You're openly campaigning? Sure!
September 5, 2016 2:20 PM   Subscribe

As the polls (slightly) tightened, Donald Trump surprised everyone by visiting the President of Mexico. While this appeared to signal a long-awaited pivot, Trump pivoted right back with a scathing immigration speech hours later. Trump's surrogates have followed suit, tweeting cartoons of Hillary in blackface and warning of taco trucks on every corner. Later in the week, Trump appealed to to the black community by visiting an African-American church.

Hillary Clinton had a quieter schedule, speaking to the American Legion (something Trump also did.) Her email controversy continues with the State department releasing 30 more emails referencing Benghazi. The press continued its quest to find something wrong with the Clinton Foundation, while Trump's payments to state AGs that were investigating Trump University found little traction.

Looking ahead, the first Commander in Chief Forum will be held Wednesday. Further downstream, the 2016 debate moderators have been announced, while Hillary looks to field an Obama surprise.

lampshade's voter resource roundup:
-----
U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Resources for Voters (eac.gov)
-----
Can I Vote? National Association of Secretaries of State (canivote.org)
-----
Student Voting Guide - Brennan Center for Justice (brennancenter.org)
-----
Campus Vote Project (campusvoteproject.org)
-----
Voting and Elections - Find answers to common questions about voting in the US. (usa.gov)
-----
Early Voting Calendar (vote.org)
-----
Absentee and Early Voting - National Conference of State Legislatures (ncsl.org)
-----
Federal Voting Assistance Program (fvap.gov)
-----
Vote From Abroad Dot Org (votefromabroad.org)
-----
How to Vote in Every State (YouTube Channel | URL links on right side of page)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker (3373 comments total) 100 users marked this as a favorite
 
This election: honestly, it's kind of draining.
posted by lunasol at 2:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [99 favorites]


WaPo: Trump, dismissing allegations of impropriety, says donation to Fla. AG came with no strings
“I never spoke to her, first of all; she’s a fine person beyond reproach. I never even spoke to her about it at all. She’s a fine person. Never spoken to her about it. Never,” Trump said Monday while speaking to reporters in Ohio. “Many of the attorney generals turned that case down because I’ll win that case in court. Many turned that down. I never spoke to her.”[...]

Asked by reporters what he expected to receive in return for his donation, Trump said that he and Bondi have known each other for years.

“I have a lot of respect for her. Never spoke to her about that at all. I just have a lot of respect for her and she’s very popular,” he said.

Trump's assertion contradicts statements made to the Associated Press by Marc Reichelderfer — who worked as a consultant on Bondi's reelection effort — that suggested Bondi spoke with Trump and solicited the donation directly. Reichelderfer told the AP at the time that Bondi had not been aware of the complaints against Trump University when she solicited the contribution.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 2:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


Speaking with my friends Saturday night, we were all excited with the prospect of a taco truck on our corners. Finally, some fresh pico in this town!
posted by Thorzdad at 2:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [28 favorites]


Re: Obama surprise -- I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what a President with a fair amount of net-positive popular opinion in his last few months of office can do on the campaign trail for his successor-candidate. We haven't seen anything like this in what, 80 years? A century?
posted by tclark at 2:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


He just lies, reflexively, even when he doesn't have to. I know people like that. I try to stay away from them. I hope I can continue that.
posted by Etrigan at 2:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [42 favorites]


New talking point from the right, regarding Hillary's health - apparently she had a coughing fit at the beginning of her Labor Day speech in Cleveland today. There's a video but I don't want to link to the Daily Mail or similar.
posted by stolyarova at 2:27 PM on September 5, 2016


Not using Bill Clinton more (for fear of getting jizz on the priggy churchy parts of the Gore/Lieberman campaign, I think) was a huge error in 2000.
posted by thelonius at 2:28 PM on September 5, 2016 [18 favorites]


Speaking of surprises, I've been thinking lately about an October Surprise, which is something people always start worrying about this time of year, but I kind of wonder if that's even a thing anymore (if it ever was), what with early voting, and with there being such a small number of true undecideds these days.
posted by lunasol at 2:29 PM on September 5, 2016


Kevin Cirilli: CLEVELAND -- TRUMP on Clinton: "Does she look presidential, fellas? Give me a break."

"fellas" Yeah let me translate that for you: "Hey guys we don't want no stinky girls in our sekrit club house, right?"
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 2:31 PM on September 5, 2016 [45 favorites]


Canada will gladly take any and all excess taco trucks!
posted by ssg at 2:32 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


AV Club has an article about Trump's youth outreach with #millennialsforTrump. I don't know much about his sons, but those are two incredibly punchable faces that radiate smugness (Ivanka, however, looks perfectly pleasant).
posted by AlonzoMosleyFBI at 2:32 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]




There's a video but I don't want to link to the Daily Mail or similar.

Here it is.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 2:36 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


I still kinda think this thread shoulda been titled "You Have Invented A New Kind Of Stupid"
posted by Itaxpica at 2:37 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


And also Bondi's spokesperson said she personally asked Trump for the donation back when this first broke. - TPM
posted by chris24 at 2:37 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


The conspiracy theories that continue to swirl around Hillary's emails and the Clinton Foundation really lay bare how partisan these conversation are. Not only did the story about Trump's habit of giving large campaign donations to state AG's who stopped investigating Trump U (again, why is this even an elected position?) not get any traction, but the fact that Trump's daughter took an Eastern European vacation with Putin's girlfriend is literally the kind of thing that the /conspiracy crowd is convinced happens all the time. Yet, crickets.
posted by thecjm at 2:38 PM on September 5, 2016 [69 favorites]


I'm incredibly disappointed at the lack of coverage of the Trump AG payoffs. I think it deserves more scrutiny than the Clinton foundation, but I'd settle for equal time.
posted by humanfont at 2:39 PM on September 5, 2016 [21 favorites]


"You Have Invented A New Kind Of Stupid"

Dems: I'm With Her

Reps: I'm With Stupid
posted by adept256 at 2:39 PM on September 5, 2016 [40 favorites]


homunculus, that's hilarious! It's brand new, though - this is part of it, the only video I could find that wasn't from Right Side Broadcasting or some other horrible alt-right source.
posted by stolyarova at 2:41 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


The conspiracy theories that continue to swirl around Hillary's emails and the Clinton Foundation really lay bare how partisan these conversation are.

Yeah, I have to admit to being genuinely appaled at how hard all the media have been on Clinton, and pretty-much kid-gloves with Trump. I mean, the guy was in high-bucks real estate in NY and NJ. Tell me with a straight face there aren't warehouses full of skeletons just sitting there, waiting to be opened. And, yet...nada.
posted by Thorzdad at 2:43 PM on September 5, 2016 [15 favorites]


Sopan Deb: Trump on what could stop him from debating: "Hurricanes, natural disaster. No, I expect to do all three."

He said he looks forward to the debates, "I think you have an obligation to do the debates."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 2:45 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, honestly, for some of us, the Clinton email stuff is actually a pretty big deal. In any other year, I'd be urging people to fight her pretty hard. But at this point, I'd rather the person who disingenuously claims that she had no idea "C" was a classification than the person who will literally set fire to America to watch it burn.
posted by corb at 2:45 PM on September 5, 2016 [13 favorites]


Not using Bill Clinton more (for fear of getting jizz on the priggy churchy parts of the Gore/Lieberman campaign, I think) was a huge error in 2000.

Lieberman was the first "Democrat" to shit on Clinton. I don't think it was quite an error but a state of mutual disdain.
posted by Talez at 2:47 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


"Hurricanes, natural disaster. No, I expect to do all three."

What was that third one you'd do again?
posted by adept256 at 2:48 PM on September 5, 2016 [27 favorites]


Trump appealed to to the black community by visiting an African-American church.

which I would guess was basically an insult given that church is one of those tele-evangelist shops selling Prosperity Gospel BS.

The Fraud is strong with this one.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 2:48 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Hmmm....this native Angelena would prefer tamale trucks.

FWIW, there already is a wall.
posted by brujita at 2:49 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


the Clinton email stuff is actually a pretty big deal

not to me. totally a shruggola thing.

http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/01/22/infiltration_of_files_seen_as_extensive/
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 2:50 PM on September 5, 2016 [14 favorites]


Yeah, I have to admit to being genuinely appaled at how hard all the media have been on Clinton, and pretty-much kid-gloves with Trump. I mean, the guy was in high-bucks real estate in NY and NJ. Tell me with a straight face there aren't warehouses full of skeletons just sitting there, waiting to be opened. And, yet...nada.

The argument that most editors have is that saying "Trump is corrupt and here's the proof" is basically a "dog bites man" story.

To a point they're right. Everyone who cares already isn't voting for him and those who think he's the savior of Western white civilization don't give a shit and think the end firmly justifies the means.
posted by Talez at 2:50 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


"Hurricanes, natural disaster. No, I expect to do all three."

What was that third one you'd do again?


There are three scheduled debates.
posted by Sys Rq at 2:53 PM on September 5, 2016


Plus if I were running a media enterprise I would pray for a Trump Presidency with all my heart.

No news is bad news if you're running a news organization. This is what CNN learned from the first Gulf War. 1990-91, people love watching dramatic TV.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 2:54 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Kevin Cirilli: CLEVELAND -- TRUMP on Clinton: "Does she look presidential, fellas? Give me a break."

Yes. Yes she does.

Next question?
posted by dersins at 2:54 PM on September 5, 2016 [22 favorites]


Bike riding out in rural Oregon this weekend, I came across a gigantic hand-made sign that said:
HILLARY: Too Big to Jail?

And saw my first ever trump-pence lawn sign. Kinda out in the middle of nowhere, and will make no difference at all...
posted by kaibutsu at 2:55 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


the Clinton email stuff is actually a pretty big deal

Yeah, not to me at all either. I'd say most reasonable evaluations of the full FBI release conclude it pretty much exonerates her. If you want to be pissed at someone from it. Powell looks worse in it.
posted by chris24 at 2:55 PM on September 5, 2016 [70 favorites]


Yay! *makes New Thread Angel*

the person who disingenuously claims that she had no idea "C" was a classification

I admit to skipping a lot of those bigly articles, is there a readily-available cite for that?
posted by petebest at 2:56 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


is there a readily-available cite for that?

no because it's not true
posted by stolyarova at 2:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [33 favorites]


There are three scheduled debates.

The joke is that adept256 deliberately misunderstood hurricanes and natural disasters to be the first two items in a three-item list representing Trump's general rhetorical presence as a catastrophe.

posted by cortex at 2:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [56 favorites]


This still pisses me off:
Fox's Chris Wallace, moderator for the October 19th debate in Las Vegas, won't bother with whether or not candidates are making shit up:
“What do you do if they make assertions that you know to be untrue?”

That’s not my job,” Wallace replied, without skipping a beat. “It’s not my job to be a truth squad.”

posted by cashman at 4:19 PM on September 5
The Politifact scorecard for Trump is
True/Mostly True: 15%
Half True: 15%
Mostly False/False/Pants on Fire: 70%

Clinton is (respectively)
50%
22%
27%
posted by TWinbrook8 at 2:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [21 favorites]


I just posted a link to the Washington Post article on Trump and the Florida AG in the comments on a post to the NEW YORK TIMES Facebook page, with the note that "perhaps your reporters would like a reminder of what proper journalism looks like."
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [66 favorites]


WaPo Unpacking Donald Trump’s history with this fall’s debate moderators
But [Martha] Raddatz absolutely grilled Trump last summer in his first interview after saying Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is "not a war hero." She also confronted Trump about his rhetoric, in general.

"There seems to be a pattern, Mr. Trump," Raddatz said. "When you're criticized or attacked, you often respond with name-calling, using terms like 'dummy,' 'loser,' 'total losers' on Twitter and elsewhere. You even demean some people's physical appearance. Is that something you would continue doing if you were president? Isn't that language beneath the office of the president?"
Funny how they don't have to unpack Clinton's history with the moderators. Oh yeah. That's because she doesn't pick fights or hold grudges.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 2:59 PM on September 5, 2016 [25 favorites]


Thorzdad: Speaking with my friends Saturday night, we were all excited with the prospect of a taco truck on our corners.

After talking about taco trucks on every corner with other folks, I realized I need a plan on this. See, we have some funky road layouts here, where one house can be on two corners, with a normal suburban size lot (1/8th of an acre, probably), plus there are some weird loop streets. On the other end, you have Phoenix, where the blocks are a frickin' mile long on some sides, long enough that you can get a sunburn on half of your face by walking the entire length of a block (I speak from experience).

Do we get a taco truck on every corner, or is it really more like one every quarter or half mile? I'd like to see the candidate's plans implementing this.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:01 PM on September 5, 2016 [12 favorites]


Given the vast number of emails Hillary has sent me, it's not that surprising anymore that she may have overlooked one or two that should've been more classified than they were.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 3:01 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


So have we all made our bets on which one Trunp will think is the skippable one?
posted by Artw at 3:02 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Joy Reid's panel is eviscerating Chris Wallace rn
posted by schadenfrau at 3:04 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


I was pretty immersed in covering corporate network security at the time the whole Clinton email system was in operation - going to conferences, reviewing products and practices, writing up developments and what have you. I don't see what she did as being in any way significantly different than standard practice then; in fact, I think she probably took a more responsible path in the advice she took and the way she set things up than many CEOs at the time, even taking into account that she had more responsibility because of the classified aspects of her job and her communications.

Not perfect, no, and with more resources and willingness from her three-letter IT guys it could have been done better. But what she did and what happened as a result in no way justifies the intensity and negativeness of the spin put on it by the GOP and the media.

It just doesn't.
posted by Devonian at 3:04 PM on September 5, 2016 [66 favorites]


I would like to share with everyone that Dinild Trimp has followed me on Twitter, and is following me around and tweeting things like this at me when appropriate (yes, those are my cats). I don't know if I love him or am terrified by him or both.

MAKE AGAIN make
posted by stolyarova at 3:04 PM on September 5, 2016 [31 favorites]


I'll pick apart the report from computer later today. My basic read on the Clinton email stuff is:

Clinton displays a lot of ignorance around basic classification security protocols that I, as someone at a much, much lower rank and level of responsibility, could have reasonably expected my junior soldiers to do better than. She has always struck me as an extremely competent person; I am having to re-evaluate that, in light of the disclosures. Either she was competently aware of the rules and chose to ignore them because she thought they were petty (strikes me as probable) or she was unaware of shit that even the most junior guys would be told before entering a SCIF, thus her competency is in question (strikes me as improbable, she seems a smart lady).

It also seems that people on her team did not feel comfortable checking the SecState, and so she didn't often get challenged on her abysmal security procedures. But that's no excuse for someone on her level not knowing them.
posted by corb at 3:05 PM on September 5, 2016 [14 favorites]


But what she did and what happened as a result in no way justifies the intensity and negativeness of the spin put on it by the GOP and the media.

It just doesn't.


But she's a woman. She needs to be beyond reproach and unimpeachable to hold elected office. The man can have multiple wives, sex scandals, bankruptcies, and cheated people, but a woman? WHO HAS CLINTON MURDERED ON HER WAY TO THE TOP?
posted by Talez at 3:06 PM on September 5, 2016 [29 favorites]


As far as the Clinton Foundation thing goes, I think it's fairly obvious that there was a pay for access deal in place, perhaps not directly with Clinton demanding it, but her staffers certainly routed people who had donated to the Clinton foundation her way.

This is nothing new of course. Politicians often directly solicit campaign contributions on the promise of access, soliciting donations to a charity is, if anything, somewhat better than the normal political routine of auctioning off their time to the person who gives the most to their reelection fund.

I don't like it, even though the Clinton Foundation does good things. Payment for access means that the only viewpoints the politician hears are the viewpoints of those rich enough to pay for access, and that's going to unavoidably distort and shape the politician's positions.

But it's universal in American politics, and in that context I suppose I'd rather see some rich fucker give a billion to a charity in order to bend Clinton's ear for an hour than see them make a smaller campaign contribution bribe for the same privilege.

I'm not happy with it, and I do think it's a legitimate problem. But it isn't as if, literally, every single other politician in the USA doesn't do the same thing only without any charitable benefit. And 86% of Clinton Foundation money goes to real charity, which is pretty good for a charity.

Still don't really like it. Rich people playing rich people games does not endear me to Clinton. But I can't see it as some huge awful major scandal.

Heywood Mogroot III which I would guess was basically an insult given that church is one of those tele-evangelist shops selling Prosperity Gospel BS.

I think that Trump feels most comfortable around other blatant con artists. He seems to have the opinion that everyone is a fraud, everyone is running a con, so I suppose when he's in the company of people who aren't he feels nervous because he can't figure out what the con is. While with the prosperity gospel types the con is obvious enough that even Trump can figure it out right away.
posted by sotonohito at 3:07 PM on September 5, 2016 [20 favorites]


Report from Republican leaning family members who are hesitantly on Team Hillary: she looks like she as a terrible memory, regarding an interview with (the FBI? I'm not sure), where she says she doesn't recall what she did a number of times. To them, it sounds like she has a terrible memory.

From this vague (non)story, it sounds like she's a busy person who doesn't recall everything she did or didn't do at work.

I still don't think they'll vote for Donny.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:08 PM on September 5, 2016


So have we all made our bets on which one Trunp will think is the skippable one?

Town hall meeting format. Though the questioners are going to be drawn from the narrow and brackish pool that is Independent Swing Undecided Voters (or people who say they're undecided) it's the one where he has more limited capacity to bully the moderator, even if it gives more room to act like a snake oil peddler to Doris from Wapakoneta.
posted by holgate at 3:10 PM on September 5, 2016


Either she was competently aware of the rules and chose to ignore them because she thought they were petty

I just think she wanted a private, secure channel to communicate with her minions.

And couldn't really get that from the existing government resources, given how the government is wired, literally and figuratively.
posted by Heywood Mogroot III at 3:11 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


Still don't really like it. Rich people playing rich people games does not endear me to Clinton. But I can't see it as some huge awful major scandal.

And yet you have spoken over 250 words about this non-scandal, and barely 50 about Trump - none of which about any even worse scandals on his part. Does that not strike you as profoundly odd?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:11 PM on September 5, 2016 [58 favorites]


As far as the Clinton Foundation thing goes, I think it's fairly obvious that there was a pay for access deal in place, perhaps not directly with Clinton demanding it, but her staffers certainly routed people who had donated to the Clinton foundation her way.

I'd love to read more about that. Do you have a link that documents the Clinton Foundation staff routing donors to Clinton? The only ones I'm aware of had Abedin actually blocking the donors who were asking for that kind of pay for play.
posted by one_bean at 3:13 PM on September 5, 2016 [53 favorites]


We talk about Clinton because we have reason to expect better of her. We have no reason to expect anything better than being a flaming fascist of Trump.
posted by corb at 3:13 PM on September 5, 2016 [22 favorites]


I think it's fairly obvious that there was a pay for access deal in place

Funny, because all the newspapers digging haven't been able to find anything. But I'm sure people's feelings are a better indication.
posted by chris24 at 3:15 PM on September 5, 2016 [93 favorites]


We talk about Clinton because we have reason to expect better of her. We have no reason to expect anything better than being a flaming fascist of Trump.

The less attention there is put upon Trump's genuine scandals, the greater the danger of enough people remaining uninformed of them and voting for him because "I dunno, there's all this talk about Hillary and emails and stuff, at least Trump's honest."
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:16 PM on September 5, 2016 [106 favorites]


corb My position on Clinton's email and "classified" information has always been that a) it was the same exact thing Colin Powell did so therefore people throwing a fit about Clinton doing it when they didn't care that Powell did it have a motive other than security, and b) I don't really care in the slightest anyway.

