Author Topic: October Surprises  (Read 7255 times)

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
October Surprises
« on: October 07, 2016, 09:51:36 PM »
So we have the sexist video of Trump and his tax return

And for Clinton we have the release of o batch (2000+ out of over 50,000 apparently to come) of the Podestra emails (Clinton's campaign manager) - allegedly containing one or more of her speeches; and dirty tricks directed at Sanders.


JoshCrow

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2016, 11:06:31 PM »
At a glance, the Trump thing will have more legs. It's already caused Paul Ryan to disinvite Trump to an event tomorrow, and even Kelly Ayotte (who has called Trump a role model for kids) had to say how offensive the tapes are.

So far, nothing I've read in the Clinton e-mail release comes as a surprise to me. That she's "not in touch" with middle-class folks by her own admission? Seems like she knows it, and we know it, so where's the surprise? Other messaging, like from Podesta, sounds more or less like what I'd expect from a campaign manager - fretting over this or that line or comment... it all seems very ordinary. But what do I know?

One thing is certain - the timing of these two reveals can't be an accident. I also think I'll give the benefit of the doubt to the cybersecurity experts (from multiple companies) who have fingered Russia on the hack. Seems like Russia really wants Trump to win... I wonder why that might be  ::)
« Last Edit: October 07, 2016, 11:08:32 PM by JoshCrow »

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2016, 12:12:12 AM »
My understanding of the Trump vids is it basically consists of him being clothed around a bunch of topless Playboy Playmates. Anyone with a more "European" outlook probably don't see an issue, some new wave feminists will be in an awkward spot on it(but also puts the Hillary Camp in an awkward spot trying to leverage it), old school feminists will hate it, and religious conservatives will hate it.

Trump wasn't likely to get the feminist or "European" voters anyway. Religious conservatives aren't likely to go for Hillary, but it might be enough to get them to stay home instead.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2016, 09:04:11 AM »
It's now the second week of October - when does it start getting too late for those wanting to release damaging information against the candidate they oppose to see the benefits of their attacks fully come to fruition?

Put another way - how late is too late, and when will the last prepared "surprise" likely be released?

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2016, 11:44:32 AM »
I'm not sure there is a mystery to it, rather than opportunities.  Trump hasn't himself revealed anything about Clinton, whereas she probably has a list of things to reveal about him in a steady drip.  As for outside actors other than the legitimate news media, I think it's like watching a hunter looking for an opening to plunge the knife or take the shot. 

There will be more to come, but I also think that there are diminishing returns to repeated exposes against wonk Clinton, but Trump is an endlessly newsworthy celebrity almost as compelling as Kim Kardashian's butt.

Greg Davidson

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2016, 11:59:22 AM »
The Trump video isn't about language, it's about power giving him the right to commit acts of sexual assault.

I suspect that what Trump does is not dissimilar from what President Kennedy did, and those who argue that he is being judged by a different standard are correct. But times have changed over the past 55-60 years. Even 20 years ago in the 1990's, Senator Bob Packwood engaged in essentially the same behavior and had to resign from the Senate.   

The Republican response will be that Bill Clinton did the same, but that's almost definitely not true (his sin appears to an excess of consensual extra-marital sex), and it is completely irrelevant to Hillary Clinton's fitness to be President.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2016, 12:06:41 PM »
AI - Both Clinton and Trump have decades of available history to troll through - and opposing parties have had a year in one case and, again, decades in the other, to find the most damaging evidence.  Barring new fatally damning activities being perpetrated by the candidates in the past few months while under the scrutiny of a presidential election, it is highly likely that the opposing parties have long held all the info they will likely acquire prior to the election.

So the question comes back to what those opposing parties are waiting for - is it still too early to blow one's most damaging attack, and when does it become too late for any particular attack to acquire its maximum effect on the election - especially since early voting has already begun?

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #7 on: October 08, 2016, 12:32:38 PM »
Greg - I don't see this particular statement of Trump's as being significantly different in meaning from when he observed that he could probably get away with shooting somebody in Times Square in broad daylight (from the perspective of losing supporters).

Of course, the context is different - he wasn't running for office at the time, and it wasn't a public statement.

But I don't believe he was claiming back at the time he made the statement that power gave him "the right to commit acts of sexual assault" - I don't think he was even claiming that celebrity (which is what he was discussing at the time) gave him such a right. I believe he was no more condoning sexual assault at the time than he was condoning murder in his Times Square remark - and clearly, he wasn't condoning murder.

Yes, this is more evidence of him being a crude, sexist lightweight, but let's not exaggerate this one particular event - it's already bad enough as simply another brick in the wall that he's been building his whole life.  I suppose as political theatre it works, because the audio so clearly demonstrates what a disgusting person he is to the many people who have been kidding themselves, and managing to ignore that their previously held beliefs are diametrically opposed to the way he has lived his life and the way he continues to act and speak.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #8 on: October 08, 2016, 12:34:07 PM »
It's now the second week of October - when does it start getting too late for those wanting to release damaging information against the candidate they oppose to see the benefits of their attacks fully come to fruition?

