on this one a bit.
If this were McCain or similar the reaction would be "what a battler, he is sicker than he is letting on and still going forward - what a trooper".
Unfortunately over many years Clinton has been so disingenuous and so deceitful in the eyes of many in the public that it is more a reaction of "she is sicker than she is letting on, she is putting on a false front again".
While I still have trouble believing enough people when alone in the booth will genuinely vote for Trump at the end of the day - it certainly wouldn't hurt for Clinton to come out full of piss and vinegar in the debates and show a bit of vitality. That is the best way she can overcome this IMO.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Election Thread 2016:
@rotated You have that completely backwards, I think shy tory syndrome is rampant in the US as well. It is exactly when people are alone in the booth that they will vote for Trump.
Nah I think it swings the other way. You have self identifying republicans who have spent the past 20 years rallying against the Clintons, who despise Obama but who are somewhere between ambivalent or dead against Trump. They are resigned to not voting for him but would rather turn against the republican party for a day in the privacy of a cubicle (or their couch if they just don't turn up) rather than a whole election cycle.
Cruz's rise in the fractured party would have had much the same effect at the polls.
I suspect we will see a serious softening in both the turn out and lopsided support for the GOP in the college educated whites and evangelical whites relative to the past 16 years.
-
@rotated
That is just an exercise in wishful thinking. People have have had months of being shouted down and harassed for saying they support Trump, the media hates them for it, celebs hate them for it, being a Trump supporter makes you a target . So people just shut up, they don't admit to supporting Trump, even when asked by polling companies.Then when they get in the booth... they raise the middle finger to all the loud mouths... and tick Trump.
EXACTLY what happens in the UK elections.
You are betting ALOT on republicans hating Trump more than the democrats and Clintons. I think you are wrong, and frankly cannot see any real basis for yuor optimism. With your theory all the Sanders supporters will vote Trump... unlikely.
-
Neither candidate is capturing the nation, it will boil down to a large group of voters who either
- Vote Trump as a middle finger gesture vs the "establishment"
- Vote Trump or Clinton because they feel strongly about the other candidate being unsuitable to lead
There have been significant people within the GOP and their supporters who have come out and refused to endorse or vote for Trump. It won't have an effect on his base, it remains to be seen what effect it will have on wavering GOP voters who have not made their minds up
Clinton has broader support, albeit tepid in some of the Dems ranks. However as IIRC BSG alluded to there is reportedly a significant proportion of Sanders voters who will not vote Clinton. I wonder how much of a bounce Clinton will get from Obama going into full attack mode as the election gets nearer.
Who knows what will happen but it appears to be wide open, perhaps the debates will sway undecideds, but there is plenty of time for a few gaffs and both candidates seem to have the potential for some more in them
-
@rotated said in US Election Thread 2016:
If this were McCain or similar the reaction would be "what a battler, he is sicker than he is letting on and still going forward - what a trooper"
McCain got smashed over the state of his health in 2008 and that was without having any incident like Hillary. Most of it focused on injuries he received in Vietnam.. apparently lacking arm mobility was important.
In fact the probability of his death within 8 years was part of the mainstream discussionIf he collapsed in public it would not have got the reaction you claim
Candidates health is always an issue. Particularly if they are old (Reagan, GHB, Dole, McCain, Hillary, Trump) or if they have had issues (Reagan, GHB, Bill, McCain, Hillary)
It seems like a very partisan position to claim that Hillary is getting treated differently than any other recent candidate on health. You may think the questions are unfair but they are not unusual.
-
Hillary's health.
A little slip-up by Bill Clinton, dutifully edited out by the liberal media.
The problem with this election is everyone is lying (more than usual) - Clinton, Trump, the media (both sides)
Liberal journalists have gone full retard trying to take Trump down. You can't be seen to be supporting him if you care about future career prospects. But, of course, Fox have been full retard on Hillary for many years.
NZ is way better - imo
-
@Duluth said in US Election Thread 2016:
@rotated said in US Election Thread 2016:
It seems like a very partisan position to claim that Hillary is getting treated differently than any other recent candidate on health. You may think the questions are unfair but they are not unusual.I am in total agreement - I think you misread what I was getting at. Absolutely aware that McCain released thousands of pages of medical records which pretty much nipped it in the bud.
The key point is Hillary's explanation of pneumonia and downplaying of her condition is being met with more skepticism than it would for other candidates. If McCain had an episode like this his explanation - providing it wasn't completely insane - would have been taken at face value.
Even if Hillary does have pneumonia the average voter can be forgiven for thinking it could be something much worse.
Seems to undermine Trump's point somewhat though. Four years of Trump wouldn't be for many, but a couple of months of Hillary perhaps seems more palatable to the swing voter?!
-
@rotated said in US Election Thread 2016:
The key point is Hillary's explanation of pneumonia and downplaying of her condition is being met with more skepticism than it would for other candidates.
Yeah.... nah. It is being met with scepticism because she just told lie after lie after lie about it... so now any explanation seems rather untrustworthy. Why would anyone believe her latest explanation? I cannot think of a single reason.
US Politics