The USA has the most incredibly foolish, pointless, woefully overused secrecy mechanism I can imagine a supposedly free nation having. The US government has apparently adopted the position that, by default, anything it does should be kept secret, and that a case must be made for something to be public. This goes 100% against my position that by default everything the government does should be assumed public and that a special case must be made for making something (very briefly) secret.

The Snowden leaks showed the sort of petty bullshit the US government was considering to be top secret.

Given that, I really don't care if Clinton violated the secrecy rules. I'd rather she had challenged their blatant and obvious foolishness and abuse, but simply ignoring the rules when they got in the way of doing her job was, to me, tolerable simply because the rules are so bad.

I'm absolutely certain she knew perfectly well what all the rules were, she's smart and she's a wonk and she's lying about being confused. Seems to be a fairly normative and inconsequential political lie to me.
posted by sotonohito at 3:16 PM on September 5, 2016 [24 favorites]


Plus if I were running a media enterprise I would pray for a Trump Presidency with all my heart.

No news is bad news if you're running a news organization. This is what CNN learned from the first Gulf War. 1990-91, people love watching dramatic TV.


I mean, sure, but aren't we already guaranteed endless hearings (at least in the House) and "scandals" if Clinton's elected?
posted by HumuloneRanger at 3:17 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


The Taco Truck Meme has made this election almost fun for me. It's so silly and so telling. Really, Hillary should just repaint the campaign bus. If she came back to Maine, which she won't, I'd totally hire a taco truck.
posted by theora55 at 3:17 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]




I mean, sure, but aren't we already guaranteed endless hearings (at least in the House) and "scandals" if Clinton's elected?
WW3 is likely to be more photogenic than congressional hearings.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:19 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


I still can't believe Trump is in the running. I keep expecting to sober up. I really think 2016 is the year where the writers went on strike, and the network brought on a bunch of stoned college kids to do the last few episodes.
posted by mrjohnmuller at 3:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [12 favorites]


I think at this point, everyone typing the word "email" in this thread should be required to attest that they have already read the following:

1. 14 Excerpts From the FBI's Report on Hillary Clinton's Email
2. A Quick Follow-up on Hillary Clinton's Email

and that they have something further to say that isn't already covered by:

"If that's your case against Hillary—one trivial email over four years that shouldn't have been sent—then go to town with it. The rest of us will spend our time on stuff that matters."
posted by RedOrGreen at 3:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [135 favorites]


The less attention there is put upon Trump's genuine scandals, the greater the danger of enough people remaining uninformed of them and voting for him because "I dunno, there's all this talk about Hillary and emails and stuff, at least Trump's honest."

That's a perfectly fair criticism of the media. But to me, at least, it doesn't seem like a fair criticism of people in this comment thread.
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 3:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


And yet you have spoken over 250 words about this non-scandal, and barely 50 about Trump - none of which about any even worse scandals on his part. Does that not strike you as profoundly odd?

No, it's not odd, because as Clinton is the only actual serious candidate in the race, it seriously makes sense to give her serious critique. Why the fuck would I waste my breath on the fucking trainwreck that is Donald Trump?

The less attention there is put upon Trump's genuine scandals, the greater the danger of enough people remaining uninformed of them and voting for him because "I dunno, there's all this talk about Hillary and emails and stuff, at least Trump's honest."

I hate to break it to you, but the kind of people who can be taken in by a con-man like Trump generally can't be reasoned with. You can really try if you want, but ignoring the things that they have issue with when it comes to Clinton isn't going to suddenly make them trust her.

I don't think me or others being willing to take Clinton to task because we actually want to hold our politicians feet to the fire to get the kind of politics we want, not what her biggest donors want, is unreasonable, especially when it's taking place in such a pro-Clinton echo-chamber such as Metafilter. (No offense fellow MeFites, but it distresses me how much legitimate criticism is just brushed away here because "Trump is worse!" We all know he is, so why does it mean we can't discuss Clinton's faults?)
posted by deadaluspark at 3:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [12 favorites]


"Plus if I were running a media enterprise [and had no concern for the future of humanity, just my immediate revenue stream] I would pray for a Trump Presidency with all my heart."

I envy your ignorance of Fox News.
posted by adept256 at 3:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


EmpressCallipygos Not especially. My position on Trump is that he's the very definition of the worst possible type of human being, a vile person in all respects, manifestly unsuited to be President, and dangerous in both his randomly shifting wild pulled out of his ass positions and his naked racism, xenophobia, homophobia, and misogyny. He's your bog standard Republican, except that he says the soft parts loud and he's dumber, has thinner skin, and is a more frat boy asshole than the average.

There's not much to say except "ZOMG I hate him so much and the latest examples of his assholery reaffirm my position."

With Clinton there's more to talk about because there's more there. She's a real candidate with real positions and with whom I have some real disagreements. Trump is someone I disagree with very close to 100%, and I personally loathe. I can only say "I really hate that motherfucking Trump asshole" so many times before it gets boring, you know?

Clinton I agree with about 80% of the time, and that remaining 20% is crunchy and interesting to me because of my larger area of agreement with her.
posted by sotonohito at 3:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


oh god if clinton ate a live baby during the debates i would still vote for her

who the fuck cares about her emails
posted by poffin boffin at 3:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [129 favorites]


Report from Republican leaning family members who are hesitantly on Team Hillary: she looks like she as a terrible memory, regarding an interview with (the FBI? I'm not sure), where she says she doesn't recall what she did a number of times. To them, it sounds like she has a terrible memory.

From this vague (non)story, it sounds like she's a busy person who doesn't recall everything she did or didn't do at work.

I still don't think they'll vote for Donny
.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:08 PM


Hillary Clinton FBI Notes Didn’t Really Show 39 Times Hillary ‘Couldn’t Remember’
so what we have here is not Hillary Clinton “(telling) the FBI ‘I do not recall’ 39 times,” but rather, 39 examples of an FBI agent saying Hillary could not recall something.

That seems like a minute distinction, until you actually look at the examples being cited. “Did not recall” is FBI-speak that doesn’t actually mean someone can’t remember something that they should be able to remember, as evidenced by the 15 times Hillary Clinton is said to “not recall” things that she would have no reason to recall because there’s no evidence they happened. For example, “Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system” because she, in fact, did not receive any emails she thought should not be on an unclassified system. She couldn’t recall using a flip-phone while she was at State because as far as anyone knows, she didn’t use a flip-phone while she was at State.
On the other hand...

In Trump U. Lawsuit Deposition, Trump Can't Remember 'World's Greatest Memory' Boast
Donald Trump claims to have a world-class memory, but it certainly wasn't on display during his deposition for a lawsuit over Trump University.

"I don't remember," Trump told lawyers 35 times during his December testimony, which was released on Wednesday.

His inability to recall covered a wide range of subjects — including whether he had told NBC News' Katy Tur just a month earlier that he had the "world's Greatest memory."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:25 PM on September 5, 2016 [137 favorites]


That's a perfectly fair criticism of the media. But to me, at least, it doesn't seem like a fair criticism of people in this comment thread.

You don't think that the perceived interests of the public are what is driving the media these days?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


waste my breath on the fucking trainwreck that is Donald Trump?

'cause he beat out a dozen or so legitimate viable candidate when everyone was discounting a laughing?

Oh and Hil's numbers dropped recently.
posted by sammyo at 3:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


What poffin boffin said. I'd vote for a yellow dog, as the saying goes, this election as long as it was a Democrat. I'm voting for her, I'm giving her money, an I'm volunteering for her. She's my candidate, and even if it was Cruz or Rubio instead of Trump she'd be my candidate because while I've got my disagreements with the Democrats they're the closer party to my ideals.

So saying "oh how I hate and loathe Trump" is just redundant to me.
posted by sotonohito at 3:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


I really think 2016 is the year where the writers went on strike, and the network brought on a bunch of stoned college kids to do the last few episodes

You make it sound like the series finale. 😱
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 3:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [12 favorites]


You don't think that the perceived interests of the public are what is driving the media these days?

Has it ever?
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 3:28 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh and Hil's numbers dropped recently.

So maybe she needs to take some legit fucking criticism and learn from it before they drop anymore compared to a fucking orange buffoon who would be LOSING BY A LANDSLIDE to pretty much ANYONE else?
posted by deadaluspark at 3:28 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


It matters what the media talks about precisely because a lot of folks aren't going to be reasoned into (or out of) a position and instead focus on signals: what people talk about, how often, who talks about it, etc. The reason Clinton is perceived as more dishonest is because the media talks about it a lot, and has for decades. If the media talked about Trump's failures more -- actually held him to the standard they hold Clinton to -- then folks would hear about it. Yes, of course, lots of folks aren't going to change their vote because of it. But they didn't decide they didn't want to vote against Clinton for any less reason than the media (all of it) talks about how much everyone dislikes her so much.
posted by R343L at 3:29 PM on September 5, 2016 [58 favorites]


You make it sound like the series finale. 😱

It is. Earth wasn't renewed.
posted by Talez at 3:30 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]




You don't think that the perceived interests of the public are what is driving the media these days?

I don't think the fact that someone on Metafilter spends 250 words on Clinton and only 50 on Trump in one comment drives the media. And I think it's wrong to criticize someone here for posting such a comment.

I also don't think that our spending time here talking about what we do or do not perceive as problems with Clinton or her campaign is driving the media either. Do you really think what we say here has that much influence on media coverage of national politics? If so, why?
posted by Jonathan Livengood at 3:35 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


So since I see some C for Classified mumbling here, I'll link to this facebook post.
"C is a paragraph marking for confidential.
Confidential is the lowest level of controlled or classified information. Confidential is not Secret (S) or Top Secret (TS). Confidential material is typically not classified in and of itself, but is controlled because if combined with other specific information may give away schedules, capabilities, operations, or intentions. . .

What Americans seem to be missing here is this: this situation would never have existed in the first goddamned place if Congress and the various agencies tasked with supporting Cabinet Secretaries had done their jobs by providing regulation, funding, and the proper communications support and security. They didn't. In fact when asked to provide that support by the White House for Secretary Clinton, they refused."
posted by threeturtles at 3:36 PM on September 5, 2016 [98 favorites]


Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: The Polarization of American Politics (someone's been watching you).
posted by andrewcooke at 3:37 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


Lovely bike ride, andrewcooke, but somehow I don't think that's what you meant to link to?
posted by stolyarova at 3:39 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


thanks - fixed the link, i hope.
posted by andrewcooke at 3:40 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


I work for the government, so I have opinions on emails. I have to get constant training on how to email (OK, once-a-year training), so I know exactly what I can or can't do with email and what will get me fired or reprimanded. Therefore I get irritated at high-level government workers who clearly do not have to take this training or follow the rules. On the other hand, government IT is a joke, and all my personal information has been stolen. So my feelings are mixed about Clinton. I strongly suspect her emails were more secure than mine.
posted by acrasis at 3:43 PM on September 5, 2016 [20 favorites]


If the media talked about Trump's failures more -- actually held him to the standard they hold Clinton to -- then folks would hear about it.

..and his common public image today would be as a Con Man and a Crook. But the New York Times in particular decided they'd rather promote him as a "Local New York Character", probably at the behest of the Classifieds department who saw all those buildings with names on them as sources of lots of rental listings.

And then there's NBC, which openly promoted him as a Model Businessman. Which is obviously why The Apprentice didn't air on ABC, who lost big bucks when Donald took over and destroyed the USFL.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:44 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


Secret Life of Gravy, thanks for those details on the FBI report on Hillary (and the comparison to Donny).
posted by filthy light thief at 3:45 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


"oh god if clinton ate a live baby during the debates i would still vote for her"

Wait, that was the voting day theme at Terminus.
posted by clavdivs at 3:46 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


acrasis: I work for the government, so I have opinions on emails.

I think you have to be more clear about which branch of the government, and where. I work for a branch of my state's government, which isn't really a bastion of good email etiquette, so it's not surprising we've never had any training on email management. Then again, we're not generally working with classified materials, but there are details of internal discussions that shouldn't go out to public entities, but do because they're included in a long email chain someone doesn't review before forwarding.
posted by filthy light thief at 3:47 PM on September 5, 2016


compared to a fucking orange buffoon who would be LOSING BY A LANDSLIDE to pretty much ANYONE else?

[citation needed]

There are not many landslides in national elections any more, and that's not just in the US. At least, not for the moment. For some reason -- perhaps including the media's desire to keep its thumb on the scale to ensure a grand finale, not a foregone conclusion -- we're doomed to squeakers.
posted by holgate at 3:49 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


I love the people on Twitter saying that Bernie would be winning in a landslide. I love them like brothers (they are all dudes) but they are being extremely goofy. Bernie couldn't even win Brooklyn in a landslide vs HRC, I doubt his organization would be able to get it together to crush anything other than the college vote.

Not that it matters because he (we) lost. It's time to admit that trump has a very hard floor of support. Not in spite of his insane facist tendencies but because of them.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:53 PM on September 5, 2016 [46 favorites]


So maybe she needs to take some legit fucking criticism and learn from it...

When you're accused of stuff you didn't do, I'm not sure what the lesson is supposed to be. People are idiots, maybe?
posted by um at 3:54 PM on September 5, 2016 [85 favorites]


Filthy Light Thief, I'm USDA scientist, so I have no access to classified information, but I have to take the same training as folks who have access to SS#s and other sensitive information. Even during the various govt. shut-downs, I was not allowed to do official business on non-work email addresses, and I certainly can't do non-work stuff on my official email. I take Clinton's email stuff a lot more seriously than almost everyone I know, and give her some serious side-eye. But there's no way I'm not voting for her.
posted by acrasis at 3:56 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


/ I doubt his organization would be able to get it together to crush anything other than the college vote.

Meant to add, and for every college kid anarchist he gained he'd lose a middle class suburb dad who would stay home instead.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:56 PM on September 5, 2016


I don't think Bernie would be winning in a landslide against Trump. I can't help but think that if 2008 Obama was running against Trump, Trump would get crushed, though.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:57 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


This election is a choice between two futures. Let's not forget that.
posted by heatherlogan at 3:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


This election: honestly, it's kind of draining.

For anyone else who is feeling overwhelmed by this election, I have a few helpful guidelines. They may not help everyone, but it never hurts to try.

1. Install Trump Filter
2. Play Dark Souls III instead.
3. Choose to not post in threads like this one. Aside from this comment, I've mostly stayed out of the other election oriented threads.
4. I am Canadian, so it's probably easier for me than it is for you to choose to ignore this election.
5. Google image search "happy dog gifs".
6. You're welcome.
posted by Fizz at 3:59 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


"Hey Hillary, you suck! For these reasons!"
"Literally all that stuff is made up."
"Yeah? Well I... Christ woman can't you take fucking criticism?"
posted by um at 4:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [202 favorites]


When you're accused of stuff you didn't do, I'm not sure what the lesson is supposed to be. People are idiots, maybe?

Well, let's be real. Clinton lies about weird shit. Like the story about being under sniper fire in Bosnia (which totally WAS NOT MADE UP despite all the BULLSHIT comments saying EVERYTHING people point out about her is made up. Take a fucking hike with that shit, people.). I mean, really, maybe it isn't that people are idiots, but her difficulty in somehow being straightforwardly truthful doesn't help her at all. She never admits wrongdoing, never attempts to make amends, and says ridiculous shit like "I'm the most transparent politician in US history that I'm aware of." It doesn't make me think "Oh wow, she's so trustworthy." It rather makes me think she has a shaky truce with the truth, like most people in D.C., and like many people this kind of stuff rubs me the wrong way. Does it mean she is evil incarnate and going to ruin shit? No, but seriously, can't anybody fucking step back and say "Hey Hillary, you really need to change how you handle this kind of shit, because all you are doing is pushing away people who might actually agree with you?"
posted by deadaluspark at 4:06 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


I feel frustrated because I also want to wag my finger at Clinton over her private email server, but what is the point when she is running against Literal Hitler?
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:06 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


She never admits wrongdoing,

off the top of my head she admitted wrongdoing in:

-- Nancy Reagan comments about AIDS
-- email server
posted by zutalors! at 4:09 PM on September 5, 2016 [53 favorites]


KMOX St. Louis News ‏@kmoxnews 8m8 minutes ago
#BREAKING: Longtime conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly has died, per KMOX sources. We'll bring you more information as it becomes available.

She just turned 92 in the middle of August. She was a particular thorn in my side as a young woman-- much as Ann Couter is today, I suppose, although maybe not as vulgar nor as trollish.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:09 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


compared to a fucking orange buffoon who would be LOSING BY A LANDSLIDE to pretty much ANYONE else?

She's up 4 points more than Obama was at this time. But I guess women just never do it well enough.
posted by chris24 at 4:10 PM on September 5, 2016 [103 favorites]


She never admits wrongdoing,

off the top of my head she admitted wrongdoing in:

-- Nancy Reagan comments about AIDS
-- email server


Iraq. Crime Bill. Super predators.
posted by chris24 at 4:11 PM on September 5, 2016 [54 favorites]


She never admits wrongdoing

Let me google that for you.
posted by Somn at 4:12 PM on September 5, 2016 [21 favorites]


This coughing thing is so petty and obvious. I saw a video compilation on Twitter (#HackingHillary is even trending) of times Hillary has coughed over the last decade. HOW DARE A WOMAN COUGH!

I'm sure if someone made a video of every time I coughed it could be manipulated to make it appear that I had a terminal illness.
posted by guiseroom at 4:12 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


In bizarro news, not only did Schlafly die today, she also started a PAC today called Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle PAC.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:13 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


[One comment deleted. Once you're telling people to "shove it", you're at the point where you should take a break from the thread for a while.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 4:15 PM on September 5, 2016 [27 favorites]


> We talk about Clinton because we have reason to expect better of her. We have no reason to expect anything better than being a flaming fascist of Trump.

The less attention there is put upon Trump's genuine scandals, the greater the danger of enough people remaining uninformed of them and voting for him because "I dunno, there's all this talk about Hillary and emails and stuff, at least Trump's honest."


Paul Krugman: Hillary Clinton Gets Gored
True, there aren’t many efforts to pretend that Donald Trump is a paragon of honesty. But it’s hard to escape the impression that he’s being graded on a curve. If he manages to read from a TelePrompter without going off script, he’s being presidential. If he seems to suggest that he wouldn’t round up all 11 million undocumented immigrants right away, he’s moving into the mainstream. And many of his multiple scandals, like what appear to be clear payoffs to state attorneys general to back off investigating Trump University, get remarkably little attention.

Meanwhile, we have the presumption that anything Hillary Clinton does must be corrupt, most spectacularly illustrated by the increasingly bizarre coverage of the Clinton Foundation.
Paul Krugman Dismantles the Dangerously Lopsided Coverage of Trump and Clinton
posted by homunculus at 4:15 PM on September 5, 2016 [75 favorites]


Wow. I'm from St. Louis and I had no idea Schlafly meant anything other than good beer.
posted by saul wright at 4:16 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


So maybe she needs to take some legit fucking criticism and learn from it

If I were Clinton, what I would have learned from A QUARTER FUCKING CENTURY OF CRITICISM is "Fuck all of y'all."

Because Clinton is a far, far better person than I, what she has learned is to respond to bullshit criticism with grace and patience.
posted by dersins at 4:17 PM on September 5, 2016 [112 favorites]


Donald Trump, being graded on a curve? You don't say.

