Author Topic: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.  (Read 28752 times)

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #100 on: October 15, 2016, 06:28:00 PM »
You are making leaps in faith to assert what you say she is thinking (or rather, you are linking to an article to someone citing another author who made an assumption of what Hillary really must have meant). That's not a very strong substantiation of your point - that she once said something ambiguous that someone else asserted really meant something that would help your argument.

I would assert that a more likely indication of what she means on guns is what she says she means to do about guns, as was put into the Democratic Party platform:

Quote
“To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws; repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to revoke the dangerous legal immunity protections gun makers and sellers now enjoy; and keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines (LCAM’s)—off our streets.

Me personally,  I'm more likely to believe what she says in private when she doesn't necessarily know that she's being recorded. Much more so then a statement from her website that has been carefully polished and worded in order to draw in the maximum amount of voters.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #101 on: October 15, 2016, 07:51:18 PM »
Quote
Can't anyone supporting Hillary admit that if the 2nd Amendment is one of your big issues and a deciding factor for your vote that you have to vote for Trump because of it?
If that was THE issue for me.  I might vote for Trump.  Then again, that's A LOT of bad medicine to take for 4-8 years just to secure against a "What If".  Also, do we know anything about Trump's position on gun rights?  I mean, I assume he falls into the republican talking point spectrum on it, but I'm not sure.

Now Hillary MAY be one of those rare anti-gun politicians who WANTS gun control rather than who USE gun control as a tool.  I think she probably is.  She MAY nominate one or more judges who are ALSO actual gun control advocates.  Of those, she MAY even find one who will tell her/us outright how they view 2nd amendment issues during selection.  If they make the bench they MAY choose to hear 2nd amendment cases (likely) and MAY rule the way she/we expect they will.

That's a whole heap of garbage (IMO) to safeguard against a lot of "maybe".  But... seated for life.  So it IS a threat, even if I see it as a small one. 

Oh also, if you are THIS single issue voter, you have to also be willing to leave your heavily defended compound and go somewhere you are almost certainly not permitted to be armed long enough to cast your ballot.   ;D

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #102 on: October 15, 2016, 07:59:51 PM »
Quote
The Supreme Court in Heller, 5 out of 9 justices anyway, said that a city (D.C. specifically) cannot refuse to let you possess a handgun.
That doesn't contradict having commonsense laws controlling how guns are purchased, maintained and which ones are allowed.  We've had laws governing those things for centuries, and as you say a 5-4 SC ruling appears to contradict that.  Remember, it was a 5-4 ruling, not 9-0.  It could easily swing back the other way, and if it does you won't have to give up any of your guns, even if you have 100's stacked up in your basement.

Quote
Me personally,  I'm more likely to believe what she says in private when she doesn't necessarily know that she's being recorded. Much more so then a statement from her website that has been carefully polished and worded in order to draw in the maximum amount of voters.
We can assume that represents what she personally believes, but her website says what her policy position is.  Jimmy Carter said he had no conflict with his personal faith and his public duties.  Good leaders are able to keep these things from interfering; bad leaders -- which include religious conservative politicians and Trump -- can't.

Quote
Also, do we know anything about Trump's position on gun rights?  I mean, I assume he falls into the republican talking point spectrum on it, but I'm not sure.
Anybody who supports Trump has to admit that they don't really know what he actually believes or what position he would take on any particular issue when the time comes to act.  My guess is that he would drift more toward the center if elected, because there are a lot of Congressional votes in the middle.