Put another way - how late is too late, and when will the last prepared "surprise" likely be released?

Am I the only one that is forgetting that the "October Surprise" is normally a reference to an "ambush release" of damaging information in the days/weeks immediately prior to the election. The release being timed such that the ambushed person is unable to effectively counter it before the voting takes place. This usually means the real "October Surprise" happens within 2 weeks of election day, preferably within 1 week if possible. (This year being an outlier because November 1st is on a Tuesday, making most of the window for such a surprise actually lie in November instead as voting will happen on the 8th instead)

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #9 on: October 08, 2016, 01:02:59 PM »
TheDaemon: Yes, I think you may be the only one forgetting that :)

Any such ambush does not immediately see its effects manifest.  There is often a certain amount of analysis that goes on, followed by partisan hackery, and throughout that process and afterwards, there requires time for people to become aware of the attack and to internalize the knowledge that they acquire.

Wait too long, and the full attack may not have time to ripen.  Also, given that advanced voting has already begun in some battleground states, it's already too late for any future attack to affect the votes already cast.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #10 on: October 08, 2016, 02:12:54 PM »
TD: I would also observe that the timing of any particular 'surprise' might be more tactical than a direct, swing for the cheap seats election day attack; I'm not saying that the recent Trump video/audio release being discussed was strategically timed, as there have been reasons put forth for why the release occurred yesterday as opposed to next week, and they seem to be related to competitive media pressures... but putting out this video 2 days prior to the second debate, a debate wherein Trump pretty much had to turn around his whole campaign; well, it makes Trump's job of recovering and even making up ground on Sunday night now almost impossible.

Whereas putting it out two days before the election would have likely limited its effect on the election significantly.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #11 on: October 08, 2016, 02:24:46 PM »
Quote
Whereas putting it out two days before the election would have likely limited its effect on the election significantly.
I agree, but I'll note that the report was put out by the media (Washington Post), not by Clinton's campaign.  The Post has been extremely vocal about their hostility to Trump since day one and has repeatedly and regularly unearthed and published unflattering stories from his past and been clear in their opposition to his campaign.  It will be seen by some Republicans and especially Trump supporters as a partisan attack, but if they have their facts straight they can't be criticized for the content of their articles.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #12 on: October 08, 2016, 03:51:03 PM »
I don't think anybody is suggesting that the Trump/Access Hollywood recordings originated from, or were even somehow triggered by, the Clinton campaign.

No more than the Russian email hacking and email releases was directed by the Trump campaign.

People outside the campaigns do have their own motives for making material public, and those motives can be independent of, or complementary to, any desired effect on the election.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #13 on: October 08, 2016, 04:44:01 PM »
If the media has damaging information on Hillary would they withhold it?

Examples would include video of her stating that the Supreme Court got the Heller decision wrong and in another speech that she wants open borders.

If our media had that info would they keep it secret? Perhaps they even did have it, or they have other things just as truthful and just as damaging that they intend to hold onto in perpetuity.

Does it take Russian hackers to do our media's job because they just flatly refuse?

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #14 on: October 08, 2016, 04:55:59 PM »
If the media have video of Trump's sex tape with Giulliani, or of his KKK membership card, or the recording of him confessing to the New York Central Park 5 attack, would they keep those secret?  If so, why haven't they released those yet?

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #15 on: October 08, 2016, 06:25:11 PM »
Uh... well... I'm just going to go ahead and take that as a no, you don't think the media would ever cover for Hillary.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2016, 10:00:44 PM »
Uh... well... I'm just going to go ahead and take that as a no, you don't think the media would ever cover for Hillary.
I think the media has gone after Clinton, but unfortunately can't find enough to make her look as pathetic as Trump.  Let's also not forget that she's been the target of many, many Republican investigations whose purpose was solely to find fault or criminal activity by her, and they pretty much failed.  Simply reporting that she is a Democrat and therefore has evil intent is the domain of FOX, Breitbart, Drudge and other media concerns.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2016, 07:14:26 PM »
Quote
If the media has damaging information on Hillary would they withhold it?

Examples would include video of her stating that the Supreme Court got the Heller decision wrong and in another speech that she wants open borders.

What do you consider the media, cherry?  What do you consider "withholding?"

The Washing Post reported that Hillary stated that the Supreme Court got the Heller decision wrong on June 6.

And The Washington Times reported yesterday that Hillary "dreams of a “common market with open trade and open borders,” saying that economic opportunity in the U.S. would grow as a result", per the latest Wikileaks leak.  (A position that the Republican party agreed with until recently, IIRC.)

So these topics have been discussed in the media.

Or do you mean that they haven't been discussed as much as you think they should be?  Probably.  But editorial boards don't always agree with individuals on what is the most important news of the day.

So maybe it hasn't been blazoned in the headlines as you'd like.  But a quick internet search shows these stories haven't been "withheld."

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2016, 08:55:57 PM »
Discussing the stories is much different than breaking them.