John Gruber pointed out, rather astutely, that you should just try to imagine the political hay-making that would go on if Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama had five children by three different partners.
posted by DoctorFedora at 4:19 PM on September 5, 2016 [67 favorites]


Hillary Clinton Blames Coughing Fit on Being 'Allergic' to Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton blamed a bad coughing fit on opponent Donald Trump during a Labor Day rally in Cleveland, triggering a sharp response from the Trump campaign and a trending hashtag on social media.

“Every time I think of Trump, I get allergic,” Clinton croaked in between coughs, after drinking some water and patting her chest. “Boy, we have 63 days to go.” [...]

Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, was quick on the rebound with a jab about Clinton’s lack of face time with the press.

“Must be allergic to media. Finally spent a minute [with] them,” Conway posted on Twitter.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:19 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


the Clinton email stuff is actually a pretty big deal

how about rove erasing 22 million white house (bush) emails (pdf, yo) while there was a warrant being acquired by doj? that a big deal?
posted by j_curiouser at 4:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [110 favorites]


"Hey Hillary, you suck! For these reasons!"
"Literally all that stuff is made up."
"Yeah? Well I... Christ woman can't you take fucking criticism?"


Thank you.

The problem is not that Clinton maybe could have had better email security habits. The problem is that she did just as well as everyone else in her role, arguably BETTER than Colin Powell, and yet is still the only one getting her feet held to the fire. Endlessly.

The problem is that the 24 hour news cycle has become 24 hours a day of "Clinton emails" and "Clinton foundation" -- while Trump is given a near-total pass by the vast majority of the media for well-documented, actually illegal activities. Well-documented, actually illegal activities that somehow don't warrant the same level of relentless scrutiny as the non-crimes for which Clinton has been completely exonerated after exhaustive investigation.

It's true that what we say here probably makes zero difference to the outcome of the election. But seeing that pattern play out here as well as in the news is incredibly frustrating, since it means whatever the hell the networks are playing at these days -- it's clearly working.
posted by kythuen at 4:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [121 favorites]


So Trump's taking the Mean Girls approach to messaging now. Classy.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 4:25 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


how about rove erasing 22 million white house (bush) emails

If you need me to say Karl Rove is objectively terrible, I'm happy to do it, but I'm not sure this comes as news to anyone.
posted by corb at 4:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


Media approach to Clinton: "Well, where there's smoke, there must be fire!"


Media approach to Trump: "NOTHING TO SEE HERE, PEOPLE! JUST A BUNCH OF FIRE! TOTALLY NORMAL FIRE!"
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 4:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [100 favorites]


One of the better writers at one of the better papers, Karen Tumulty at the Washington Post just wrote "How Hillary Clinton helped create what she later called the ‘vast right-wing conspiracy’". (Must be noted: writers don't write their own headline and the URL shows the much more accurate wording "hillary-clinton-was-right-about-the-vast-right-wing-conspiracy-heres-why-it-exists") But, with some minor quibbles, it shows how Hillary's "impulses toward secrecy" (what I would call more of a "control freak" tendency) helped enemies of the Clintons build negative perceptions about them. (It is also interesting that after several good Trump-focused articles in a row in mid-August, Tumulty took two weeks on this Hillary article. Editors, sigh.)
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Refresh my memory y'all, is there currently a "beer and cookies" appreciation fund for the mods?
posted by duffell at 4:32 PM on September 5, 2016 [13 favorites]


Phyllis Schlafly also has a new book out (Warning, link goes to a Pat Buchanan editorial
At 92, the founder of Eagle Forum has a new book out, published by Regnery. “The Conservative Case for Trump,” co-authored by Ed Martin of Eagle Forum and Brett Decker, argues that the Donald is an authentic conservative around whom every conservative should rally.
Note that her co-author, Ed Martin, is also the treasurer and Custodian of Records of the brand spanking new Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle PAC. Ed Martin is also President of the Eagle Forum which was torn apart by Schlafly's endorsement of Trump. Most Eagle Forum members were Cruz supporters.


Since the Eagle Forum PAC already existed I'm guessing that this new PAC will be to raise funds for Trump. I'm wondering how much money and attention the new PAC will get without Schlafly alive to promote it. I don't think the Ed Martin Eagle PAC has as much appeal.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:37 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


she's smart and she's a wonk and she's lying about being confused.

Perhaps you would like to elaborate? Confused about what? Lying about what?
posted by JackFlash at 4:39 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


5. Google image search "happy dog gifs".

r/rarepuppers not r/rarepepes!
posted by um at 4:44 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump Surrogate Admits To Joy Reid: Trump Did 'Pay-For-Play'
In what can only be described as an epic failure, a Trump spokesman first admits that Trump participates in "Pay for Play" deals, but then tries to justify it because he is a private citizen and *everyone* does it.

Clearly, Steve Cortes has no idea that donating money (paying off) officials to get favors or special access is patently illegal, for any citizen. His spin comes so fast and so hard, you can see his eyeballs nearly roll back in his head as he tries to say that Trump plans to end it. Yes, you have to hear it for yourself:
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:45 PM on September 5, 2016 [98 favorites]


Since the Eagle Forum PAC already existed I'm guessing that this new PAC will be to raise funds for Trump. I'm wondering how much money and attention the new PAC will get without Schlafly alive to promote it.

You're not going to believe this, but:

Phyllis Schlafly, whose grass-roots campaigns against Communism, abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment galvanized conservatives for almost two generations and helped reshape American politics, died on Monday. She was 92.
posted by holborne at 4:46 PM on September 5, 2016


Corb: "Either she was competently aware of the rules and chose to ignore them because she thought they were petty (strikes me as probable) or she was unaware of shit that even the most junior guys would be told before entering a SCIF, thus her competency is in question (strikes me as improbable, she seems a smart lady)."

That all sounds suspiciously vague. What are you precise complaints? What rules did she ignore. What rules was she unaware of?
posted by JackFlash at 4:46 PM on September 5, 2016 [9 favorites]


In what can only be described as an epic failure, a Trump spokesman first admits that Trump participates in "Pay for Play" deals, but then tries to justify it because he is a private citizen and *everyone* does it.

Front page news! Or you know, a paragraph in the back pages. Or not at all.
posted by Artw at 4:48 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


Even if you're "smart and a wonk", you won't know everything about everything, especially things you really don't want to bother with... they're called "blind spots" and sometimes "I can't recall" means "I had better things to think about".
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:49 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


As far as the Clinton Foundation thing goes, I think it's fairly obvious that there was a pay for access deal in place, perhaps not directly with Clinton demanding it, but her staffers certainly routed people who had donated to the Clinton foundation her way.

I'm absolutely certain she knew perfectly well what all the rules were, she's smart and she's a wonk and she's lying about being confused.

Hello, I noticed there are a number of comments with statements like these peppered in. Given the stakes of this election, I think it is quite dangerous to make assertions without proper evidence. So would you mind citing the evidence that prove these to be true?
posted by schroedinger at 4:49 PM on September 5, 2016 [32 favorites]


yea I would love to hear about this obvious pay for play on the part of the Clinton foundation, especially wrt to the "pay" part. Like there are actual checks written in the Bondi situation on the Trump side.
posted by zutalors! at 4:51 PM on September 5, 2016 [9 favorites]


Haven't you heard, rumors of smoke are enough to burn a place down this year.
posted by chris24 at 4:52 PM on September 5, 2016 [17 favorites]


Payment for access means that the only viewpoints the politician hears are the viewpoints of those rich enough to pay for access, and that's going to unavoidably distort and shape the politician's positions.

Getting back to the pay-for-access thing... the AP "investigation" showed about half Clinton's meetings were with donors, which means about half her meetings were with non-donors. So she was hearing the viewpoints of non-paying people. Since it was also shown that donors weren't exactly getting their way (were ANY of the pay-for-access meetings shown to result in pay-for-action?), it appears she was making her own decisions regardless of donations.

Business interests are always trying to meet with politicians, and they do have legitimate reasons to meet. If they think paying a donation will improve their standing, that's fine. But if it's shown that 1) you don't have to make a donation to have a meeting, and 2) making a donation doesn't result in you automatically getting your way (both of which Clinton followed), there really shouldn't be a problem.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 4:52 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]



Re Phyllis Schlafly: you're not going to believe this, but:

Yeah, no, that is why I started linking to all of the Schlafly stuff.



Philip Rucker: Clinton took questions with reporters aboard her campaign plane

So you think the Press will stop reporting, "It has been X number of days since Hillary Clinton held a press conference"?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:53 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Somehow I have a cable package that has HBO yet doesn't include MSNBC.

#FirstWorldProblems
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 4:57 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


So if we take the trump sphere of invulnerability as a given, shouldn't the guys he's paying off get investigated over this?
posted by Artw at 4:59 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


the AP "investigation" showed about half Clinton's meetings were with donors, which means about half her meetings were with non-donors

No that's not what they found at all. They found that half of the people the AP classified as "outside the government" were donors, not half of all her meetings. They did misstate that distinction in their tweet reporting the story and refuse to retract it. And they won't release the list they generated. And the people they're talking about include (Nobel Laureate) Elie Wiesel and (Nobel Laureate) Muhammad Yunus, two people I'm guessing could have gotten meetings with Clinton regardless.
posted by one_bean at 5:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [49 favorites]


the AP "investigation" showed about half Clinton's meetings were with donors

No, although they tried to spin it that way. It was half of the meetings that weren't with various government officials, which was a small fraction of her schedule.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [18 favorites]


> oh god if clinton ate a live baby during the debates i would still vote for her

Can we shape crescent dough into a baby shape and stuff it with taco fixings, like a taco ring shaped like a baby pinata? She can nosh on it during the debate with her hot sauce.
posted by Fiberoptic Zebroid and The Hypnagogic Jerks at 5:02 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Oh good, a new thread so all the people who didnt read the last 1000 comments of the last one can argue over emails again.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:04 PM on September 5, 2016 [105 favorites]


Wow. I'm from St. Louis and I had no idea Schlafly meant anything other than good beer.

She recently lost a trademark dispute with the brewery owner (who I just learned is her nephew by marriage).
posted by HumuloneRanger at 5:05 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


"I think it is quite dangerous to make assertions without proper evidence. So would you mind citing the evidence that prove these to be true?"

I agree. So what's in a name?

"I don't know if I particularly want to be remembered for anything. I personally do not think I'm a great gift to the world. I've been very fortunate."

-Sir Edmund Hiliary.
posted by clavdivs at 5:06 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Absent significant new evidence, I pledge never to mention those darned emails again. I was sick of them last month, I'm twice as sick of them now. Because, like the Clinton Foundation, there's no there there.
posted by Devonian at 5:08 PM on September 5, 2016 [22 favorites]


Refresh my memory y'all, is there currently a "beer and cookies" appreciation fund for the mods?
posted by duffell at 5:32 PM on September 5


That would be the Fund MetaFilter options, I think. Maybe not officially, but I for one support the mods maintaining their mental health on a few of our dimes.
posted by filthy light thief at 5:09 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


Oh good, a new thread so all the people who didnt read the last 1000 comments of the last one can argue over emails again.

BEER AND COOKIES.
posted by duffell at 5:09 PM on September 5, 2016


Oh good, a new thread so all the people who didnt read the last 1000 comments of the last one can argue over emails again.

Yeah I love the beginning of each thread when the people who only ever read a couple hundred comments in each thread show up and try to relitigate a bunch of stuff. *sigh*
posted by threeturtles at 5:10 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


Oh good, a new thread so all the people who didnt read the last 1000 comments of the last one can argue over emails again.

Oh, I read it, but I am getting sick of the drive-by "hey guys did you know Clinton did this terrible thing byeeeeeeeee" comments that drop their "knowledge" and fail to cite any reliable evidence whatsoever. It perpetuates the exact culture of innuendo that Krugman talks about during a time where the opponent has a long list of things he has said and done that objectively disqualify him for any elected position, much less president. It's false equivalency, it's intellectually lazy, and it wastes everyone's time.
posted by schroedinger at 5:12 PM on September 5, 2016 [75 favorites]


This is forever. This is what we do now. This is who we are. *creepy smile*
posted by um at 5:13 PM on September 5, 2016 [18 favorites]


My apologies, Secret Life of Gravy -- totally missed it. No disrespect intended.
posted by holborne at 5:14 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Richmond Times-Dispatch (wikipedia claims it is the most important newspaper in the state of VA) has endorsed Gary Johnson.
posted by bukvich at 5:15 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


I totally understand that people are criticizing Clinton and not Trump because they take for granted that Trump is terrible, but it might be worth considering that that's not how it plays to a lot of voters. They're hearing so very much about how Clinton is terrible, and they already know that Trump is terrible. So the takeaway is that everyone is terrible, and they might as well stay home. I think there's a good chance that Trump will win my state because of this dynamic. I don't think he'll win, but I do think he may win my particular state because a lot of people are listening to the steady drum-beat of anti-Clinton stuff and deciding that they just won't vote.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:16 PM on September 5, 2016 [36 favorites]


I have never voted for either Clinton and I don't care at all about the emails. If you do you either have an incredibly naive approach to politics or are simply being deluded into thinking this minor mistake has some bearing on her actions as a president. My misgivings have always been about her policies AS STATED. Any other speculation is just conspiracy theory nonsense.

If you don't want to vote for Clinton, don't. If you plan to and are trying to help then stop engaging with any talk about the emails. Don't even defend her. Just ignore it and talk about things you like about her instead. If you can't do that, make fun of her opponent. Every micro-unit of energy spent publicly worrying about this helps Trump.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:19 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


And someone should do a FPP on Schlafly, because she was genuinely an interesting character, even if she's not someone for whom I've ever had even the slightest bit of sympathy.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh good, a new thread so all the people who didnt read the last 1000 comments of the last one can argue over emails again.

Unfortunately, some people continue to restate previous false accusations. You have to push back tirelessly because that is the way the "Crooked Hillary" narrative gets established. A perfect example is the "Gore is a big fat liar because he claimed he invented the internet". False and uncorrected narratives helped put George Bush in the White House.
posted by JackFlash at 5:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [50 favorites]


A bit of advice to people who are resigned to voting for the "lesser of two evils" (especially when the "greater of the two evils" is the WORST. EVIL. EVER.): Focus your mindspace on the qualities of the person you reluctantly support. It also prepares you better for when you get reluctantly drawn into political discussions (heaven forbid), in real life and in internet places like HERE.

On preview, what Potomac Avenue said (without the "never voted for either Clinton" part)
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:22 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Doris from Wapakoneta

Do-RIS! Repasent! Whoot! Whoot!

But srsly, the article CHT linked to above on Pam Bondi's 8,491 pages is fantastic. NYT, eat a bag of clicks. Go . . . Orlando Sentinel!

Among the tl;dr, Scott Maxwell points out that
1) Its acknowledged that Pam asked Trump for cash
2) well hell that ain't right right there
3) Among the reasons Bondi gives for extortion being okie dokie: They thoroughly investigated the complaints and it was all totes kewl.
4) 8,491 pages show they investigated NOTHING.
5) Calls for a special prosecutor, and rightly so

Hey NYT, didja hear about those wacky taco trucks?! Yeah. I know, they don't serve emails. Yeah. Yeah.
posted by petebest at 5:22 PM on September 5, 2016 [28 favorites]


so very much about how Clinton is terrible, and they already know that Trump is terrible.

Or they don't know he's terrible. Or just how terrible. A lot of people really don't pay attention to politics. Which is why people letting him skate is even worse. It takes a drumbeat to get through.
posted by chris24 at 5:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


Hey whatup party people in the thread house, I've been busy with work and houseguests how are our chances?
posted by vrakatar at 5:25 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


And someone should do a FPP on Schlafly, because she was genuinely an interesting character, even if she's not someone for whom I've ever had even the slightest bit of sympathy.

Phyllis Schlafly: Still wrong (and mean) after all these years. [nb: article from 2014]
posted by dersins at 5:25 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


The only reason people give a shit about the emails is that the GOP Congress spent millions of dollars of taxpayer money to say that where there's smoke, there's fire. (Well, that and two decades of a cottage industry of hating the Clintons. It's very profitable!) Even though there isn't smoke, it's a bit of chalk dust that only a fool would think would be smoke.

But if anything, this election has proven the W administration was right: they can make their own reality and enough people will believe it in the face of all contrary evidence. Have a rapist on staff? No story. Violate a bunch of laws paying off an attorney general so that your criminal "university" doesn't get investigated? Not really a story. Hillary coughs? OMG GET A DOCTOR ON THE LINE WE'RE GOING LIVE
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 5:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [26 favorites]


I just want to make sure we are clear that not only wasn't Hillary Clinton ever a "junior soldier." She wasn't a soldier. She wasn't even a career civil servant. She was a civilian political appointee.

Also I couldn't give a fuck about her emails.
posted by spitbull at 5:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yes I am aware that I broke my own rules to combat that here is another statement:

My daughter is very down with Hillary. She is 2. She yells GO HILAREE! whenever her name comes up in conversation. She has no idea that they are both women, she just thinks she's cool. It used to annoy me because my wife programmed it into her. Now I think it's amazing. I read the country bunny tonight, a kids book written in the 30s where a housewife bunny becomes the Easter bunny because (not despite) her being the mom of 21 baby bunnies. It made me cry, not least because my kid doesn't see it as weird at all, just totally and completely normal for a lady bunny to be president. So I can't say any of the cheesy official slogans, but I'm happy to yell GO! HELARY!!! whenever possible.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [32 favorites]


As for Schlafly, this tweet says it better than I can.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 5:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [23 favorites]


The Richmond Times-Dispatch (wikipedia claims it is the most important newspaper in the state of VA) has endorsed Gary Johnson.

For those curious, previous endorsements: Reagan, Reagan, Bush, Bush, Dole, Bush, Bush, McCain, Romney.
posted by one_bean at 5:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [15 favorites]


I know the thread has probably moved on, but just wanted to say that I sympathize with acrasis's comments up thread. I also work as a Fed (in the foreign affairs field to boot) and have to admit that I have mixed feelings about the whole email thing. On one hand, I did roll my eyes a bit when the news first broke. On the other hand, I don't blame her - I've dealt a lot with State Dept IT, and like most government IT systems, it's not the greatest. And it's not like she's the only senior official to use her own system (Powell, Cheney, etc). At least she's not this guy.

Also, as an aside I'd like to say that as Secretary, she was quite popular with employees and had a number of successful initiatives (such as expanding benefits to same-sex couples). Too bad no one seems to be interested in talking about that.
posted by photo guy at 5:28 PM on September 5, 2016 [18 favorites]


Wikipedia claims Chris Wallace is a democrat.

Wikipedia seems like Russia Today lately.
posted by spitbull at 5:29 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


This election is a choice between two futures.

Let me guess: Blade Runner or The Road.
posted by Lyme Drop at 5:31 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


Chris Wallace registered "D" to avoid disappointing his great journalist father Mike Wallace TOO much. Also, he gets a small bonus at Fox News for having the title "token Dem".
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:31 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


Both are Battlestar Galactica but when Trump wins it ends during the pilot.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:32 PM on September 5, 2016 [11 favorites]


Why this coverage matters: my husband and I in the past week have had two encounters with totally different random people (not Bernie bros just regular working class low info voter folk) who have stated that both Trump and Clinton are equally "scary". Neither were able to actually express why Clinton is "scary" when pressed. They just know that they're both equally bad for.... reasons.
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:33 PM on September 5, 2016 [34 favorites]


I know the thread has probably moved on...and have to admit that I have mixed feelings about the whole email thing.