Quote
That's a whole heap of garbage (IMO) to safeguard against a lot of "maybe".  But... seated for life.  So it IS a threat, even if I see it as a small one. 
Every important issue is loaded with "If"s.  If you want to vote your worst fears, vote Trump; he's guaranteed to scare the bejeezus out of us all if he's in the Oval Office.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #103 on: October 15, 2016, 09:28:51 PM »
Well Trump gave his list of Supreme Court nominees and has promised he will stick to it. The NRA doesn't seem to have a problem with any of them. That's isn't a single issue thing for me but it's huge. Trump is also better on securing the border, not taking in as many refugees from terrorist countries when they can't be vetted. He's pro-police, pro law enforcement, against sanctuary cities, for lower taxes, he wants other countries to shoulder more of the costs of defending themselves. Trump is pro enhanced interrogation / torture which I think is appropriate in some cases especially with terrorists because I think it saves American lives and that's worth making terrorists who purposefully blend in with and target civilians in contravention of the Hague and Geneva conventions uncomfortable. I'd bring Singapore style corporal punishment to regular rapists and murderers let alone terrorists. A vandal in Singapore named Michael Faye gets appropriately caned and we freak out over hurting terrorists who make sex slaves for life out of women they capture? That's just weakness. On just about everything I think of as simple common sense and I believe will be effective Trump is on the right side of the issue. As I also mentioned he is more likely to expose the corruption of Obama while Hillary will surely cover it up. For instance, once he has the NSA at his disposal he can read for himself the emails Hillary deleted and give them to a special counsel for consideration. Hopefully he will purge the federal government of the corrupt officials who targeted conservatives because of their politics. I think Trump will get out of Russia's way in Syria and ISIS will be handled there and I also believe keeping Assad in powerful is preferable to deposing him. Now I see Trump is promising a closer relationship with India which is something I've wanted for a long time too for many reasons not least of which is a counterbalance against Islamofascism. I know all of this puts me firmly in the half of Trump supporters that are all nestled snuggly up in Hillary's big basket of deplorables, but so be it. Realistically people may hate my politics with a vengeance but there's no doubt that anyone who thinks along the same lines as I do has to pick Trump over Hillary without any doubt whatsoever.

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #104 on: October 16, 2016, 02:04:53 AM »
cherry, I totally agree with your last line - if I believed the facts and assumptions that you lay out, I would probably vote for Trump too.

The difference is in the facts and assumptions.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #105 on: October 16, 2016, 12:30:25 PM »
Can you image Trumps responses to someone hacking and release his campaigns email and just what those emails might reveal about his state of mind?

Why hasn't Trump been hacked?

Has Wikileaks ever been hacked? Is Wikileaks neutral?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #106 on: October 16, 2016, 02:31:26 PM »
I heard it's because it's very personal between her and him.

She basically asked why can't we just drone this guy.

Everybody laughed at the time except for her because she wasn't joking.

Not sure if that's true or not but that's what I heard. I can see taking something like Hillary wanting your name added to the Clinton body count list a little personally.

With all the accusations against Trump to my knowledge at least he isn't known for having the people about to testify against him suicided or accidented or straight up just murdered by black ops wet works assassination teams, or maybe it's just one guy they have on retainer. I don't know. But those are the rumors and nothing even remotely like that, for all his faults, swirls around Trump.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #107 on: October 16, 2016, 04:31:44 PM »
On August 11, 1984, United States President Ronald Reagan,
 "My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes."


AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #108 on: October 16, 2016, 04:58:22 PM »
Quote
Everybody laughed at the time except for her because she wasn't joking.
Trump is always joking when he tells mothers to shut up their babies, when he calls on Russia to hack Clinton's emails, when he says 2A supporters should take care of her.  Funny guy, funny guy.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #109 on: October 16, 2016, 05:47:53 PM »
Oh what's that Al you disapprove of Donald Trump and think he's said and done things that are bad? I am absolutely shocked. But hey for a change of pace why don't we stick to the topic at hand instead of shifting to how the opponent/nazi is so much worse?

How do you feel about the reports that Clinton wanted to drone strike Assange?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #110 on: October 16, 2016, 06:00:14 PM »
I'll give y'all everything you say about everybody else if you'll be willing to admit even one thing said about Hillary might have some truth to it.

And the question was posed about what's Assange's problem with Hillary. That was my attempt at an answer. Even if you think she was joking, and even if she actually was just joking, that doesn't mean he thought it was funny. Apparently he's not laughing.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #111 on: October 16, 2016, 06:00:59 PM »
I don't know much about it, other than it was reported by a right-wing blog site, True Pundit, and Snopes says it's unverified.  She denies it (obviously).  Do you think it's true?

Quote
Apparently he's not laughing.
He has been targeting her for years because he feels victimized by her.  I don't blame him, since he's been hiding out in a South American embassy in the heart of London for years to avoid extradition to Sweden on rape charges, and is convinced that if he comes out the US will extradite him here.  Even so, I'm still waiting for Wikileaks to release anything attacking Republicans, *any* Republican.  Not likely to happen, since Wikileaks is obviously anti-Democrat and anti-Liberal.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2016, 06:04:17 PM by AI Wessex »

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #112 on: October 16, 2016, 06:11:07 PM »
I think Assange believes it's true. I think anyone releasing this level of intelligence would naturally be considered an enemy of the state and targeted for termination with extreme prejudice. I believe they were discussing legal and nonlegal remedies to the situation. This wouldn't be the first time someone giving the Clintons a headache experienced some permanent pain relief. She and Trump apparently have at least one thing in common which is a black sense of humor. It's a credible report but we'll almost certainly never know for sure whether or not it's true. But whether she actually said that or not to believe that assassination was never considered as a solution to the Assange problem is just naive.