They broke the story on Trump's tax returns but for the Hillary stories they are just repeating what wikileaks already revealed for which they deserve no kudos.

And it doesn't seem like the law should be holding them back since whoever released Trump's tax returns certainly broke it.

When they break a story on Hillary then I'll be impressed.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #19 on: October 10, 2016, 12:43:38 AM »
cherry,

the tax returns are speculated to be released by his wife, and thus a joint tax return, and thus no law broken to release them.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2016, 11:08:51 AM »
Quote
They broke the story on Trump's tax returns but for the Hillary stories they are just repeating what wikileaks already revealed for which they deserve no kudos.

It's hard to break something when you don't have it, cherry. :)  Until someone had those e-mails, there was nothing to either break or withhold.

But don't worry, cherry.  If it makes news (which today means garners attention or ratings), they'll break it.  The MSM is beholden to no one but their bottom line.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #21 on: October 10, 2016, 12:48:32 PM »
But don't worry, cherry.  If it makes news (which today means garners attention or ratings), they'll break it.  The MSM is beholden to no one but their bottom line.

That is not really right. They are motivated by the bottom line, but are beholden to whatever instructions they receive from the CEO and the board, who in turn are beholden to the principle shareholders. That may sound like a technical quibble, but it is very different to suggest that a news station will do whatever makes the most money, from suggesting that they will simply do whatever they're told to do by the owners, which may include strategies to make the most money.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2016, 03:35:50 PM »
Well, primarily are strategies to make the most money, but point taken. :)

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2016, 04:18:59 PM »
Other than Rupert Murdock's media companies, I think journalists try to avoid illegally hacking computer systems. So it isn't really a surprise that Wikileaks gets these first, is it, and that they would be the ones to break such information?

As far as bottom line, I agree that companies often don't do what is in the best interest of profitability. The board and CEO will care about company principles, reputation, and perception. News organizations have withheld stories in the past that could have sold copy. Drone base reports were withheld at the request of the government. Government censorship always comes with a cloak of "you're a traitor if you would print this".

Organizations also walk a line of when to make allegations that are not fully proven. Possibly only to avoid being sued for libel, but also I would think sometimes with a genuine respect for not destroying someone's life with something not well founded.

In the Trump case, however, I don't see them waiting on breaking any bad news about him. If they had had it sooner, they would have run with it. Similarly with the tax returns. Now, as to whether the timing was deliberate on the part of whomever made these available, I absolutely think it was. Someone was holding the Trump tapes - it may have been the Democrats, establishment republicans, or someone with a personal axe to grind. Naturally WaPo is not letting on who got them the tapes. If the Republicans had it, they would likely have used it in the primaries, so they either found it later or not at all. If you want to get really wild, there are those who speculate Trump doesn't really want to be President, so he might be trickling out dirt on himself. :)

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #24 on: October 11, 2016, 09:33:41 AM »
Oops - and now we have Donald Trump probably quoting a Russian 'news agency' article that misattributes a Kurt Eichenwald article, claiming that Eichenwald's statements about Benghazi were actually written by Sydney Blumenthal - which would be pertinent because the words would then suggest that Blumenthal (a close confidant and advisor to Sec. Clinton) believed that the Benghazi attack was preventable.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/10/11/kurt-eichenwald-benghazi-article-russia-donald-trump-intv-newday.cnn

It turns out that Blumenthal embedded an article written by Eichenwald in an email that he sent out to John Podesta at the time - the article clearly being the words of Eichenwald, and easily distinguishable from Blumenthal's words in the email (as Eichenwald mentions in the interview linked above, "it says Newsweek-Newsweek-Newsweek, time and time again."

I say Trump probably got it from Russian propaganda, but it is possible that he (or one of his sources) independently came up with the same misrepresentation.  I'm not sure which is better. Or whether this will be enough to distract from his statements concerning celebrity sexual assault.

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #25 on: October 11, 2016, 10:02:58 AM »
How many people here have would allow their children to get away with their excusing bad behavior by pointing a finger at someone else’s behavior.

Who would take serious a person who has no issue with lying accusing others of lying?

When you can’t see your own shadow bad things happen.   

D.W.

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2016, 10:05:33 AM »
I've had that same thought multiple times.  Actually it was, "Wow, I guess these people didn't grow up with siblings..."

<Rocky the squirrel> That trick never works.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2016, 10:07:28 AM »
I wonder how long it was before the "news agency" took the article down? 5 minutes or 5 hours make a big difference in how likely it is Trump's people would see it before it disappeared.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #28 on: October 11, 2016, 11:06:16 AM »
I think Trump happily takes any tidbit of misinformation that he thinks makes Clinton smell bad and has no concern about whether it contains even a grain of truth.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #29 on: October 11, 2016, 11:33:06 AM »
NH, apparently, portions of the 'article' were retweeted and went somewhat viral over the course of the day, so it is more likely somebody saw it on Twitter.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: October Surprises
« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2016, 11:34:45 AM »
That's reassuring.

Which is incredibly depressing.