It may move on but it'll be back. The thread has mixed feelings about the email.
posted by kingless at 5:34 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


No that's not what they found at all.

and

No, although they tried to spin it that way.

To be clear, that's why I put "investigation" in quotes, because even if you believed the spin it still only shows half the meetings were with donors. If the most biased portrayal still has her meet half the time with non-donors, it's impossible to say that you have to buy your way into a meeting with Clinton.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 5:34 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


Chris Wallace is the duck and cover turtle.

I don't care about the e mails either but they keep coming back even if it's multiple bi-partisan requests for they to be dropped as subject matter, here.
posted by clavdivs at 5:35 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


In passing...I can't believe nobody's used this yet: "Head-first into a political abyss"
posted by GrammarMoses at 5:36 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


my husband and I in the past week have had two encountered with totally different random people (not Bernie bros just regular working class low info voter folk) who have stated that both Trump and Clinton are equally "scary".

Yeah, I have been volunteering for the Clinton campaign and we're doing voter registration. In one hour I encountered three different people who said they weren't going to vote because "they're all liars" and "both are the same".

Trump and Clinton are not the same, by any measure, and tolerance of news coverage and political commentary that treats them as such will land us a President Trump. If you have factual criticism of Clinton, then by all mean, drop it on us, but don't talk about how it's "clear" that Clinton did this or that when it is not clear and you have nothing to back up your claims. Because that leads to real, live people either not voting or voting Trump.
posted by schroedinger at 5:38 PM on September 5, 2016 [40 favorites]


I am inordinately pleased that Phyllis Schafly lived to see same-sex marriage become the law of the land. I am profoundly disappointed that she died before she could get to see the first female American president.
posted by Brie Fantasy at 5:47 PM on September 5, 2016 [66 favorites]


This election is a choice between two futures.

Hillary is either "Star Trek" (if she gets a friendly congress) or "Mad Max: Fury Road" (with a hostile congress)

Trump is TOTALLY "Idiocracy" with elements of "Blade Runner" AND "The Road" AND "Elisium" AND "The Handmaid's Tale" (from VP Pence) AND "Planet of the Apes" (emphasis on Heston yelling "you blew it all up!"), with a little "Death Race", "The Running Man" and "Hunger Games" tossed in for some Reality TV Entertainment.
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:49 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


Trump is TOTALLY "Idiocracy"

Why 'Idiocracy' Would Actually Be A Utopia

Which is somehow more depressing.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:53 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


Trump agrees to participate in all three presidential debates
Donald Trump said Monday that he will participate in all three presidential debates, ending lingering questions about whether the GOP presidential nominee would escalate complaints about the debate schedule or moderators.

“I expect to do all three. I look forward to the debates. I think it is an important element of what we’re doing. I think you have an obligation to do the debates,” Trump said Monday to reporters in Ohio. “I did them with the other [primary candidates] — I guess 11 debates. I look forward to the debates.”
Three weeks, y'all.

I would love to believe that the debate organizers will do everything in their power to produce the events that Americans deserve: enforcing turn-taking and time limits, pushing back against blatant lies, ignoring bullshit "many people are saying" non-scandals, etc.

I don't believe that, though. I'm fully expecting that the debates will get away from the moderators, that Trump will dominate the time simply by being the loudest and most audacious person in the room, and that most of his lies, misogyny, self-contradiction, and nonsense will go effectively unchallenged.

(Trump alludes to the size of his penis = finish your drink)

Sigh. This fuckin' year, man. I'll breathe a big sigh of relief when Trump loses in 63 days (two months! auggh!), but I still dread what comes after.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 5:55 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'm seriously thinking Donald's popularity would rise if he took part in the debate with an eyepatch and cutlass.
posted by clavdivs at 5:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


I would totally prefer Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho as president over Trump. Camacho was genuinely warm and charismatic. He cared about his nation. He recognized his limitations. And he didn't hesitate in changing his mind when presented with evidence he was wrong.
posted by um at 6:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [44 favorites]


that most of his lies, MISOGYNY, self-contradiction, and nonsense

While I agree that the moderators will probably do a shitty job of reining in most of this, the misogyny I think is what will do him in. He can't help it or hide it. And it just doesn't play well on TV. The moment with Carly Fiorina in the debate made him look bad. And Lazio trying to play dominance politics with the pledge in Clinton's 2000 senate debate didn't go well for him.
posted by chris24 at 6:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Washington Post: Trump's History of Corruption

...is mind-boggling. So why is Clinton supposedly the corrupt one?
posted by kingless at 6:02 PM on September 5, 2016 [45 favorites]


A decent WaPo piece on how Pence is essentially running his own campaign independent of Trump Tower, which involves spending as much time courting and placating the GOP establishment in the places he visits as he does on a campaign stage:
There is virtually no micromanaging of Pence by Trump or his top aides, in part because the Trump campaign is often preoccupied putting out its own fires. Pence is effectively running his own campaign, traveling where he sees fit and delivering a stump speech he crafted with his longtime advisers.
The Veep debate is going to be (dare I say it) interesting in its own right.
posted by holgate at 6:02 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


Buzzfeed News: Former “Apprentice” Contestants Say Donald Trump Has Never Cared About People Of Color
“The idea that you can establish some measure of credibility with three months before the presidential election? … Anyone who has had any interaction with people of color would know better.”
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:04 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's fucking ridiculous that one of the two main candidates running for president agreeing to participate in the presidential debates is headline news, but here we are.
posted by tzikeh at 6:05 PM on September 5, 2016 [66 favorites]




The one thing those who are saying Trump may win have never been able to satisfyingly explain is the demographic issue. Clinton has poor overall favorability but 68% favorability among Hispanics, higher among African Americans. And then there's women. And college educated whites.

What do people think is going to happen to those voters? Unprecedented voter suppression? Russian meddling?

To be honest, to me it just seems to be a way to downplay minority votes and voices. The narrative this entire election has been what white people think and what white people want. But that doesn't match national demographics.

Trump would have to win 40% of the Hispanic vote to win. How can that happen?

I eagerly await the oncoming encrushening of Trump so that we can finally give proper respect to changing demographics in this country and how this will affect elections.
posted by zutalors! at 6:14 PM on September 5, 2016 [46 favorites]


One part of Trump's case that I find puzzlingly amusing: "I know the system is pay for play, because I participated in it!"
What in that would encourage me to trust you?

"I know police corruption is a problem, because I was bribing them to ignore my speeding through stoplights!"

"You should support my push to become part of head management. I'm well aware of the issues with nepotism in our department, and I'll deal with them! Hell, I was fuckin' the boss' son. How do you think I became a supervisor?"


I actually have the ability to vote, for the first time, in an American election. I'm worried it'll be tough doing it overseas, though. Does Florida have voter ID laws or something else to get in the way?
posted by constantinescharity at 6:18 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


the misogyny I think is what will do him in. He can't help it or hide it. And it just doesn't play well on TV.

I honestly can't believe he is still here after the things he said to Megyn Kelly.
posted by maggiemaggie at 6:18 PM on September 5, 2016 [17 favorites]


The narrative this entire election has been what white people think and what white people want.

So much this. I meet with working class people every day and nearly all of them who have expressed political views to me are horrified by and afraid of Donald Trump.

Oh but they're mainly not straight white men so they don't get the Working Class Halo of Authenticity
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:20 PM on September 5, 2016 [22 favorites]




the misogyny I think is what will do him in. He can't help it or hide it. And it just doesn't play well on TV.

I honestly can't believe he is still here after the things he said to Megyn Kelly.


And that's exactly why I don't believe it will do him in. It hasn't yet, and there have been lots of opportunities.
posted by tzikeh at 6:21 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


election stressing you out? trump-anxiety getting you down? well, let madamjujujive soothe your tortured soul with the daily donald.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 6:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [20 favorites]


What do people think is going to happen to those voters? Unprecedented voter suppression? Russian meddling?

Yes. I don't know about the Russian meddling, but I guarantee at least one Trump supporter will show up at a polling place with a gun to scare off undesirables.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:25 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


after the things he said to Megyn Kelly

Ahh, I forgot that example. Well, Republican primary vs general helped him -- and he is way down with women compared to Romney so it and other misogyny hurt -- and she was part of the press, not the other candidate. Doing something similar thing to Clinton in front of a huge general election audience would have a much bigger impact. At least in the minds of moderates, persuadables. The 40% Trumpsters I don't really care about because they're beyond logic, reason and hope.
posted by chris24 at 6:25 PM on September 5, 2016


What do people think is going to happen to those voters? Unprecedented voter suppression? Russian meddling?

Yes. I don't know about the Russian meddling, but I guarantee at least one Trump supporter will show up at a polling place with a gun to scare off undesirables.


Sorry, that's not a theory. That's not enough. Minority voters will not back down from this election.
posted by zutalors! at 6:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


Homunculus, you beat me to posting that Paul Krugman column. It is a must-read. I've been having ugly flashbacks to 2000 election coverage for a while now.
posted by SisterHavana at 6:28 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


Sorry, that's not a theory. That's not enough. Minority voters will not back down from this election.

You must be one of those people who does not expect the worst possible outcome literally all the time.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:30 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]



You must be one of those people who does not expect the worst possible outcome literally all the time.


No, I want to hear a real theory that does not condescend to minority voters.
posted by zutalors! at 6:32 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


And not just voters, but in particular minority community organizers, lawyers, etc, who have been working for generations against suppression, to drive turnout, and to make voices heard.
posted by zutalors! at 6:33 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


A bit of advice to people who are resigned to voting for the "lesser of two evils"

I have another; learn something about the situation. Anyone who thinks this is a lesser of two evils situation is either covering for laziness and ignorance, or so deluded they can't think straight.

A friend of a friend, not an urban myth, had problems in the last election because of "Ben Ghazi". He wasn't sure what Ben did, but it sounded bad. He was called an idiot. People who believe the campaign of lies about Clinton are his peers, brainwashed.
posted by bongo_x at 6:34 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


The only alternative theory is that there is a hidden or poorly modeled Trump vote out there, either or both of angry alienated white middle class and working class voters who don't usually vote or the fabled "they lie to pollsters" bunch.

Both seem very unlikely.
posted by spitbull at 6:35 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


NJ GOP candidate threatens ‘Daily Beast’ reporter: ‘I hope somebody rapes you today’

It really is just the party of Chan-nazis and trolls now. I fear for the world if any significant number of them are left in positions of power post November.
posted by Artw at 6:36 PM on September 5, 2016 [38 favorites]


I don't usually bother to read into pictures of world leaders together, but look at this picture of Obama and Putin and tell me it shouldn't be captioned I know and you know that I know
posted by Countess Elena at 6:37 PM on September 5, 2016 [55 favorites]


Man does Obama make Putin look small
posted by zutalors! at 6:41 PM on September 5, 2016 [36 favorites]


In happier news, Sanders did a better job surrogating today in NH than his Clinton Foundation bullshit on MTP yesterday. He said Clinton was the superior candidate in every way, called Trump a pathological liar, and said "the essence of his campaign is bigotry."
posted by chris24 at 6:42 PM on September 5, 2016 [9 favorites]


escape from the potato planet: "I think you have an obligation to do the debates,” Trump said Monday to reporters in Ohio

tzikeh: It's fucking ridiculous that one of the two main candidates running for president agreeing to participate in the presidential debates is headline news, but here we are.

But it sounds like Donny agreed only because someone reminded him "there's only three, and you kind of have to." Only attending 11 out of 12 isn't so bad, but 2 out of three is terrible.
posted by filthy light thief at 6:47 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


but 2 out of three is terrible.

Unless you're Meat Loaf.
posted by bongo_x at 6:51 PM on September 5, 2016 [42 favorites]


NJ GOP candidate threatens ‘Daily Beast’ reporter: ‘I hope somebody rapes you today’

That page serves me an ad for dating Russian women. -_-
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:52 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


Man does Obama make Putin look small

He has that effect on pretty much everyone, in pretty much every way.
posted by multics at 6:56 PM on September 5, 2016 [19 favorites]


That page serves me an ad for dating Russian women. -_-

I got Jesse Ventura pointing at me and yelling something.
posted by cashman at 6:58 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


Note that her co-author, Ed Martin, is also the treasurer and Custodian of Records...

Ed Martin is also the chief of staff (of the former governor of Missouri) who deleted a ton of emails that were under subpoena.

Beyond that, he's a guy with tons of his own political stickers on his own vehicle, and who, when exiting his vehicle on a residential street, will stand in the street so you can't drive past him, just to display his power.
posted by notsnot at 7:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


Media approach to Trump: "NOTHING TO SEE HERE, PEOPLE! JUST A BUNCH OF FIRE! TOTALLY NORMAL FIRE!"

A visible thermal excursion.
in a dumpster
posted by ctmf at 7:06 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


This election is taking such a toll on me that I just ordered Domino's.
posted by guiseroom at 7:07 PM on September 5, 2016 [14 favorites]


Oh and Hil's numbers dropped recently.

Says who? Not the polls, all of them. Two weeks ago (August 22) Clinton was at 47.4% and he was at 40.6%. Now she's at 47.0% and he's at 41.6%. So her "drop" over two weeks is 0.4% and he's one point higher. More importantly, the spread's been pretty stable since about August 28. He's currently plateaued below his pre-convention ceiling of 42.1% and she's above her pre-convention floor of 44.3%.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:10 PM on September 5, 2016 [10 favorites]


I got Jesse Ventura pointing at me and yelling something.

he thinks you're dating his russian.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 7:13 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


Washington Post: Trump's History of Corruption
The WaPo is solidly standing out in this sea of Trump-tolerant news media. Can we rip the title of "Paper of Record" out of the NYeT and put it where it belongs?

And the "bad week" for Hillary is looking much better... glad the 'final releases' about the Emails have come out more than 2 months before the election, so it can be "old news"and not an "October Surprise".
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:18 PM on September 5, 2016 [13 favorites]


This election is taking such a toll on me that I just ordered Domino's.

Jokes aside, this has happened to me multiple times. Junk Food and Joy Reid have been my go to things when I absolutely cannot take yet another false equivalence, ignored story on Trump, obvious lie, pushing the unicorns (hey, we found a young biracial black and hispanic woman who thinks Stein is incredible and she just can't trust the others, lets talk to her for 45 minutes instead of doing a Bondi story), and other nonsense.

For somebody who grew up really respecting journalism and idolizing the reporters on shows like 60 minutes, watching a lot of what is happening lately is crazy-making. And I'm pretty sure I've put on a good 5 pounds.

Stay healthy, yall. Go for walks while the weather is still somewhat nice. Stand up and walk around when you can. Try not to strangle anybody.
posted by cashman at 7:19 PM on September 5, 2016 [26 favorites]


Says who? Not the polls, all of them.

HuffPosts methodology is weird. Nobody else has Clinton's numbers that high; I think they are tossing out any polls which include Johnson and Stein.

The RealClearPolitics average is, I think, better. It shows in a 4 way race Clinton dropping from a ceiling of 44% to a current 41.3%, and Trump climbing from 36.3% to 37.9%. So that's a tightening from a near-8 point race to a 3.5 point race. So roughly cut in half.
posted by Justinian at 7:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Thanks, cashman. I would have ordered Pizza Hut but the last time I did they forgot to put cheese on the pizza. After calling to alert them of their egregious oversight, they called me a liar and insisted there was cheese on the pizza and that I just wasn't seeing it. They brought me a replacement pizza regardless, which ALSO DIDN'T HAVE CHEESE ON IT. After calling the restaurant a second time they told me that if I don't specifically ask for cheese on the pizza there's a chance they won't put cheese on the pizza.

They're dead now.
posted by guiseroom at 7:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [42 favorites]


Additionally, HuffPost doesn't include the LA Times polls which consistently are the most favorable to Trump. Because reasons.
posted by Justinian at 7:25 PM on September 5, 2016


Here you go, cashman. A CNN reporter actually taking somebody to task for lying about his credentials. It may not be old school 60 Minutes, but it was the most reporting I've seen on American news in ages.
posted by sardonyx at 7:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


I've never been much of a fan of Mark Cuban but have been enjoying following @mcuban on Twitter. He's been aggressively tearing into the Donald - it's about all he's been tweeting about lately and he takes on his critics. This recent tweet has a rare video clip from The Trump Network that's worth seeing.
posted by madamjujujive at 7:34 PM on September 5, 2016 [10 favorites]


I've put on 20 pounds in the last year, most in the last six months. I'm not saying the election is the only reason, but it's definitely been a contributing factor.*

Thank god I'm not dating right now or I'd have to buy a whole new wardrobe.

*See, E.g., the infamous Convention Guacamole
posted by Superplin at 7:37 PM on September 5, 2016 [10 favorites]


> Thank god I'm not dating right now or I'd have to buy a whole new wardrobe.

I've switched to muumuus.
posted by guiseroom at 7:39 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


I've found that harem pants with a stretch waist are forgiving. My local pizza place is not stingy with the cheese, alas.
posted by madamjujujive at 7:42 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


Additionally, HuffPost doesn't include the LA Times polls which consistently are the most favorable to Trump. Because reasons.

What are those reasons and why do you disagree with them?
posted by one_bean at 7:43 PM on September 5, 2016


guiseroom: I've switched to muumuus.

I've actually been eyeing some.

Not least because apparently there's a hashtag movement suggesting punishment for "disloyal" GOP members, like my (not currently running for re-election and thus momentarily bulletproof) senator Jeff Flake.
posted by Superplin at 7:43 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Additionally, HuffPost doesn't include the LA Times polls which consistently are the most favorable to Trump. Because reasons.

Big reasons, though. 538 doesn't even assign that poll a grade (as opposed to the UPI/CVoter tracker which gets a C+) because the methodology is so different from the other polls it feeds into its maw. It's not good or bad, it's just stuck with an iffy initial assumption and the T+3.5ish bias seems consistent, which means that Trump will probably be waving it around in November.

I think it's about a 47ish-43ish race right now versus a 49-40 after the DNC, which in EV terms is actually relatively static.
posted by holgate at 7:47 PM on September 5, 2016


Clinton didn't commit a crime with her email server. This was the finding of the FBI and the Department of Justice after a year long investigation. I don't understand why anyone is still arguing about this?
posted by humanfont at 8:03 PM on September 5, 2016 [20 favorites]


The lack of enthusiasm for Clinton in where I live -- the epitome of a Democratic suburban stronghold -- is striking. No bumper stickers. No lawn signs. Everyone sighs and grimaces when her name comes up -- unlike Obama about ehom everyone was all smiles, big ones from liberals, tolerant ones from conservatives of the sort that live around here.

As for Trump, guys aren't scared to mention they like him in mixed company, the way they were a couple of months ago, and their wives do an attentive nod not a dismissive shrug. One well known guy jogging in "Hillary for Prison" t-shirts. I think there'll be some some non-ironic MAGA stuff soon.