Added: Maybe he knows his bridges are burned with Hillary but hopes for a chance at a pardon from a President Trump.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2016, 06:17:17 PM by cherrypoptart »

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #113 on: October 16, 2016, 06:31:42 PM »
Yo Cherry I think Hillary is better then Trump but I'm more then willing to say that she too is a *censored*bag, just not on the same level. She may well be the catalyst to being together the disaffected rural voters and the disaffected millenial voters. Against almost any other Republican candidate, she would have been crushed in a landslide.

Also this LOL.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/clinton-staffers-were-disappointed-in-emails-that-san-bernardino-shooter-was-muslim-instead-of-white/

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #114 on: October 16, 2016, 06:35:49 PM »
Awwww man I woke up this morning and that damned gravity kept me from flying like Superman. I sure wish that it had been the weak nuclear force that kept me from flying because the optics would have been *so much better!*

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #115 on: October 16, 2016, 09:00:08 PM »
I think someone needs to hack Wikileaks

I need to know if those in Wikileaks management have ever written incriminating or embarrassing emails... especially ones that I can take out of context to prove what I already know.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #116 on: October 17, 2016, 07:14:06 AM »
"Hillary Clinton Says She Won't Add 'A Penny' To National Debt"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/10/16/hillary-clinton-vows-to-slam-the-economy-into-recession-immediately-upon-election/#111d02926b61

    “When people ask me, ‘So how are you going to pay for infrastructure jobs and paid family leave?’, I say, ‘Well, I’m telling you how I’m paying for everything,” she said at a campaign event in Seattle, drawing a contrast with GOP nominee Donald Trump.

    “I am not going to add a penny to the national debt,” she vowed. “We’re going to go where the money is. We’re going to make the wealthy pay their fair share, and we’re finally going to close those corporate loopholes.”

Is this supposed to be taken as some kind of used car salesman's puffery or does she actually expect ANYONE to believe she won't add even ONE PENNY to the national debt?

I can't believe even her most fervent supporters believe this is even in the realm of possibility to achieve.

As I noted before, Trump has made no such promise that I'm aware of. He's said he will increase the debt and as long as interest rates are this low it makes financial sense to keep borrowing money. I don't agree with him about that being the best approach but I do believe that's what's going to happen anyway no matter who gets into office. At lesat Trump is being honest about it. Is Hillary?

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #117 on: October 17, 2016, 08:28:27 AM »
Cherry, FWIW here is an alternate view from another Forbes contributing writer with a report he wrote for the Tax Policy Institute at the Urban Center and Brookings Institute:
Quote
Two new Tax Policy Center reports quantify the dramatic contrast between the latest tax plans of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Clinton has proposed a significant tax increase on high- income households and businesses. Trump’s plan, while less ambitious than the version he released in 2015, would still largely benefit high-income households and result in a substantial boost in the federal debt.

Trump’s latest plan would reduce federal revenues by $6.2 trillion over the next decade, with nearly half of the tax cuts going to the highest-income one percent of households.  Clinton, by contrast, would boost federal revenue by $1.4 trillion over the next decade, with the bottom 80 percent of households receiving tax cuts and the top one percent paying over 90 percent of the net tax increase.   
Assuming that you are in the bottom 99% along with me, her plan sounds more promising.  Since I am not a tax expert I can't independently confirm what he says, but feel free to do an analysis yourself and let us know if it is flawed.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #118 on: October 17, 2016, 09:43:00 AM »
If she could magically pass her plan, then she probably could do it without adding to the national debt.  The idea that the president can achieve that alone is the fantasy. 