Maybe Clinton can rely upon yellow dog Democrats to drag her into the endzone, or for Trump to commit some unrecoverable foul (at this point not sure what that would be) but if she wants to be sure of a victory she's got to do something to close the sale. The media can't do it -- it has blown its wad against Trump. You can't run 3-4 anti-Trump stories a day weeks on end and leave anyone carrying any more.
posted by MattD at 8:03 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Maybe Clinton can rely upon yellow dog Democrats to drag her into the endzone

No, just as with Obama, it will be people of color who win this election for Clinton.
posted by one_bean at 8:10 PM on September 5, 2016 [31 favorites]


...and the unrecoverable foul for Trump was being a racist piece of shit
posted by one_bean at 8:13 PM on September 5, 2016 [17 favorites]


That Trump Network promo madamjujujive cited above is hilarious, those testimonials brimming with portent. "Get on board. Don't think about it." A snake-oil slogan for the ages.
posted by valetta at 8:17 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


You can't run 3-4 anti-Trump stories a day weeks on end and leave anyone [caring] any more.

And yet you can apparently reheat nothingburger time and time again against Clinton and people will swallow it? Well, maybe you can, and more's the fucking pity.

I mean, we MeFi oldies know where you stand here -- which is fine enough -- but you seem not to have noticed that Trump is the kind of candidate who attracts supporters who'd react to a bumper sticker or a lawn sign by rear-ending you or poisoning your dog.

(And anyway, bumper stickers and lawn signs are a shitty index. The Obama campaign hated distributing lawn signs. Lawn signs are for state commissioner of widgets.)
posted by holgate at 8:18 PM on September 5, 2016 [25 favorites]


I still think the factor that will turn this from a 'squeaker' to a 'blowout' is Gary Johnson picking up support from Republicans who were "hold your nose and vote Trump" and the news that the Richmond VA Times-Dispatch, a dependable Republican endorser since Reagan, giving the Libertarian its endorsement is a good first sign. There are many "highly respected" Rs out there who are still "Never Trump" but know that they can't make Johnson into a true contender, just a "sure spoiler". We are just now moving from "not yet" time to "maybe now" time... it depends on whether they want to give Johnson enough of a boost to put him in the third podium on the debates (if not, they'll keep waiting until they feel they 'have to', so if Hillary remains semi-solid they may never come out for a Not Trump). And an "acceptable conservative alternative" will allow Hillary to have an 'easy' victory with even less than 47% (remember, with Ross Perot in the thick of things, Bill Clinton won his first Presidential election with 43%).
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:22 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


A snake-oil slogan for the ages.

Cuban's one of those actual billionaires -- let's just state for the record that he's a billionaire mostly because he lucked out with the timing on web-prehistory streaming media -- who recognises that Trump's shitty barrel-scraping infomercial business ventures are not anything an actual billionaire does. What's also hilarious here is that Cuban, who is no model of gentility, clearly treats Trump as déclassé.
posted by holgate at 8:25 PM on September 5, 2016 [30 favorites]


> And an "acceptable conservative alternative" will allow Hillary to have an 'easy' victory with even less than 47%

Added bonus for Senator Turtle: She won't be elected by a true "majority" - no Supreme Court nominations for her!

(This is a no good, very bad, absolutely terrible outcome for everyone, including especially the American people and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.)
posted by RedOrGreen at 8:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


Clinton didn't commit a crime with her email server. This was the finding of the FBI and the Department of Justice after a year long investigation.

Not quite. They found that she didn't intentionally break the law, but that she was "extremely careless." And the crime doesn't require intentionally breaking the law; it requires "mishandl[ing] classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way." (Source: that link to fbi.gov.) And I'm not sure how it's possible to be "extremely careless" without being "grossly negligent."
posted by John Cohen at 8:27 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


On the Goring of Hillary and Narrativeitis by Craig Mazin (Storify, fast read).
posted by maudlin at 8:30 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


Since May 2015, HuffPo has had 233 national polls showing Clinton over Trump and 25 with Trump over Clinton. And white folks wander around wondering to themselves where all those enthusiastic Clinton voters are. And people obsess over every little twitch in their favored poll tracker. Twenty years from now, the story of this election is going to be so obvious it'll be stupid: white people cannot elect a president on their own in 2016, and Republicans nominated a white nationalist for president. That's it. The rest has been the most fascinating, terrifying reality show the news media could produce.
posted by one_bean at 8:31 PM on September 5, 2016 [47 favorites]


RedorGreen, Ruth will never retire, she'll probably outlive us all. And even if Hillary doesn't get a 'real' mandate, she may get a friendly Senate - Trump's anti-coattails could still win the Ds the 3 seats they need. So maybe not so bad.
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:32 PM on September 5, 2016


Not quite. They found that she didn't intentionally break the law, but that she was "extremely careless." And the crime doesn't require intentionally breaking the law; it requires "mishandl[ing] classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way." (Source: that link to fbi.gov.) And I'm not sure how it's possible to be "extremely careless" without being "grossly negligent."

Now that the full report has been published, it's become clear Comey held his press conference so that he could exaggerate his agency's findings against Clinton, not downplay them as first assumed.
posted by one_bean at 8:32 PM on September 5, 2016 [78 favorites]


"extremely careless" is not the legal standard, and it was "extremely irregular" for the FBI director to hold a political press conference about an investigation that resulted in no recommended charges, while insinuating unspecified wrong doing that did not rise to a criminal level. Oh, and then the FBI released all their investigation materials to House Republicans, "extremely irregularly".

But we've only been over this 519 times, maybe the next thread we can start with SMOKE and SHADOWS around EMAILS, that should start the discussion off on a productive note.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:43 PM on September 5, 2016 [68 favorites]


They found that she didn't intentionally break the law, but that she was "extremely careless."

Just who is "they"? As it turns out, that is the personal (political) opinion of James Comey. That personal opinion is not supported by the evidence and reports of the actual FBI agents conductioning the investigation, which is why the recent release of actual FBI agent reports is so important. There is no indication that Clinton ever mailed even one single piece of classified information. And regarding the people emailing to her, they told the FBI that they were extremely careful, contrary to Comey's opinion. "Authors of the e-mails stated that they used their best judgment in drafting the messages and that it was common practice at State to carefully word e-mails on UNCLASSIFIED networks so as to avoid sensitive details or "talk around" REDACTED classified information.

The FBI agent reports indicate that no only didn't she break the law, she did nothing wrong at all. A big nothing.
posted by JackFlash at 8:52 PM on September 5, 2016 [78 favorites]


But, JackFlash, it sure is nice to see the progression in action from "didn't break the law" to "didn't intentionally break the law" through "extremely careless" on to "grossly negligent" and out at "committed a crime", all in one short comment!
posted by RedOrGreen at 8:56 PM on September 5, 2016 [9 favorites]


I'm not sure how it's possible to be "extremely careless" without being "grossly negligent."

Honestly, it's down to the fact that she was Secretary of State, which meant that her job was sui generis and involved doing shit that regularly got her out of range of the fucking creaky government networks that Obama inherited in 2009. It would have been nice if there had been flexible and agile systems and processes in place to accommodate that during a period of rapidly advancing technology, but it turns out that Colin and Condi were winging it as well, just in Colin's time it was an AOL account.

Of course a fucking desk jockey like Jim Comey is going to think that's careless because he's never had to be strapped into a fucking C-17 to do his fucking job.
posted by holgate at 9:11 PM on September 5, 2016 [26 favorites]




people, we could have four to eight YEARS of holding Clinton's feet to the fire and showing how much we haven't drunk the kool-aid in the echo chamber by asking the hard questions and pointing out how her email handling totally wouldn't fly in our IT departments. Let's just elect her and send the white supremacist candidate back into the dustbin of history first, k? Then there will be so much fun times to be had talking about Clinton's "optics," I promise
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:20 PM on September 5, 2016 [50 favorites]


I took a break from these threads for the long weekend, finally get home from the airport tonight and you folks are still having the exact same damn arguments about the fucking emails that you were last week. Jesus, give a break.
posted by octothorpe at 9:23 PM on September 5, 2016 [41 favorites]


also when all this is over I want prez Clinton to sign an executive order granting Joy Reid a prime time show and a life size working replica of the starship Enterprise
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [27 favorites]


Here's the relevant article from Tonycpsu's link, above:

The Revenge of Roger’s Angels
[…] Murdoch was not a fan of Trump’s and especially did not like his stance on immigration. (The antipathy was mutual: “Murdoch’s been very bad to me,” Trump told me in March.) A few days before the first GOP debate on Fox in August 2015, Murdoch called Ailes at home. “This has gone on long enough,” Murdoch said, according to a person briefed on the conversation. Murdoch told Ailes he wanted Fox’s debate moderators — Kelly, Bret Baier, and Chris Wallace — to hammer Trump on a variety of issues.[…]

On the night of August 6, in front of 24 million people, the Fox moderators peppered Trump with harder-hitting questions. But it was Kelly’s question regarding Trump’s history of crude comments about women that created a media sensation. He seemed personally wounded by her suggestion that this spoke to a temperament that might not be suited for the presidency. “I’ve been very nice to you, though I could probably maybe not be based on the way you have treated me,” he said pointedly.

After the debate, Trump called Ailes and screamed about Kelly. “How could you do this?” he said, according to a person briefed on the call. Ailes was caught between his friend Trump, his boss Murdoch, and his star Kelly. “Roger lost control of Megyn and Trump,” a Fox anchor said.

The parties only became more entrenched when Trump launched a series of attacks against Kelly, including suggesting that her menstrual cycle had influenced her debate question. […]
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:36 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


I love these election posts, but this is yet another week where it's 1 am Monday morning (ok, Tuesday this week because of the holiday.) I've finally caught up with the comments, but now I have to go to sleep. By the time I return from work 17-18 hours hence, there will be another 500+ comments. Thus the near-Sisyphean task of reading election comments begins anew.

When I get back, can we please, please, please have the email stuff settled for once and for all? Please?
posted by double block and bleed at 10:03 PM on September 5, 2016 [8 favorites]


So apparently Ann Coulter was silly enough to go on the Rob Lowe roast on Comedy Central.

I'm only sorta following the reactions on Twitter, but predictably nobody seems to be holding back.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 10:08 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm absolutely certain she knew perfectly well what all the rules were, she's smart and she's a wonk and she's lying about being confused. Seems to be a fairly normative and inconsequential political lie to me.

OK, I just have to say that I have worked with a LOT of smart wonks. And let me tell you, there is no one more baffled by anything to do with computers and with IT policies than your standard boomer wonk.
posted by lunasol at 10:14 PM on September 5, 2016 [16 favorites]


I mean, oh god, you should have heard the wailing and unhappiness when we switched to google mail/apps (from Outlook) at my last job.
posted by lunasol at 10:15 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


I am a total wonk on multiple subjects, and this morning I WAS BAFFLED that I got a Google Update notice, but I couldn't connect to anything. ANYTHING. Was it a virus? Was my computer no longer compatible with Google? I checked the router, asked my wife if I could use her phone-
*just waking up* "Did you pay Comcast for this month?"
"....Oh."

Being a wonk doesn't help. At all.
posted by happyroach at 10:42 PM on September 5, 2016 [9 favorites]


I seriously hope that Clinton wasn't intimately involved and understood the workings of her email server, I'd like to think the Secretary of State has more important things to do. I'm pretty sure she told someone "make it work" and they did. Or do we think she should compile her own OS too? Maybe that's how she relaxes at night.

This whole thing is ridiculous.
posted by bongo_x at 11:03 PM on September 5, 2016 [37 favorites]


Seriously tired of the "Clinton should have known better" about email. In 2009, she asked everyone involved if it was OK. Including a Colin Powell, a previous Secretary of State. Everyone said it was ok.

So how could she have intuitively known that eight years later, that becomes the focus of the opposition against her? Because honestly, she has lived in a world where she just has to get shit done, and everyone is going to find some reason to sue her for something anyway.

If you want to be frustrated, be frustrated at the terrible state of IT practices of the GSA and the Government security community that leads to shadow IT like operations. And this one was with a blessing, and it is not that big of a deal.

Compared to the missing emails on the server run by Cheney during his time as Vice President that probably included his direct responsibility for the Valeria Plame security leak, Hillary is definitely someone I trust to do this the right way. And would probably force a few GSA leads to read "The Phoenix Project" to get their head out of the 1990s world of IT management as well.
posted by mrzarquon at 11:08 PM on September 5, 2016 [34 favorites]


a fucking orange buffoon who would be LOSING BY A LANDSLIDE to pretty much ANYONE else?

How exactly do you even define LANDSLIDE? It's extremely rare for the losing candidate to not win at least 40% of the national vote. McGovern lost to shitbag Nixon 37% to 60% in 1972. In 1992 Clinton/Bush/Perot split the vote 43%/37%/19%. Reagan crushing Carter and Mondale? They got 41% and 40% of the vote. Bush crushing Dukakis? He got 45%!

The winningest president ever was Johnson in 1964. He still only got 61% of the popular vote.

How far ahead do you think Clinton should be?
posted by great_radio at 11:31 PM on September 5, 2016 [17 favorites]


How far ahead do you think Clinton should be?
Let's see, Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election but he got just over 60 million votes. The largest audience Trump's "Apprentice" show ever got was almost 29 million in the season finale of the first season... recent seasons have averaged less than 10 million. And many of those TV watchers are not eligible to vote. On Prime Time TV when there were only three networks, a "30 share" was considered a hit; today most channels are delighted to get a "10 share". Of course, a baseball player is a success with a .300 batting average and only The Super Bowl gets close to a "50 share" anymore (And that's with almost as many viewers as there were voters for both candidates combined in 2012... and remember, a lot of people watching TV aren't voters)

So what was I saying? Compared to his "TV popularity", he shouldn't be polling over 20%. Maybe if he were running against Tyrion Lannister or Rick Grimes...
posted by oneswellfoop at 11:54 PM on September 5, 2016 [2 favorites]


If people are going to be criticizing Hillary Clinton for her time at State, they should actually look into her actual policies and actions there, and judge her based on that. The email situation is just a distraction, lacking substance.
posted by Apocryphon at 11:55 PM on September 5, 2016 [5 favorites]


Boy, if those taco trucks have Wi-Fi, we should be able to arrive at a consensus on the relative cosmic importance of Hillary's emails sometime in Chelsea's second term.
posted by y2karl at 12:00 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]




Hillary Clinton: The China hawk - "For some US officials, including a few angling for senior positions in a future Clinton administration, the Hanoi meeting is evidence that she would be prepared to adopt a tougher approach to China. In Beijing, the meeting reinforced the impression that she was the principal China hawk within the Obama administration."
These tensions set the stage for what will be one of the central challenges facing the next president. The new, more confrontational US approach, first signalled by Mrs Clinton in Hanoi, has not persuaded the Chinese to abandon its plans for the South China Sea. As a result, the new administration will face a choice between doubling down on the same strategy or trying to find some way to accommodate Chinese demands...

Over the past few years, the US has expanded security co-operation with Vietnam and the Philippines, both of which are involved in territorial disputes with China, and backed a court case brought by the Philippines. An international tribunal ruled in July that many of China’s claims in the South China Sea were unlawful...

Along with the Hanoi meeting, the stand-off over Mr Chen was another piece of evidence for those in Beijing who believe Mrs Clinton to be a relatively hardline voice about China, both on security issues and human rights. Indeed, Chinese suspicions about Mrs Clinton date back to the 1995 World Conference on Women in Beijing, when she insisted that “women’s rights are human rights and human rights are women’s rights” — remarks that were not broadcast in China.

As a result, many analysts in China would expect a prospective Clinton administration to be more willing to confront Beijing. “She has always been hard on China since her first visit in 1995,” says Chu Shulong, an international relations expert at Tsinghua University. “That’s her style.”

Shi Yinhong, another international relations expert at Renmin University, agrees: “Hillary will be tougher on China than Obama...”

However the pivot has not been without its critics. Hugh White, a former Australian defence official and an influential observer on Asia, believes that the US is not prepared for the huge risks and costs that would be required to actually shift China’s strategy...

So how would President Clinton act in Asia? ... Should Mrs Clinton win the election, the ideal situation for her would be for Congress to approve the [TPP] trade deal before her inauguration. But if that does not happen, she would face the difficult choice of whether to reopen an agreement which she has described as central to American influence in the region, but which she now believes to be flawed in practice. At the Asean summit in Laos this week, Mr Obama will try to reassure Washington’s regional partners that the trade agreement still remains on track.
posted by kliuless at 12:12 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


If Clinton wins either Georgia or Arizona, states that haven't gone blue since well before we started using the terms red and blue, the press will definitely call it a landslide. It doesn't take a huge margin in the popular vote to win a lot of states, and there are enough never-Trumpers out there to make some normally red states winnable.
posted by nangar at 12:12 AM on September 6, 2016


Phyllis Schlafly was quite a piece of work -- a woman campaigning against the idea of women working, so she created and ran a very successful and large national organization.

I think, in her honor, that we should re-launch the Equal Rights Amendment. Who would oppose it today?
posted by msalt at 12:16 AM on September 6, 2016 [33 favorites]


mrzarquon, all of the things you're saying there—that everyone is going to find some reason to sue her and that preceding administrations avoided getting held responsible for things because the evidence wasn't in the public record—are the sort of things that make me certain she knew exactly what she was doing. This is the equivalent of a government official keeping paper records at their house, in filing cabinets with trapdoors under them to drop them into an industrial shredder-pulverizer in the basement at the push of a button.

It's just absurd to suggest that this high-ranking government official who is a lawyer and somehow had the presence of mind to have all the emails checked by a team of lawyers before handing them over, as she was taking up the office of SoS really simply missed the significance of having those records under her and her team's complete control, rather than in the hands of a neutral government archivist and available to any elected official with sufficient authority. (Or unelected official, for that matter.)

But, as sotonohito said in the passage quoted by lunasol, in a world where none of those elected officials are going to be held to the same standard this is "a fairly normative and inconsequential political lie": I mean, one way Congressional Republicans could have been sure to take her down with this (not to mention prevent things like this from happening in the future, as if they even care about that) would have been to immediately pass legislation holding themselves and all other members of Congress to the same standards. It would've been the equivalent of that comedy trope where everyone in line takes a step backwards, so that the one person left looks like they volunteered/stuck their neck out on purpose. But there's no way that would have happened.
posted by XMLicious at 12:20 AM on September 6, 2016


How far ahead do you think Clinton should be?

I'd settle for about 7-8%. That's enough to give a nice cushion. Right now one October Surprise puts Trump in the lead.
posted by Justinian at 12:24 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


The problems I have with Clinton are the problems I have with politicians in general, and the US system in particular.

The problems I have with Trump are so much bigger and more colorful than that. You'd think he'd actually benefit from not being a practiced politician in that regard, but adding the impossibility of one person coming in and completely changing the system with the impossibility of him, specifically, being that person...

My ideal candidate doesn't exist and wouldn't win anyway. Clinton being good at politics is a plus, rather than a minus, even if I don't like the politics she has to be good at.
posted by gadge emeritus at 12:38 AM on September 6, 2016 [14 favorites]


I'm still waiting for a taco truck, period. We got burritos (Mexican! woooooo!) and empanadas (Colombian, so delicious) and plantain chips and there's even a Venezuelan food truck, BUT NO TACOS.

This is making me hungry and it's not lunch yet. I hope the Colombian or Mexican food truck is around today. dammit... only on Friday... empanadas!!

(already registered to vote, no worries)
posted by fraula at 1:13 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh for the love of Christ. Big media outlets have a perverse incentive. They're (mostly) white (mostly) dudes living in (entirely) large U.S. cities, who will benefit from an idiot president who will provide them with stories galore.
posted by SakuraK at 1:19 AM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


This is the equivalent of a government official keeping paper records at their house, in filing cabinets with trapdoors under them to drop them into an industrial shredder-pulverizer in the basement at the push of a button.

It's just absurd to suggest that this high-ranking government official who is a lawyer and somehow had the presence of mind to have all the emails checked by a team of lawyers before handing them over


No, just no. As the full FBI release shows, she disregarded Powell's advice to try to skirt/break the law and instead set up a system that retained all records required by the law. And you think it's some dastardly proof that she had lawyers doing the personal/business division? You think she should have personally gone through 50,000+ emails? And if she had done it herself, I'm sure people would be saying she should've let a third party do it. Hell, even Comey who was clearly trying to bring her down a notch or completely said there were no issues or nefariousness with the separation.
posted by chris24 at 2:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [36 favorites]


I'm pretty sure she told someone "make it work" and they did. Or do we think she should compile her own OS too? Maybe that's how she relaxes at night.

Folks. Folks, I couldn't believe it when I read it in the paper today. I know! I know. We're all shocked that I can still be shocked by Crooked Hillary. That's how short-circuited she is; she's literally shocking you with electricity.

But look. We all knew that Crooked Hillary lied about Benghazi. We all know she lied about the emails in her computer. But did you know she lied about her operating system too?

When I heard that she compiles her own OS for the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play email server, I needed to know what that meant. I wanted to know how to make the best operating system. I wanted an operating system that's going beat China's computers like a dog. So I asked the best experts.

"Donald," they said, "you have to optimize it."

And I said, "How? Tell me how."

"With flags," they said. Can you believe it? "You have to compile it with flags."

Crooked Hillary said she was a patriot. Crooked Hillary said that she loves my country. But did she compile her operating system with American flags? No, my friends. She did not. This is going to make you sick. So sick, I almost don't want to tell you. But you deserve to know. She used the -O3 flag. At first I didn't get it. It sounds like gobbledygook. But if you put it in a mirror and read it backwards, you all know what that stands for. EO. "Europe Okay."

And do you know what else? You invoke it with the taco emoji. I tell you, my head was spinning.

[Fake]
posted by compartment at 2:31 AM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


Funny how they don't have to unpack Clinton's history with the moderators. Oh yeah. That's because she doesn't pick fights or hold grudges.

No, that's obviously because she doesn't hold press conferences.
Also, journalists don't want make her mad by telling the truth about her, because they are afraid of being killed or mysteriously vanishing.

It's really not so hard to think like a Republican, if you really try.
posted by sour cream at 2:32 AM on September 6, 2016


It's really not so hard to think like a Republican, if you really try.
It's called Fantasizing.
posted by oneswellfoop at 2:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Fellas, fellas:

Donald asks: "Does she look presidential, fellas? Give me a break."

Plus, I just learned on liberal MSNBC that yesterday Hillary coughed for almost 2 minutes. How presidential is that, fellas?

Tim Kaine's got your back, Hillary.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:01 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


"Here's my prediction," Kaine said. "At the end of the second term of Hillary Clinton Donald Trump will still be saying that very same thing as he's hawking bottled water somewhere and we've forgotten he'd ever run for president of the United States."

Tim Kaine flavored shade is delicious.
posted by like_neon at 3:06 AM on September 6, 2016 [66 favorites]


I continue to hold out hope that Donald Trump spends at least part of Hillary's term as President sharing a jail cell with Bernie Madoff and we get to see the TRUMPs removed from 'his' buildings and replaced with something representing honest business.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Hooooooly smokes Dad with the sharp darts
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:18 AM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


Trump tops Clinton 45% to 43% in new CNN survey of likely voters.

Hopefully an outlier, but let's keep fighting about bullshit email stuff.
posted by chris24 at 3:30 AM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


"likely voters" = white people.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:36 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Clinton 45% to 43% in new CNN survey

Full results here. (PDF)
posted by lampshade at 3:40 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Hillary Clinton's Personal Emails Are the Key to Understanding Emailgate

"3. That said, Clinton was well aware that her department emails were official records and had to be retained. The evidence makes it very clear she knew this. What's more, while her use of a private server may not have been known widely, there were plenty of people who did know. It's hard to believe that she did this with FOIA in mind, since a non-government email account would have been a spectacularly stupid and ineffective way to try to avoid FOIA requests.

4. Clinton did in fact retain all of her emails on her private server. When the State Department asked for them, she turned everything over to them promptly, with no hedging or negotiation.

5. There's been lots of feverish speculation that Clinton may have deleted some official emails before turning them over to State, but there's no evidence that this ever happened."

Another good analysis from Kevin Drum.
posted by chris24 at 3:49 AM on September 6, 2016 [30 favorites]


Oh, and for the "she's smart and a wonk and is just playing dumb but really knows/should know all the technical stuff" crowd:

"There's abundant evidence that Clinton was almost completely technically illiterate. She had virtually no experience even using a computer, and frequently discarded new BlackBerries after a few days because she was frustrated that they worked differently than her old one. She had no computer on her desk. She was famously confused by her iPad. Like a lot of people, she basically treated email like magic: you type some words, press a button, and your words end up somewhere else. All the intricacies of protocols and servers and intermediate storage and backups were like so much Greek to her."
posted by chris24 at 3:51 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


"likely voters" = white people.

Even in RVs her lead dropped 5 points from the last CNN poll.
posted by chris24 at 3:56 AM on September 6, 2016


So America's voters are rewarding Trump for (by his own declaration) NEVER using email. Well, we get everything we need from Twitter, right? Yeah, even if we survive the Assault of the Donald, America is doomed.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:00 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


What's the Justinian index currently?
posted by Yowser at 4:04 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Well, thankfully NBC's just released poll shows Clinton leading 48-42 (2 way) and 41-37 (4 way) among registered voters, same as last week. So maybe Twitter America isn't doomed yet.
posted by chris24 at 4:05 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


The NBC poll can't make up for the TEN POINT swing in the CNN poll. Clinton's honest and trustworthy number is 35% in the CNN poll... vs 50% for Trump. Yes, 50% of the population thinks that a guy shown by every fact checking body in the country to be the biggest liar of any current politician (and rivaled only by human garbage machine Michelle Bachmann for the recent past) is honest and trustworthy.

JCPL: moderate-high. If it wasn't for the NBC poll it would have spiked all the way to HIGH.
posted by Justinian at 4:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


oneswellfoop, even Republican pollsters are sharing your concern on CNN's poll.

"Would love to see explanation of their "likely" voter model, which drops sample by 100, more than half HRC voters."
posted by chris24 at 4:15 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Calm down people, she still has an extremely likely path to winning that does not even including winning Florida OR Ohio, both of which she's leading in the polling average by 2-3 points.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:20 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Calm down people

Clearly you've never met me.
posted by Justinian at 4:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [36 favorites]


The only bright sign in that 50% "honest and trustworthy" rating for Trump is that now is the best time in America's history to go into business selling snake oil, Florida off-shore real estate and shares in a Broadway musical about Hitler. No, wait, that last one would probably become a real hit...
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:22 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


I do technical support at a large R1 university. Believe me when I tell you that there are actualfax geniuses who don't know what a web browser is. I have had to explain over the phone what a cursor is. I frequently have to provide the most basic of "click there to upload a document" sort to a state supreme court justice who teaches a class as an adjunct from time to time (and he's a good two decades younger than Hillary).
posted by soren_lorensen at 4:32 AM on September 6, 2016 [24 favorites]




I agree that she's going to win TD Strange. I have faith in America - well, black, brown, female and LGBT America - but I don't want to just win, I want to nuke him from orbit to be sure. I want to burn his movement to the ground and salt the earth so it never rises again.
posted by chris24 at 4:33 AM on September 6, 2016 [26 favorites]






NBC: Hillary coughed

That is soooo one-sided reporting! Fact of the matter is, both sides cough.
posted by sour cream at 4:45 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


That Abc headline is kinda misleading actually. Trump is still saying all undocumented immigrants have to be deported, but maybe some of them can come back. It's the same vague bullshit.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:45 AM on September 6, 2016


I agree that she's going to win TD Strange...

And not implying you don't want the same thing. Just commenting on why I don't like even tightening of polls.

posted by chris24 at 4:46 AM on September 6, 2016




BREAKING NEWS: Autocorrect picks "I'M WITH STUPID" for running mate.
posted by y2karl at 4:55 AM on September 6, 2016


Love that he'll be in charge of agriculture in the Trump administration. I wonder what cool innovations he might have in mind for our nations farms. 🙃
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:55 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Kaine Hits Trump For Saying Clinton "Doesn't Look Presidential"

[real, but misleading]
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:12 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


sometimes you get the oligarchs you deserve...

Inside Bill Clinton’s nearly $18 million job as ‘honorary chancellor’ of a for-profit college
posted by ennui.bz at 5:34 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


I love how for the past couple of months everybody, especially the press, has been insinuating really bad things about Clinton for not having a press conference for XXX days and then yesterday she has one and it barely makes the news. And by 'I love' I actually mean wtf.
posted by localhuman at 5:35 AM on September 6, 2016 [45 favorites]


There is no evidence that Laureate received special favors from the State Department in direct exchange for hiring Bill Clinton, but we're going to insinuate that's what happened anyway. Thanks for the additional helping of muck, WaPo!
posted by yhbc at 5:41 AM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


I think the very concept of press conferences is highly overratted, especially with the modern lapdog model of the press. Why bother with a presser when there's so many other, better, ways of getting the message out? The press never presses (heh) anyone on the tough issues or problems, they're just stenographers taking down the words of the mighty, so who needs the big flashbubs and gazillion microphones presser of yore?

Go on various talking head shows, have townhalls, do basically what Clinton has been doing, and you get your message out just fine, and sometimes even face tougher and more persistent questions than the once mighty fourth estate ever bothers asking.

I agree it's pathetic that the long line of evil Clinton not doing pressers for this many days bit ended without anyone really acknowledging that she did a presser, but ultimately I think her approach to things is better than having a weekly event where reporters talk over each other.
posted by sotonohito at 5:49 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


I love how for the past couple of months everybody, especially the press, has been insinuating really bad things about Clinton for not having a press conference for XXX days and then yesterday she has one and it barely makes the news.

Oh, it was front and center on NPR this morning. Not the actual answers she gave to the questions, mind you (which were proclaimed standard and not of consequence), but the fact that she did it. The press conference angst is 100% journalist inside baseball and I really wish they would just admit that instead of insinuating that something is rotten in the state of Denmark because Clinton is happy to do all manner of press other than standing in front of a room full of 50 journalists all shouting random questions at her and trying to get themselves in front of the business end of a camera in order to increase their own professional prestige.
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:49 AM on September 6, 2016 [36 favorites]


Get ready for a whole new round of articles talking about Clinton only holding one press conference in 280+ days and counting.
posted by GhostintheMachine at 6:06 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now that the fourth, fifth, and nth walls are well and truly broken with #trumpcantswim trending on Twitter, I have to conclude that we're living in some sort of CASE NIGHTMARE GREEN where things you write actually come true.

So maybe we should cool it a little, OK?
posted by whuppy at 6:06 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]




Or do we think she should compile her own OS too? Maybe that's how she relaxes at night.
I'm now imagining Hillary and Bill sitting together in bed. Bill's reading a book, with a highlighter tucked behind the cover. Hillary's quixotically staring at a battered circa-2005 Dell Laptop sitting on the bed.

She swears.

"Hey Bill. Can I borrow your iPad? I'm in menuconfig, the Wi-Fi drivers for this thing don't work, and can't remember if this laptop had an ATI or NVidia GPU"

Bill silently hands her his iPad.

"Oh, and that tar command I always forget?"

Bill grins, looks at a post-it carefully hidden on the side of his nightstand. "Was it -czvf?"

"Duh. Thanks." Hillary, now laser-focused, finds the answer she's looking for on Stack Overflow, types some more, finally types make and leans back while Kernel 4.7.2 compiles on the ancient laptop.

"Hey hun?" Bill asks. "I've got to fly out to New Hampshire at the crack of dawn. Do you think you can postpone setting up sendmail until tomorrow?"

"Of course. Learned my lesson on that one. I think I'm more of a postfix person these days..."

Bill goes back to his book, and mumbles something about "buy a router like normal people." Hillary picks up an inexplicably-leatherbound copy of O'Reilly's "DNS and BIND (5th Edition)" from her nightstand, and begins flipping through it while her code compiles.
posted by schmod at 6:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [91 favorites]


Has Trump hit his ceiling?
In poll after poll, Trump isn't even close to winning a majority of the vote. While he’s narrowed the gap between his campaign and Hillary Clinton in recent weeks, in the past 21 national polls conducted using conventional phone or internet methodologies over the last five weeks, Trump’s high-water mark in a head-to-head matchup with Clinton is 44 percent.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


over the last five weeks, Trump’s high-water mark in a head-to-head matchup with Clinton is 44 percent.

Trump has never been above 44% the entire election according to Huffpost Pollster and only once (45%) very briefly at Real Clear Politics.
posted by chris24 at 6:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I have to conclude that we're living in some sort of CASE NIGHTMARE GREEN where things you write actually come true.

This was tentatively established a few threads back; the dominant hypothesis was that there may exist a reality-making typewriter which is being passed around Metafilter but no one knows they had it until afterward
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:22 AM on September 6, 2016 [36 favorites]


Future headline: 2016 Electoral College votes are finalized. Trump comes in second, Clinton next-to-last.
posted by DanSachs at 6:23 AM on September 6, 2016 [37 favorites]


Oh, it was front and center on NPR this morning.
I know full well that hanging out here has, uh, affected my views on how this election is being covered, but NPR had me swearing back at them, this morning. Literally calling this a "horse race;" "[Trump] has had a problem with what political professionals would call message discipline;" "Clinton's answers didn't make news." Asking insipid rhetoricals like 'I wonder why people think that Donald Trump is a viable candidate?'
Piss-poor, weak excuse for actual journalism. Infuriating.
posted by rp at 6:25 AM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


This was tentatively established a few threads back; the dominant hypothesis was that there may exist a reality-making typewriter which is being passed around Metafilter but no one knows they had it until afterward

The apocalypse will be brought about by writers too twee to use a damn word processor
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:26 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


Inside Bill Clinton’s nearly $18 million job as ‘honorary chancellor’ of a for-profit college
Clinton’s contract with Laureate was approved by the State Department’s ethics office, in keeping with an Obama administration agreement with Hillary Clinton that gave the agency the right to review her husband’s outside work during her tenure. An ethics official wrote that he saw “no conflict of interest with Laureate or any of their partners,” according to a letter recently released by the conservative group Citizens United, which received it through a public-records request.
. . .
The company says its campuses have received about $1.4 million total over the years in grants from the State Department and its international aid arm, USAID. Of that amount, only $15,000 came while Clinton was secretary of state — student scholarships funded by USAID, Laureate said.

Publicly available grant records are not detailed enough to corroborate Laureate’s exact numbers. But the records do show that neither Laureate nor any of its campuses has received any individual grants larger than $25,000 from the State Department or USAID.
. . .
Unlike Trump University, Laureate’s campuses are fully accredited and offer graduating students valid diplomas. Compared with other universities, including its for-profit competitors, Laureate has a relatively low percentage of students who default on their loans, seen as an indicator of student financial success after graduation. A 2012 Senate report on for-profit colleges said that Laureate’s flagship U.S. school, Walden University, was the best of 30 campuses studied and that students there generally “fared well.”
TRUMP & CLINTON ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AMIRITE
posted by schroedinger at 6:29 AM on September 6, 2016 [41 favorites]


Piss-poor, weak excuse for actual journalism. Infuriating.

Yeah, I've spent a lot of time over the years defending NPR as middle-of-the-road-but-inoffensive and the home of at least some excellent journalism to my husband, who has a subscription to Jacobin so, you know. But I'm over that. I still listen to it in my car because the alternative is listening to my four-year-old talking about whether every crosswalk we see beeps or talks, but otherwise I'm all in on podcasts. I don't know what they're doing at NPR these days but it's not political journalism.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:30 AM on September 6, 2016 [14 favorites]


The only bright sign in that 50% "honest and trustworthy" rating for Trump is that now is the best time in America's history to go into business selling snake oil, Florida off-shore real estate and shares in a Broadway musical about Hitler. No, wait, that last one would probably become a real hit...

"♫ Springtime for Donald and Ivanka ♬"
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:32 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


I still listen to it in my car because the alternative is listening to my four-year-old talking about whether every crosswalk we see beeps or talks

I am insanely jealous that you have a toddler who thinks that a parent listening to something else is a reason to hold their tongue. Mine just repeats his observation till I acknowledge it.
posted by phearlez at 6:34 AM on September 6, 2016 [18 favorites]


A mid-'40s ceiling for Trump might not be enough to win but it's still a depressing indictment of American society.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:37 AM on September 6, 2016 [35 favorites]


Oh, they don't yell at you to shut off the radio so they can be heard?
posted by Artw at 6:37 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


the alternative is listening to my four-year-old talking about whether every crosswalk we see beeps or talks

You're just gonna leave us in suspense like that?

THE PEOPLE DEMAND TO KNOW.
posted by Etrigan at 6:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


In other news, the Hamilton Thing in these political threads just got super relevant.
posted by dis_integration at 6:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


He tells me he "doesn't like the talking radio" but I tell him that the driver gets to pick what's on the radio so he's got about 12 more years before his opinion on this matters.

He talks incessantly at all other times but for whatever reason riding in the car gives him enough other stimulation that he can shut his mouth for 10 minutes at a time. Except that he is a pretty terrible back seat driver and has very strong opinions about driving routes like a London cabbie studying for the Knowledge. (As a Pittsburgher born and bread, he's already got "you can't get there from here, so turn right at the thing that used to be there 30 years ago but is no longer there" down pat.)
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


And I just noticed my 'nuke from orbit' link is completely wrong and from another comment. This is the right link. /Aliens
posted by chris24 at 6:49 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Piss-poor, weak excuse for actual journalism. Infuriating.

. . . is what I said about them in 2004. Sad to hear its the same.

For those infrequent thread visitors who wonder why we can't commiserate critically over Clinton's steadfast refusal to be perfect in politics and in life, I would ask that they please remain seated and calm for just over two months, and then we can get back to it. We are expecting a patch of turbulence from your-neighbors-are-literally-voting-for-a-fascist.

Thank you and we hope you enjoy the election. *biing*
posted by petebest at 6:49 AM on September 6, 2016 [23 favorites]


A mid-'40s ceiling for Trump might not be enough to win but it's still a depressing indictment of American society.

What's worse is that this incompetent dumpster fire of a shitshow has no ground game, is barely spending money and he's still competitive in the horse race.
posted by Talez at 6:54 AM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


He's white, he's male and he's been on TV a lot. That's apparently all it takes.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:56 AM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


What's worse is that this incompetent dumpster fire of a shitshow has no ground game, is barely spending money and he's still competitive in the horse race.

Though a lot of people are expecting him to underperform the polls 2-3% because of this.
posted by chris24 at 6:59 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Fox News Settles Gretchen Carlson's Harassment Suit For $20M

"The network is settling on Ailes' behalf, and the company is expected to offer an unprecedented public apology as part of the settlement."

"Two anonymous sources familiar with the discussions said settlement agreements have also been reached with two other women."

How Trump having a sexual predator as a key advisor is not bigger news is... well, I guess expected of our shitty press corps.
posted by chris24 at 7:03 AM on September 6, 2016 [33 favorites]


My almost five year old will cover her ears and shriek in agony when I play anything in the car besides "girl" songs (eg, Neko Case, Taylor Swift, CRJ, Loretta Lynn, Grimes, etc). She will tolerate instrumental music but cannot comprehend why I willingly listen to other people talk when you could instead be listening to sweet, sweet tunes.