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #119 on: October 17, 2016, 11:30:32 AM »
It's a fantasy if the GOP holds onto the House, but they would fight against the plan tooth and nail even if they end up in the minority.  If the analysis is correct, it will be hard to argue the the 99% should fight it on behalf of the 1%.  I hope we get a chance to find out.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #120 on: October 17, 2016, 04:23:23 PM »
I was just about all set to let this go and then all of a sudden it's on the front page of my internet.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/17/im-sexual-assault-victim-still-supports-trump/

I'm not going to go into it again but it looks like some people consider it a bigger deal than others but also that for probably 99.9% of anyone who finds out about it this is the first they've ever heard of it.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #121 on: October 17, 2016, 04:31:59 PM »
Tape comes out where Trump claims activity broadly regarded as sexual assault.
When questioned, Trump claims it was all talk and not an admission of guilt.
Women come forward calling B.S. saying that it's more than just talk.

How that comes across as choreographed to some or people ask, "why didn't they come forward sooner?", blows my mind.  Some people are (or were at the time) inclined to let this go.  However when someone (allegedly) lies about it to all of America during a debate, doesn't it make sense that could be the last straw?

I've already commented on the Obama video.  I don't know if he was "showing off" or not but the female reporters repeatedly calling for others to get out of the way so they had a better line of sight / camera angle is what stood out most to me.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #122 on: October 17, 2016, 05:27:49 PM »
How that comes across as choreographed to some or people ask, "why didn't they come forward sooner?", blows my mind. 

Well I find the timing odd.  I'm more likely to believe the second waive of people that come forward than the first.  I have no doubt that Hillary had a plan to deal with Trump if he "went there" on Bill, and the only plan that would be effective is a moral equivalence attack.  He "went there" and what did we get?  Moral equivalence attack.

The timing on the first waive is super suspicious to me.  I find it interesting that women would have been assaulted by Trump, who's been a rich and in the public eye for decades, a celebrity for at least a decade and a candidate for at least a year, and these women never saw an opportunity until October surprise time, to bring their claims forward.  Money was there to be had, fame was there to be had, and for the last year damaging his campaign was there to be had, why show up only in October and only in response to his claims?

I thought the NY Times "response" was interesting.  I'd be willing to bet if he does bring suit that they do retract the piece, but not until after the election.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #123 on: October 17, 2016, 06:26:51 PM »
The timing is the only unsurprising thing about it.  He goes on national TV and denies ever sexually assaulting women after a tape is revealed where he claims that he did just that.  The reaction from women he did assault is to speak out after years of keeping the experiences secret either out of shame or because they didn't want to draw attention to themselves.  Can you imagine how painful it can be to say "I was molested" by someone powerful and famous, and for him to respond to ALL of them by calling them liars?

Here is a personal anecdote directly related to this story.  My wife told me the morning after the debate that she had woken up from a dream where an old professor had come to the door of our house and asked to come inside.  He had a reputation for treating his women students poorly, including my wife, who for years afterward would react visibly if we were out somewhere and she saw someone who looked like him.

A few days later she was having coffee with a friend who was the first woman to become a COO at a major hospital chain in our area.  The woman said the 2nd debate brought back a lot of memories of when she was the only woman officer at the hospital; one man who was higher up in the hospital hierarchy would regularly make comments about her figure in meetings.

Though neither of them had been physically abused, I would say they both were survivors.  The women abused by Trump deserve to be acknowledged as survivors rather than challenged as liars or opportunists.  I'll note that Trump categorically believes all of the women he's dredged up who claim that Bill Clinton abused them.  No problem with their stories for him.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #124 on: October 17, 2016, 06:38:32 PM »
I have no doubt that Hillary had a plan to deal with Trump if he "went there" on Bill, and the only plan that would be effective is a moral equivalence attack. 
Why would you think so?  Why, in fact, would Clinton need to respond at all?  The only people likely to react positively to Trump's "attack" are those already pretty much guaranteed to support him.  Maybe he gains by motivating more of them to vote.

But the people on the fence, or the people who don't support Trump already?  They see such a personal attack on Clinton's spouse's actions as just more of the same Trumpian behaviour that would tend to disqualify him as being temperamentally unfit for the presidency.

Any Clinton response would neither affect his true believers, nor would it improve how her supporters think of her; although granted, they might be more motivated to vote, but since Trump has already thrown so much red meat to Clinton's supporters, it's hard to imagine this would go very far to further motivate them.  She really doesn't gain much if anything by reacting to this particular attack.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #125 on: October 17, 2016, 06:58:47 PM »
Just to be clear Seriati, you find the timing of the video release odd, or the reaction to it?  (Women coming forward)

I can agree that the video release was very... conveniently timed.  The accusations seem very natural in light of the video release paired with his denial any of it ever happened.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #126 on: October 17, 2016, 10:16:11 PM »
I'm kind of with the tinfoil hat crowd on that leak. I halfway suspect Trump asked someone to leak it out of fear it was still possible he might win the election(an election I've previously stated I don't believe he wants to win). The way he acts, it would be unsurprising to discover he hadn't fully considered the follow-on impacts it might have to him personally, as he believes he will dodge those by one means or another. (See "I could shoot a man on 5th Avenue...")

I'm not actively following things, getting most of it third or even 4th hand, but when the leakers are his wife, or "close friends" (some of whom still support him?), that sounds more like they were probably acting on orders or requests from Trump himself.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #127 on: October 18, 2016, 09:32:04 AM »
Nothing's too strange to be true this election.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #128 on: October 19, 2016, 04:46:46 PM »
So a very pro-Wikileaks anti-Hillary friend of mine just posted about a story that reads like a conspiracy story (but who knows anymore...) about a HRC tie to a pedophile allegation against Assange as well as an attempt (sorta related?) to get him to take $1m USD "from Russia".  Very strange stuff...

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/assange-clinton-wikileaks-smear/

It looks like a tinfoil hat dispensary site, but I'm not able to click on through stories to confirm that right now.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #129 on: October 19, 2016, 04:54:25 PM »
I've read the same accounts, including from 'Reddit detective' sources who did the math all on their own prior. I haven't vetted any of it so it could be garbage, but then again Reddit detectives do sometimes solve things correctly. The plot to get him to take money is called a 'honeypot' but according to this claim that failed and then they went the route of framing him for pedo instead. Freethoughtproject is, indeed, a fringe site but there can be good content there. It's basically caveat emptor and read carefully without taking anything for granted at sites like that.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #130 on: October 19, 2016, 05:02:10 PM »
That was kinda my determination at a quick glance.  I wanted to preface the link, as to not look like a pervayer of garbage.  :D

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #131 on: October 19, 2016, 05:23:41 PM »
I have no doubt that Hillary had a plan to deal with Trump if he "went there" on Bill, and the only plan that would be effective is a moral equivalence attack. 
Why would you think so?  Why, in fact, would Clinton need to respond at all?  The only people likely to react positively to Trump's "attack" are those already pretty much guaranteed to support him.  Maybe he gains by motivating more of them to vote.

I disagree with that.  I've read more than one analyst speculate about the impact this has on Millennial voters.  Remember a lot of them weren't alive during the allegations about Bill, or were too young to understand.  They have, however, been raised with a completely different set of views on sex and sexuality.  The attacks that were used real time to try and paint the accusers real time as women of questionable morality are super offensive to Millennials that have been raised with a firm belief that sexual history is irrelevant to morality. 

Given party demographics, something that would cause Millenials to not vote, or worse switch votes had to be addressed.  Hence the moral equivalence attack, make it so that the only to defend himself is to accuse women of lying about his sexual advances and you've just killed what could have been a big issue.

Quote
But the people on the fence, or the people who don't support Trump already?

Voter demographics and manipulation has advanced way beyond the idea of "people on the fence" to where there are statistics available to campaigns about dozens of categories of "on the fence" voters and which issues and issue mix matter to them.  For old and already decided voters, you may be correct, the emphasis there is to discourage them.  Nothing discourages a morality voter like making it clear they are choosing between two evils.

Quote
They see such a personal attack on Clinton's spouse's actions as just more of the same Trumpian behaviour that would tend to disqualify him as being temperamentally unfit for the presidency.

Baffling that Trump is engaging in a personal attack, yet Clinton does the same or worse through proxies and no consequence.  There's no question which campaign has tighter controls on message and on which hate and lies they tell, why do you hold the campaign that does less with intent and malice aforethought as the more culpable?

Quote
Any Clinton response would neither affect his true believers, nor would it improve how her supporters think of her; although granted, they might be more motivated to vote, but since Trump has already thrown so much red meat to Clinton's supporters, it's hard to imagine this would go very far to further motivate them.  She really doesn't gain much if anything by reacting to this particular attack.

I'm almost to the point where I don't believe there are Clinton supporters.  Maybe middle age white women, maybe a few other outliers.  Most voters are with Clinton because they are either Democratic block voters, single or primary issue voters or anti-Trump.  I literally only know one person who is excited about voting for Clinton and even he hems and haws trying to justify it, couple that with literally hundreds I knew who were excited about voting for Obama and it's easy to see why this election hasn't been put away at this point (though its darn close).