The point, I guess, is that cars are for music and I've gained a little bit of sanity by escaping the election madness by shutting out the talking and just zoning out to the aforementioned tunes.
posted by Tevin at 7:04 AM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


And Trump also does not spend frugally because he uses RNC money to pay for his events months ago at his own properties. Easy mode in indeed. Can you imagine the wall to wall coverage if the Clintons did anything remotely similar to this? (Probably as similar as a fifth cousin in some swing state being paid for cupcakes for an event.)
posted by R343L at 7:04 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


TRUMP & CLINTON ARE EXACTLY THE SAME AMIRITE

as we've seen time and time again in MeFi threads, the for-profit college business is about extracting money from students through federal college loans.

whether it specifically violated state department ethics rules is immaterial compared to the fact that it's a grossly unethical business to take 18 mil from, especially for a former president. as the article indicates, one of the things Laureate was buying was the respectability of having Clinton on board, the respectability which is crucial to continue the stream of federal money.
posted by ennui.bz at 7:09 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


At this point, I really want the Clinton campaign to do a bait and switch. Set up a situation that looks mildly suspicious, let the media go after it like ravenous wolves and then after some breathless coverage, surprise! Just a feel good story that the media would have to report on. The person behind the monster mask was Tim Kaine holding a puppy.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 7:09 AM on September 6, 2016 [16 favorites]


Talk of changes afoot, of splits and mergers, coming out of Des Moines.
posted by Wordshore at 7:10 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


He's a Republican. There are a lot of people this election who're still just voting for Their Party over The Other Guys and who I think either aren't paying attention or are just so convinced The Other Guys are actually evil that the details of the current election don't even matter. Throw in the people who legit aren't smart enough to have any idea what goes into being president and who're just swayed by all this talk about America being great? The number of people who're actually really thinking about the issues and still deciding to vote for Trump doesn't need to be very high for Trump to be polling where he is. Racism, fearmongering, and poor analytical skills are things that have to be solved outside the campaign process. I think the media's portrayal of her is having a negative impact, but it's having an impact of a few percentage points either way. Even a completely accurate picture of Clinton versus Trump would be struggling to hit "landslide" numbers.
posted by Sequence at 7:11 AM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


Artw: Oh, they don't yell at you to shut off the radio so they can be heard?

soren_lorensen: He tells me he "doesn't like the talking radio" but I tell him that the driver gets to pick what's on the radio so he's got about 12 more years before his opinion on this matters.

Our backseat rider is more like Artw's. We try "driver's pick," but he's vocal and he'll request specific songs (we're spoiled with cars that read CD-Roms or USB drives with MP3s), or more often, demand we play the game he made up. I wonder if I can get him to sing along with Soft Cell's Entertain Me, because it would be so wonderfully fitting. And entertaining for me.

His younger brother doesn't say much, but is emphatic with "No," and strongly prefers music, specifically upbeat music, over news radio. Maybe they'd both like Soft Cell (with parental filtering for such hits as Sex Dwarf).
/parent filter
posted by filthy light thief at 7:31 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


as we've seen time and time again in MeFi threads, the for-profit college business is about extracting money from students through federal college loans.

I'm not happy about that involvement--but from the evidence cited Laureate is no FastTrain or Trump University.

You don't like for-profit colleges? I'm with you. But that article is clearly written in such a way as to imply shady going-ons and the leveraging Hillary Clinton's SoS position for money, and no evidence is given of that. There is no evidence of anything illegal, unlike Trump University or, say, Jane Sanders committing loan fraud and subsequently torpedoing Burlington College.

It's innuendo and bullshit.
posted by schroedinger at 7:32 AM on September 6, 2016 [29 favorites]


soren_lorensen: I don't know what they're doing at NPR these days but it's not political journalism.

At least they 1) have a diversity of voices, and 2) aren't non-stop [bad] political news, with more news and stories from other parts of the world than I see or hear elsewhere (in part because I don't actively seek out more diverse newsfeeds). For those two reasons, I'll keep (vocally, thought not monetarily) supporting NPR.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:33 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's innuendo and bullshit.

And it sells!
posted by filthy light thief at 7:34 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump is still saying all undocumented immigrants have to be deported, but maybe some of them can come back. It's the same vague bullshit.

Actually, some of it's not so much vague, as a strictly defined area of doubt and uncertainty: as befits the role of Stephen Miller in the Trump policy team, it's close to the Sessions policy of "enforce all the laws first and then we can talk about reform" which is really saying "let's kick the can on reform way down the road because we can always find more enforcing to be done."

To the group of people who have an ear for this -- which I'm sure includes most Hispanic Americans, along with anyone who has close experience of the immigration system -- this is not new stuff, other than the idea that enforcement may be put in the hands of the kind of local cops who make money from speed traps, and that the kind of bureaucratic screwups that often show up during the process might suddenly turn into a deportation nightmare.

The press conference angst is 100% journalist inside baseball

Process stories are lazy bullshit. American political journalists too often come across as experts in the rarified field of American political journalism and nothing else.
posted by holgate at 7:36 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


All this talk of toddler back seat driving is great prep for what the eventual Trump presidency would be like.
posted by Artw at 7:38 AM on September 6, 2016 [26 favorites]


Trump also wants to stop legal immigration. And with his references to Operation Wetback, presumably wants to get rid of American citizens with certain skin colors too.
posted by zutalors! at 7:38 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


David Cay Johnston gives an interesting talk promoting his new book, The Making of Donald Trump, on Slate's Live at Politics & Prose podcast the other day. He's followed Trump since his early casino days, and supposedly has done more investigative research on him than anybody. Makes me almost suspect this Trump fellow may not, in fact, be the ideal of all things Presidential we perceive him to be.
posted by Rykey at 7:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Current PEC numbers: Clinton 336, Trump 202 EV, Clinton Nov. win probability: random drift 88%, Bayesian 93%
posted by cashman at 7:48 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


Guys I've mostly checked out of the political threads but I wanted to stop by and say I fully support the taco trucks and when do we get them?
posted by Fleebnork at 8:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


All this talk of toddler back seat driving is great prep for what the eventual Trump presidency would be like.

You wish. It'll be more like Duarte's vulgar posturing.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 8:16 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]




So America's voters are rewarding Trump for (by his own declaration) NEVER using email. Well, we get everything we need from Twitter, right?

Trump has never had a thought in his head more complex than 140 characters.
posted by JackFlash at 8:17 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


as we've seen time and time again in MeFi threads, the for-profit college business is about extracting money from students through federal college loans.

It's more accurate to say the for-profit college business is rife with corruption, but there's a range here and it's actually not too hard to filter out the total scams. It's just that corrupt congress critters have refused to do so. If we actually graded schools on retention rates and graduation rates we'd cut off huge swathes of the scammers and better protect students.

Aside from that actually-measuring thing rather than just tarring everyone with the same brush, Laureate gets over 80% of its revenue from out of the US ventures, so clearly federal student loans aren't actually what they're about.
posted by phearlez at 8:17 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump has never had a thought in his head more complex than 140 characters.

There's only one character in Donald Trump's thoughts: Donald Trump.
posted by dersins at 8:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


In for-profit college news: ITT Technical Institute is shutting down, like, as we speak.
posted by box at 8:23 AM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


I don't know what they're doing at NPR these days but it's not political journalism.

I think the media as a whole are refusing to go deeper, but NPR stand out as failures because this feels like it is squarely in their wheelhouse but for some reason they won't touch it... Clinton is a woman seeking power, so she started out guilty and is being required to disprove every negative they can throw at her. Meanwhile Trump is every shitty boss's son who gets the job you're more qualified for because he thinks he deserves it, and fuck you for asking why. That's the media dynamic here. Original sin vs prodigal son. We want to make examples of women but want to offer men forgiveness. The Republican vs. Democrat stuff exists on the surface, but sinner vs grinner is the animus, what makes criticizing Clinton compelling but calling out Trump on his lies boring. That feels like total NPR-bait. Meta-analysis. Have they gone there yet?
posted by lefty lucky cat at 8:27 AM on September 6, 2016 [44 favorites]


And Greenwald has crawled up his own ass again regarding the pushback on media reporting on the Clinton Foundation.

No, people aren't trying to delegitimize all negative reporting on her. They would just like the media to be more honest.
posted by NoxAeternum at 8:31 AM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


That prominent journalists are overwhelmingly opposed to Donald Trump is barely debatable; their collective contempt for him is essentially out in the open
Is that where it is? Because it's not in the papers or on screen.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:39 AM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


There are a lot of people this election who're still just voting for Their Party over The Other Guys and who I think either aren't paying attention or are just so convinced The Other Guys are actually evil that the details of the current election don't even matter.

Oh god, this. I had an incredibly "fun" conversation over labor day with older relatives who agreed during the primary that Trump is a total dumpster fire of a human being, but now that it's Trump versus a dreaded CLINTON they've totally backpedaled -- because THE CLINTONS are just so corrupt and THEY'VE KILLED PEOPLE and [insert breathless description with incredible levels of detail of every crackpot right-wing conspiracy theory about the Clintons for the last 25 years] and OMG MONICA and OMG THAT AP STORY and also Trump is really reaching out to minority communities now and you can't fault him for not being a politician and he's totally growing and changing and and and and ... .

Literally the only thing keeping me from disowning them was that we live in Massachusetts, which is never going to go Trump anyways.
posted by tocts at 8:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


That prominent journalists are overwhelmingly opposed to Donald Trump is barely debatable; their collective contempt for him is essentially out in the open

Sure, in the sense of "Step right up, folks! Come see the terrible man! Tune in at six to hear the terrible things he said today".
But they still want the race to be close because that draws the crowds in the first place.
posted by rocket88 at 8:47 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's just absurd to suggest that this high-ranking government official who is a lawyer and somehow had the presence of mind to have all the emails checked by a team of lawyers before handing them over, as she was taking up the office of SoS really simply missed the significance of having those records under her and her team's complete control, rather than in the hands of a neutral government archivist and available to any elected official with sufficient authority.

The FOIA has never worked the way you imagine since its beginning 1966. Working documents are not kept in the hands of a "neutral government archivist available to anyone elected official with sufficient authority." Every individual working in the government is responsible for preserving their own records. There is no policeman watching what people do. The system depends on the honesty of its workers to preserve the required records. That is the way it has always worked and that is the way it is now. You may prefer a different system but that would require new legislation.

The FOIA started before there were electronic records. Each person had lots of paper passing over their desk each day. They were required to submit xerox copies of work-related documents to the archives and trash or shred the non-work related ones. It is done by each individual on their own initiative. There is no big brother looking over their shoulder because that wouldn't even be practical with millions of documents each year. People take (unclassified) documents home with them in their briefcases. They may do work in their home offices on weekends. The only requirement is that they eventually make copies of work-related documents and send them to be archived.

The same rules were later applied to electronic records and email. You can take your documents home. You can use your personal email for work. The only requirement is that you eventually turn over copies of your work-related emails to the archives. From the beginning of email in government, people have commonly used personal email accounts for work. This is approved by the rules. Maybe you would like different rules, but that isn't the case now.

Clinton complied with all of the rules as they now exist, so what is your complaint? That there should be different rules? That isn't Clinton's problem. That's your problem.
posted by JackFlash at 8:50 AM on September 6, 2016 [69 favorites]




Holy cow you guys are still on the emails?

If we can't be done with it when we've exhausted more facts about it than most people know about the entire election, how can we expect the media to? Can everyone just stop? It adds nothing to the threads at this point except length and noise.
posted by chonus at 9:04 AM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


A reminder that Trump is not that far outside others in the Republican party: Arizona GOP Releases ‘Wanted’ Poster With Bullet Holes Around Democratic Candidate’s Face. Also Ann Kirkpatrick is polling equal with McCain, in case you missed it.
posted by R343L at 9:07 AM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


I took a bit of a break from political news over the weekend, and oi, it's really hitting me just how mentally exhausting the last 14 months of (often irresponsible) election coverage have been.

Rather sick-making that somewhere between 1/3rd and 2/5ths of the population want to be ruled by a walking hate machine. Our solution this year will be of the 14th, 15th, and 19th amendment variety.

<3 to everyone.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 9:14 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]




Our solution this year will be of the 14th, 15th, and 19th amendment variety

you forgot the 21st amendment
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 9:19 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


So, because I'm a sick, sick human being, I've been going back and listening to old episodes of Keepin It 1600 (I only just started listening to it a few weeks ago and in my defense I'm a completeist). Today I listened to the very first one, from months ago and oh my god, they completely predicted everything that is happening right now. Like, uncannily. The only whiff was that Trump's single-word nickname for Hillary would be blatantly misogynist (he seems to save the misogynist epithets for Mika, apparently). Everything else about how the media is dealing with this? Scarily correct.
posted by soren_lorensen at 9:20 AM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


That prominent journalists are overwhelmingly opposed to Donald Trump is barely debatable; their collective contempt for him is essentially out in the open
Is that where it is? Because it's not in the papers or on screen.


I can see this and being part of the issue. It's an overcompensation factor, in that yes they do despise him but their jobs say they should be 'objective' so in trying to do that they lose perspective. I can also see the fact that there is just SO much horrible with Trump that it's an almost 'where do you start?" and how do you prioritize what 'bad' you spend time on? I can also see an issue in the the timing of just how fast his crap comes out. Something happens, you say hey I'm going to do some more in depth work on that and by the time you get something solid Trump is already onto 'piece of crap 3x forward'. It's hard to keep up with.
posted by Jalliah at 9:20 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I've been wondering why FBI Director James Comey would go out to say she was "Extremely careless". (*cue Wikipedia music*)

[emphasis added]
In 1996, Comey acted as deputy special counsel to the Senate Whitewater Committee.[10]
. . . his confirmation {by Gee Dubz} as Deputy Attorney General on December 11, 2003.[12] Among his first tasks was to take over the investigation into President Bill Clinton's controversial pardon of Marc Rich.[10]

. . In February 2003, Comey led the prosecution of Martha Stewart who was considered for the charges of securities fraud, obstruction of justice, and lying to an FBI agent

. . In early January 2006, . . Comey, who was Acting Attorney General during the March 2004 hospitalization of John Ashcroft, refused to certify the legality of central aspects of the NSA program. . .

{In 2005} Senior Vice President for Lockheed Martin, the U.S. Department of Defense's largest defense contractor.[28]

. . He was also appointed to the board of directors of the London-based financial institution HSBC Holdings,[32]


"Dubz" Bush put him on the short list to replace Souter. He signed an amicus brief to support same-sex marriage.

. . . Comey keeps on his desk a copy of the FBI request to wiretap Martin Luther King, Jr., "as a reminder of the bureau's capacity to do wrong."[62]

Hm. Land of contrasts?
posted by petebest at 9:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


The only whiff was that Trump's single-word nickname for Hillary would be blatantly misogynist (he seems to save the misogynist epithets for Mika, apparently).

We haven't had a debate yet. I can easily see him debuting an ugly nickname or two then, when he's on a nationwide stage.
posted by Thorzdad at 9:23 AM on September 6, 2016


That all sounds suspiciously vague. What are you precise complaints? What rules did she ignore. What rules was she unaware of?

Alright, so now that I'm at a computer, the blow-by-blow (with cites)

First: (top of page 2) appears to contradict the frequent claims that "nothing was classified at the time, it was all classified after the fact." 81 email chains is not, in my eyes, a nothingburger.
US Intelligence Community (USIC) agencies determined that 81 email chains, which FBI investigation determined were transmitted and stored on Clinton's UNCLASSIFIED personal server systems, contained classified information ranging from the CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET/SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM levels at the time they were sent between 2009-2013. USIC determined that 68 of these e-mail chains remain classified.
Page 8 goes into the fact that Clinton used personal email for official business (which we all know but just citing anyway)- that's a huge deal for me, because it's an unsecured email being used for work that should go through secure channels.

Page 9 talks about the destruction of devices - contrary to popular belief, smashing devices with a hammer is not an approved method of destruction for devices that may have contained even information designated for official use only, and also, it goes counter to FOIA. What about BBMs? What about other non-email records? If she's using the devices for State work, then the whole thing becomes protected.

Page 10 - Clinton breaks the rules of her organization, the rules that as head of the organization, she is supposed to be at the very least familiar with, and moreover, exemplify. (There's also a bit about how one of her subordinates discouraged staffers from raising complaints about her use of personal email, but I didn't include it because it could have been self-initiated)
A May 25, 2016 report issued by the State Office of Inspector General (OIG) stated that, during Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, the State Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) required day-to-day operations at State be conducted using an authorized information system. The OIG stated it found "no evidence" that Clinton sought approval to conduct State business via her personal email account or private servers, despite her obligation to do so.
Further on Page 10 - Clinton says that "it was common knowledge at State that she had a private e-mail address because it was displayed to anyone with whom she exchanged emails" However, FBI indicates that the majority of State employees were unaware this was private, unsecured email, and that the email system was not set up to display actual email addresses (which is, admittedly, its own issue)
posted by corb at 9:23 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


FiveThirtyEight: An Assessment, from electoral-vote.com. Scathing.
posted by OmieWise at 9:24 AM on September 6, 2016 [15 favorites]


EMAILS
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:26 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's an overcompensation factor, in that yes they do despise him but their jobs say they should be 'objective' so in trying to do that they lose perspective.

I think honestly it's not that different from the dialogue we get from people here: "Oh yeah sure, Trump is awful, but there's no point in regurgitating that again. You know what's REALLY interesting? LET'S TALK AGAIN ABOUT EMAILS AND CORRUPTION AND CLINTON FOUNDATION."

You know there's more than one way to do voter supression, and one of them is a constant drumbeat of "Corruption Corruption Corruption." I'm sure the same refrain of "I'm a Clinton supporter site, but let's talk about her lies and corruption" is going on in pretty much every other social media site. I sure noticed it in ontd-political.
posted by happyroach at 9:29 AM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


We've got to call a moratorium on email-related comments, or every one of these threads for the next two months is going to be unreadable.

Well, more unreadable.
posted by yhbc at 9:30 AM on September 6, 2016 [18 favorites]


As WaPo's Greg Sargent notes, CNN tells us in advance that the bar will be dropped to floor for Drumpf during debates:

Great.
posted by holborne at 9:34 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


"...contained classified information ranging from the CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET/SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAM levels at the time they were sent ..."

But does that mean they were marked as classified? Or that they were not marked but it was later determined that they contained classified information? The sentence construction doesn't make that clear.

If she's using the devices for State work, then the whole thing becomes protected.

Is that right? If so I'm surprised that wasn't raised by the report. I'd be interested to see the regulation on that.
posted by schoolgirl report at 9:34 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Artw: All this talk of toddler back seat driving is great prep for what the eventual Trump presidency would be like.

Except we'll be the toddlers, trying to be heard from the back while some madman takes us wherever he wants, with no regard for how much we ask, plead, beg and demand ice cream that he not do whatever terrible thing he's currently doing.


schadenfrau: Chris Wallace has already thrown one debate, and it should disqualify him from moderating any future debates.

But that's the beauty of having 3 debates - balance of journalistic powers, right? Right?
posted by filthy light thief at 9:35 AM on September 6, 2016


Anyone still worried, in any way, about the emails should go watch Comey's testimony about them. He could not be more clear that he thinks there is nothing there. He could not be more clear that he wishes to God he had been able to recommend prosecution. He did as much damage to Clinton as he could, but even he thought there was no prosecuting.
posted by OmieWise at 9:37 AM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


We've got to call a moratorium on email-related comments, or every one of these threads for the next two months is going to be unreadable.