From D. W.

Quote
Just to be clear Seriati, you find the timing of the video release odd, or the reaction to it?  (Women coming forward)

There's nothing odd about the timing of the release of the video.  This was carefully held and the timing specifically decided upon (no chance there wasn't media collusion to make that happen by the way).

I found it odd that a clump of women popped up specifically at this time to denounce his response, almost like they were primed and ready to do so.  I was pointing out that such accusations would have been treated as credible at any point in this election, so I'm not seeing a reason a woman would have waited to bring them until that exact point.  You'd really have us believe that this was the straw that broke the camel's back for a group of women all at once in an election where Trump has been perceived as anti-woman the entire time?  It's kind of implausible.

And that's discounting the incentive women have had for decades to bring a claim that was credible against someone who is rich and in the public eye to get a settlement, if nothing else.  We're also talking about adult women, not just children, in some cases even women in the press without any reason to protect, in some cases with strong personal dislikes for him and no reason to believe their claims would not have been supported. 

Not saying it didn't happen, just saying the actual way it played out was clearly scripted.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2016, 05:30:25 PM by Seriati »

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #132 on: October 19, 2016, 05:31:16 PM »
 
Quote
I'm almost to the point where I don't believe there are Clinton supporters.  Maybe middle age white women, maybe a few other outliers.  Most voters are with Clinton because they are either Democratic block voters, single or primary issue voters or anti-Trump.  I literally only know one person who is excited about voting for Clinton and even he hems and haws trying to justify it, couple that with literally hundreds I knew who were excited about voting for Obama and it's easy to see why this election hasn't been put away at this point (though its darn close).
well, if you believe that Trump has enthusiastic voters you'll have to explain why voter enthusiasm is higher for her.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #133 on: October 19, 2016, 05:34:44 PM »
AI, I don't think there's any doubt that Trump has a core of enthusiastic voters.  Haven't you complained about how many of his voters are unpersuadable?

He also has a bunch of lesser of two evil voters and single issue voters.  I think Hillary may have hit an all time low on people who are voting for her because they like her.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #134 on: October 19, 2016, 06:05:32 PM »
Quote
I found it odd that a clump of women popped up specifically at this time to denounce his response, almost like they were primed and ready to do so.  I was pointing out that such accusations would have been treated as credible at any point in this election, so I'm not seeing a reason a woman would have waited to bring them until that exact point.  You'd really have us believe that this was the straw that broke the camel's back for a group of women all at once in an election where Trump has been perceived as anti-woman the entire time?  It's kind of implausible.
I find the opposite implausible.  Yes, I believe the video was held in reserve and timed.  But I do honestly believe that it was Trump saying, on a debate that was one of, if not, the most watched ever, “It was only talk.” that would trigger women coming forward. 

I don’t think the thought prior to the debate was, “Wow, this guy is a pig and I need to get my story out there so people know it.”  I think it was outrage at, “How can this man lie about this, with a straight face to the whole nation?”   

I could be way off but that seems far more plausible than having them all queued up and ready to go at the fire of the starting pistol.  What if he owned up to it and apologized instead of denial?  I guess if you believe the accusations are all fabricated that doesn't enter into it and it was a hit job he obviously would deny.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #135 on: October 19, 2016, 06:08:53 PM »
AI, I don't think there's any doubt that Trump has a core of enthusiastic voters.  Haven't you complained about how many of his voters are unpersuadable?

He also has a bunch of lesser of two evil voters and single issue voters.  I think Hillary may have hit an all time low on people who are voting for her because they like her.
Anecdotal polling:
I'd say half of the people I know are disgusted with both but are casting a party line vote.
A quarter are voting against one or the other candidate.
A quarter are voting for, and genuinely like one of the candidates.
Oh, and that one guy I know who is all about talking up Johnson.  :P

I'd say my circle of friends and family are about 2/3 Democrat leaning this election.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #136 on: October 19, 2016, 07:12:37 PM »
AI, I don't think there's any doubt that Trump has a core of enthusiastic voters.  Haven't you complained about how many of his voters are unpersuadable?

He also has a bunch of lesser of two evil voters and single issue voters.  I think Hillary may have hit an all time low on people who are voting for her because they like her.
So, you aren't going to explain why voter enthusiasm is higher for her, which suggests more people actually want to vote for her than want to vote for Trump.  How does that correlate with your assertion that she has hit an all time low of people who like her?

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #137 on: October 19, 2016, 07:50:18 PM »
AI, depends on what you mean by voter enthusiasm.  As used in the media the term is not the same thing as what I was discussing.  Literally it's a measure of how committed people are to voting, it doesn't tell you a thing about whether they are enthusiastic because they love their candidate or because they hate the other guy.  Based on what I've read, feel free to show the data you are referring to by the way, Hillary trailed Trump for most of the election and really only caught up recently.  Her "higher enthusiasm" is almost entirely based on declining enthusiasm by  Trump voters.

None of which is on point to what I said.  Happy to get a real insight into what you mean if you care to explain (no sound bites please).

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #138 on: October 19, 2016, 08:10:43 PM »
Since you began this sub-topic with your candid and confident comment that:
Quote
I think Hillary may have hit an all time low on people who are voting for her because they like her.
...it's incumbent on you to back that up rather than quibble with my empirical measure (here for instance) that says otherwise.

Seriati:
Quote
Hillary trailed Trump for most of the election and really only caught up recently.  Her "higher enthusiasm" is almost entirely based on declining enthusiasm by  Trump voters.
Here you contradict your point and agree that enthusiasm for Trump is now lagging behind that for Clinton.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2016, 08:15:00 PM by AI Wessex »

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #139 on: October 19, 2016, 09:15:18 PM »
Lol, AI, I actually read that article (among others) before I responded to you the first time.  Nothing there contradicts what I said.  If you don't understand a measure like, voter enthusiasm, and what it means don't try and dump that on me.  And to be clear, logically, I didn't contradict myself, "higher" is a relative term, her being higher than Trump is mostly because his voter's enthusiasm has declined.

So again, voter enthusiasm (a measure of whether people are likely to vote), measures a lot more noise than my claim.  Maybe you're one of the outliers that thinks she is a great candidate and would choose her over other Democratic and Republican options.  Based on your history though, I'm inclined to believe you fit into the category of "Democratic" block voter.

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #140 on: October 19, 2016, 09:22:29 PM »
Maybe?  Who is this new person who has Serati's login?   Mod!  Someone find a mod!  :)

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #141 on: October 19, 2016, 11:11:23 PM »
Lol, AI, I actually read that article (among others) before I responded to you the first time.  Nothing there contradicts what I said.  If you don't understand a measure like, voter enthusiasm, and what it means don't try and dump that on me.  And to be clear, logically, I didn't contradict myself, "higher" is a relative term, her being higher than Trump is mostly because his voter's enthusiasm has declined.

So again, voter enthusiasm (a measure of whether people are likely to vote), measures a lot more noise than my claim.  Maybe you're one of the outliers that thinks she is a great candidate and would choose her over other Democratic and Republican options.  Based on your history though, I'm inclined to believe you fit into the category of "Democratic" block voter.
I confess I don't think I understand a word of this, except that I'm a block voter, which I'm not.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #142 on: October 24, 2016, 03:19:41 PM »
Quote
The Clinton campaign Trump file includes headers such as: “Reliance On Chinese Goods”; “Support From White Supremacists”; and “Trump University.” A subsection in a unit on immigration is titled “Conspiracy Theories.” Subsections on Trump’s personal life include notes on “Net Worth,” “Dodging Personal Bankruptcy” and “Comments on Fidelity and Pre-Nuptial Agreements.”

Sorry to quote Fox News for this.  What's fascinating to me is not that the Trump file existed, but that everyone of the items in it came "somehow" to be independently arising media stories, from our neutral main stream media.  I also literally laughed out loud at the internal communications in the Hillary camp about finding something to Swift Boat him.  Given the fake? moral outrage on the left about the horror of Swift Boating a candidate, how to do you square the hypocrisy on that?

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Wikileaks once again delivers what traditional media couldn't/wouldn't.
« Reply #143 on: October 24, 2016, 03:30:14 PM »
Consider that since reality has a well-known liberal bias ;), and given that the media tries to be objective, that translates into a liberal seeming media bias.  Trump today is denouncing polls -- all polls-- that find him trailing Hillary as fraudulent. His tortured logic is that they have an inherent Democratic bias because they oversample Democrats.  Can you spot the flaw in his logic?