Start an email list for people who want to talk about it.
posted by pracowity at 9:40 AM on September 6, 2016 [15 favorites]


The thing that's been getting me about the email story lately is that it's the perfect encapsulation of the generic Hillary Clinton narrative. It deals with second guessing means and methods rather than outcomes. It's literary criticism which focuses on the author's handwriting rather than the actual story of the book. It's taken the at least somewhat objective question of whether she's done actual good and substituted it for the entirely subjective matter of a moral judgment on a complex technical matter full of convenient rhetorical rabbit holes. In the sense of all of this artifice and false construction it's an ideal 21st century American political story, it's the product of a twisted form of natural selection whose generations are represented by memes whose ancestry traces back to Thomas Nast.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:46 AM on September 6, 2016 [35 favorites]


People are making a lot of Page 11, where it notes that Clinton responded to Powell that she knew her personal devices were still subject to FOIA - but failing to tie that to her devices getting smashed?

Page 12 - she kept her phone inside the SCIF - this is enormously crazy to me, you're supposed to leave it well outside for MANY reasons. Abedin says she left the SCIF to check the emails, but there's serious reasons for not bringing an outside mobile device inside a SCIF and it's not just "because you might check it."

Page 13 - State installed secure computers in the SCIF in Clinton's home, her aides say personal computers were brought there as well (aaaagh), Clinton says there were no computers there - which is bizarre! Such an easily checkable lie! Also, the SCIF door wasn't always locked and (presumably uncleared) personal aides had access.

Page 14 - One of her aides, whose name is redacted, had a clearance, but it was deactivated when he left the Reserves, and he continued to receive classified information from State staff asking him to print things for Clinton.
FBI investigation determined that hundreds of emails classified CONFIDENTIAL during the State FOIA process were sent or received by Clinton while she was OCONUS (p15)
This is kind of a big deal, it's one of the reasons you're supposed to do business within SCIFs or hold off on it while OCONUS - because unsecured devices can be compromised.

OH GOD THIS WHOLE REPORT GIVES ME THE SCREAMING CRAZIES. Page 16 - Samuelson, in determining which emails of Clinton's were work related, just looked at the to, from, and subject header, rather than the body of the email.

I have to pause this or I will go stark raving insane, but it seems pretty clear - 1/4 of the way into the report - that neither Clinton or any of her aides took the security of classified and other information seriously. This may be because they weren't trained in a security culture, and nobody wanted to tell the boss she needed to get INFOSEC training. But any number of these would have been a Very Big Deal if a low-grade intelligence professional were caught with them.
posted by corb at 9:47 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]




holborne: CNN tells us in advance that the bar will be dropped to floor for Drumpf during debates
Donald Trump is aiming to pull off one of the greatest political comebacks in history.

The Republican nominee is rebounding from a summer of repeated stumbles that threatened to undermine his candidacy, underscoring his ability to claw his way back and stay competitive despite controversies that would sink any other politician.
Ooh, political fan-fiction, I love this shit!
Trump and Hillary Clinton enter the critical post-Labor Day phase of the campaign in a dead heat. A CNN/ORC national poll released Tuesday finds Trump ahead of Clinton by two points -- 45% to 43% -- among likely voters. The race is also tight among registered voters, where Clinton has a three point advantage. Both findings are within the margin of error.
The narrowing of the race is a remarkable feat for Trump, who was down 10 points a month ago in CNN's Poll of Polls.
So, you're comparing one poll versus a collection of polls? Yeah, that's how you build a solid fictional foundation. Let's look at the CNN election page: Poll of Polls currently reads 42% to 37%, in favor of Hillary. CNN/ORC is ... 45% to 37%? Wait, where did Donnie's 43% come from? Oh, fiction? OK, let's read on.
But if Trump can spend the next 63 days shining a relentless and unforgiving spotlight on Clinton's vulnerabilities and avoid more self-inflicted wounds, there could be a path -- however narrow -- for him to reach the White House.

"Can he fundamentally alter the focus of this election right now — which is on him?" asked Bill Lacy, a GOP veteran who ran presidential campaigns for Bob Dole and Fred Thompson. "He needs to make this election about Secretary Clinton."
Oh, we're safe!
For his part, Trump needs to do more than simply disqualify Clinton. He must show he's ready to lead the nation.

To mount an authentic comeback, Trump must finally forge an emotional connection with voters outside his natural base, who have yet to embrace his vision of a nation under siege from terror and crime.
Yeah, everything's clear. Thanks!

I really look forward to part 2, where they outline how Hillary can win. They already said in this piece that "Trump has fewer routes than Clinton to the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency," and cited a source in the Clinton campaign:
"He would have to do things in the last eight weeks that he appears to have been incapable of doing in the last 16 months," said Clinton's chief strategist Joel Benenson, citing Trump's need to build a ground game, court swing voters and improve his appeal to suburban women.
A lot of bluster, very little content that indicates if Donnie could actually change and maintain that change more than 4 hours. "Hey, he looked presidential in Mexico! He kept his pants on! How adult of him! Oh, but then he shat on the Mexican flag on stage in Phoenix, and his fan base went nuts, winning over no new supporters." [Not quite real, but a crass summary of reality]
posted by filthy light thief at 9:51 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Yea I'm going to have to step away from this thread too, where every request to dial back the repetitive and pointless email discussion only brings out more granular page by page commentary of the FBI report that's been discussed here at length.

Process over outcomes indeed.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:51 AM on September 6, 2016 [41 favorites]


Follow-up: CNN tells us in advance that the bar will be dropped to floor for Drumpf during debates is a misleading summary of that article. The article is titled How Donald Trump could win, and will be followed up by an article on how Hillary could win. [True]
posted by filthy light thief at 9:52 AM on September 6, 2016


I have to pause this or I will go stark raving insane

Please do. The email discussion is going nowhere, and has been for weeks.
posted by chonus at 9:53 AM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


[Hokay, so by popular demand, I'm gonna ask that we set the email discussion aside for now. Who knows, maybe future events will yield new stuff to discuss on this, but at this point we've spent a whole whole lot of time on it, and it seems like it's just annoying nearly everybody.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 9:53 AM on September 6, 2016 [97 favorites]


Back to phone banking after being on vacation. I can't believe how nice people are- the worst thing that's happened so far is hang-ups. Come on, universe, is that all you got?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 9:53 AM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


> FiveThirtyEight: An Assessment, from electoral-vote.com. Scathing.

I haven't really followed many of the non-political 538 pieces but have mostly enjoyed their election coverage this season. I enjoy their podcasts, too.

All that to say I am a fan and regular reader but this article seems quite accurate. Hopefully Silver takes notice.
posted by Tevin at 9:54 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I agree with everything, except his dismissal of the "tweener" articles. Those are just the right size and it's still so nice to data in political commentary. But the wunderkind stuff is spot on.
posted by corb at 9:59 AM on September 6, 2016


Back to phone banking after being on vacation. I can't believe how nice people are- the worst thing that's happened so far is hang-ups. Come on, universe, is that all you got?

You could even just assume that the hang-ups are awkward people like me who may very well support the heck out of your candidate but don't feel like talking about it/donating again right now/know that the faster I get off the phone with you, the faster you can get on to your next contact. The longest I've stayed on the phone with someone this entire election season was a Pat Toomey (R) push-poll which was a) hilarious and b) the longer I kept the caller on the phone, the fewer people they'd be able to contact during their shift with that baloney.
posted by soren_lorensen at 10:05 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]




Do you count it as a hang-up if someone says something first? I'm not going to stop responding to unsolicited calls with "no thank you, please put me onyourdonotcalllistthanks*CLICK*" but I do wonder how it's perceived.

Please feel free not to point out to me that politicalls don't have to follow do not call requests, I'm well aware (though I disagree with the distinction) but it's just my muscle memory at this point.
posted by phearlez at 10:18 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Ooh, tomorrow night's phone banking event I signed up for was billed as having a "special guest": I just got the text announcing that it's Anne Holton (Tim Kaine's wife). I am excite!
posted by Superplin at 10:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


Politico: Five reasons Hillary could be blowing it
Or, why Clinton fans might want to invest in mattress pads.
The URL for the story contains the phrase "is Hillary Clinton Losing". [clickbait, opinion]
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


>Do you count it as a hang-up if someone says something first?

In my experience the calls I have made for Hillary have been for the sake of gathering data, especially since this first phase has been harvesting volunteers. So if we get someone who hangs up it's marked as "refused" and they're able to calibrate that data point away from "potential volunteer." Hope that answers the question.
posted by Tevin at 10:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


I actually kind of prefer the hang-ups to having to continue to interact with someone.
posted by XMLicious at 10:22 AM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


What's worse is that this incompetent dumpster fire of a shitshow has no ground game, is barely spending money and he's still competitive in the horse race.

Media interests (TV, print, Internet) have a lot vested in keeping the presidential election as close as possible for as long as possible. It's not going to be close.

We're talking 1980. Or worse.
posted by mrgrimm at 10:24 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


> "I agree with everything, except his dismissal of the 'tweener' articles."

Yeah, that was annoying. It read very, "these articles don't appeal to the particular tastes of certain specific groups of people, therefore they are bad."
posted by kyrademon at 10:26 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]






Can someone explain the CNN/ORC poll for me? They polled 886 registered voters, 32% R and 28% D, who broke 44% for Clinton and 41% for Trump, and party identification was about 90% reliable in predicting voter intentions.

But in 2012 voter registration was 35% D and 28% R. So if you were adjusting the respondents to more closely match overall voter registration, that should increase Clinton's lead. In order to skew the results enough to give Trump the lead in this poll, you'd have to define "likely voter" to heavily favour Republicans, and I'd think by a significant amount.

Is a reasonable likely voter adjustment able to account for that big a difference?
posted by GhostintheMachine at 10:35 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


That prominent journalists are overwhelmingly opposed to Donald Trump is barely debatable; their collective contempt for him is essentially out in the open

Even if this were true (which it's not, as others have pointed out), being opposed to a demagogue with fundamentally un-American values is hardly a failure of journalism.
posted by entropicamericana at 10:37 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Something that should be discussed more -- what kind of personnel would Donald Trump fill the government with?

Presidents need to install at least, what, 10,000 managers in real positions of power. Maybe 100,000. For most presidents this is not a problem, because there are Republican and Democratic networks that hang around Washington waiting their turn. But huge chunks of the Republican crew refuse to work for the Donald. And his vindictiveness will rule out another large chunk that he feels has slighted him.

Already, we've seen complete amateur hour breakdowns from his (skeleton crew) campaign staff and surrogates like his officially designated African American and Latino representatives. What kind of dregs is he going to scrape up if he needs thousands and thousands of people to put in key positions?

Ronald Reagan was enough of an outsider than even he had this problem -- remember people like James Watt (who thought Jesus was returning soon, so we were morally wrong NOT to use up the resources), Rita Lavelle (EPA, convicted of perjury) and Anne Gorsuch Burford (avoided indictment, but first agency head ever convicted of contempt of congress, and had to resign)?
posted by msalt at 10:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


Can someone explain the CNN/ORC poll for me? They polled 886 registered voters, 32% R and 28% D, who broke 44% for Clinton and 41% for Trump, and party identification was about 90% reliable in predicting voter intentions. But in 2012 voter registration was 35% D and 28% R

I don't know about all that, but CNN/ORC is rated A- by 538.com, with a 0.1 R bias.
posted by msalt at 10:46 AM on September 6, 2016


Something that should be discussed more -- what kind of personnel would Donald Trump fill the government with?

The best personnel. You wouldn't believe the personnel he's going to choose. They're going to be tremendous.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:46 AM on September 6, 2016 [17 favorites]


I still think this video of Maddow explaining some facets of Trump's rise, is informative. I added some information about the content, since it's a 16-minute video. It aired late at night shortly after Trump gave his immigration speech in Arizona, and then they reaired it the next night as Steve Kornaki sat in for Rachel. It's worth watching.

Donald Trump Nativist Speech Follows Dark US Pattern | Rachel Maddow

0:00 Talks about Lincoln. What party was he, before he became a republican?
1:45 Talks about which other presidents belonged to that party, and served as presidents under that party.
2:00 That party falls apart.
2:30 If you have 2 parties and one party falls apart, it affects the 2-party system.
3:00 What was left over turned nasty, and somewhat violent. Secret societies sprang up.
3:30 The common theme was that these parties were anti-Catholics, anti-immigrant.
4:00 As that movement spread nation-wide, it morphed, and also became anti-Chinese.
5:00 Nativism. Hating immigrants, blaming immigrants. The movement became known as the Know-Nothings.
5:30 When asked about their party, they would say "I know nothing".
6:00 The growth of the Know-Nothings was in the vacuum of a second political party.
6:45 The Know-Nothings collapse.
8:00 We know from history, in times of stress, this strain of anti-immigrant scapegoating arises
8:45-12:35 [Donald Trump Arizona immigration speech excerpts]
12:40 Contrasting the inscription on the Statue of Liberty with those excerpts.
13:30 Addressing Trump's "this is the ONLY conversation (immigration) we should be having at this time".
14:15 Revisiting what happens when the 2-party system breaks from time to time.
15:30 Trump has emerged as the latest face of anti-immigration sentiment, because the Republican party is weak.
posted by cashman at 10:48 AM on September 6, 2016 [26 favorites]


Justinian, this may cheer you: Texas now a tossup as Trump loses support there.
A new poll by The Washington Post and online polling site SurveyMonkey suggests there may be another battleground for the already embattled Republican presidential nominee: Texas.

The poll, which sampled voters in all 50 states, showed opponent Hillary Clinton at 46 percent and Trump at 45 percent in the Lone Star State, suggesting Texas’ rapidly shifting demographics might tilt the historically red state more purple in the upcoming election.
I didn't expect this.
posted by stolyarova at 10:49 AM on September 6, 2016 [24 favorites]


Clinton giving a press conference that they whined for, and CNN doesn't even carry it.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:51 AM on September 6, 2016 [41 favorites]


oneswellfoop: "Focus your mindspace on the qualities of the person you reluctantly support. It also prepares you better for when you get reluctantly drawn into political discussions (heaven forbid), in real life and in internet places like HERE."

As these threads have gone on, people have gotten more and more resistant to any criticism of Clinton. I'm not a member of Clinton's campaign. I have no obligation to stay on message.

Reasons I'm not looking forward to a Clinton presidency that have nothing to do with her emails:
- She voted for the war.
- Super predators. (Yes, she apologized for the word. That she thinks it was only about the word and not about the racist mass incarceration policy that it represented is, indeed, part of the problem.)
- Her vocal support for encryption backdoors.
- She's a war hawk. (To people who respond to every criticism of Clinton asking for "evidence," what evidence could you possibly need? The entirety of the primary debates?)

I want people to be talking about these things right now, because they matter. And at the same time, I also want her to win by a historically unprecedented landslide. It's okay to want both of those things.
posted by roll truck roll at 10:54 AM on September 6, 2016 [15 favorites]


Was curious why this appeared in my YouTube suggestions. The first one appears to answer it.

5 American Words That Are Rude In Britain
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 10:54 AM on September 6, 2016


Clinton giving a press conference that they whined for, and CNN doesn't even carry it.

And MSNBC showed it after the fact (there wasn't anything occurring that should have pre-empted it), then cut it off before it ended.
posted by cashman at 10:54 AM on September 6, 2016


PAY ATTENTION TO US!

Note "even the liberal" Ari Melber of MSNBC trying to litigate whether this counted as a "press conference."

At this point, she's going to have to wear a flight suit and land on an aircraft carrier full of journalists.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:56 AM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


Preferably on top of them.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:56 AM on September 6, 2016 [23 favorites]


So if you were adjusting the respondents to more closely match overall voter registration

They may well have been just not doing that. That's fine. It's totally normal and respectable, especially with a phone-based survey that gets closer to simple random sampling out of the population of phone numbers, to just call a random bunch of registered voters* and let the partisan demographics fall where they may. On average, you'll end up with a partisan mix that's close to the actual partisan mix in the population, but not necessarily in every individual poll. That's fine, and is consistent with the way sampling works and with how people should think about poll results.

This is part of why:

Don't stress too much over any individual poll. Follow the poll averages and aggregators, and especially the poll aggregators mostly using state-poll data.

*Or just call a random bunch of phone numbers and ask them whether they're registered voters, possibly validating this after the interview.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:58 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


where can one even find a journalist in this day and age
posted by entropicamericana at 10:58 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


roll truck roll: I want people to be talking about these things right now, because they matter. And at the same time, I also want her to win by a historically unprecedented landslide. It's okay to want both of those things.

Yes, you can want them both, but the National Ignorance Threat (NIT) level is at red, so I think you kind of have to decide which you want more, and drop the other one until after the election.

(Yes, it sucks. It is also, unfortunately, The Way We Live Now.)
posted by chonus at 10:59 AM on September 6, 2016 [28 favorites]


Ugh. The worst thing of that WaPo article is that they linked to Brietbart and InfoWars.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:02 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Vox: What a liberal sociologist learned from spending five years in Trump’s America

I think that Oliver Willis' response illustrates why the argument isn't really that compelling:

in other words they feel like black, latino, asian and other minorities have felt FOREVER. boo fucking hoo.

I get that these groups are victims as well. But they've also been on the other side of the equation. And what people are telling them is that it doesn't matter that it's been how they are for generations - the other groups aren't going to tolerate bigotry anymore.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:03 AM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


The problem with all the "valid complaints" about her is that they appear to come from a world of pure black and white thinking. There's no room for nuance in a worldview that labels Hillary Clinton a warhawk without considering any of the facts of the world we currently live in. It's disappointing to see otherwise intelligent people braying that shit all over the place.
posted by palomar at 11:11 AM on September 6, 2016 [63 favorites]


Oh, and this part of that sociologist's article drives me nuts:

I came to realize that there is a whole sector of society in which the privilege of whiteness and maleness didn’t really trickle down. And I think we have grown highly insensitive to that fact.

No, we have not "grown highly insensitive" to that "fact", because it's not a fact. The reality was that all those individuals did benefit from their race and gender - it's just that it happens in such a quiet way that they don't realize it.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:16 AM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


mrgrimm: Media interests (TV, print, Internet) have a lot vested in keeping the presidential election as close as possible for as long as possible. It's not going to be close.

That link is from Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik, and is dated March 22, 2016. He has good points:
the primary factors that have shaped the outcome of presidential election in eight of the last nine presidential elections: the state of the economy, the incumbent president’s job approval and how and when the nomination fight is settled. Right now, none of these factors is working in the Republicans’ favor.
But at that point, Donny wasn't even the official GOP candidate.
Regardless of how you do the math, the current environment paints a picture of a Republican Party at the verge of implosion during the most critical period in the presidential campaign. Assuming little changes, years from now people will look back at the decisive nine-day period in mid-October last fall when the stage was set for the 2016 elections.
Emphasis mine - the thing that changed was how the media portrayed the race, and stacked the deck against Hillary in terms of coverage. Donny dropped the bar so low for himself, with the outstanding help from the media despite the fact that he as had his supporters chanting "lock them up," that it's painted as a close race now.

A lot has changed, and the positive changes for Hillary were by her and her campaign's doing. Her convention bump has helped her and it has largely lasted, while Donny had a little bump that he squandered.

I think the debates will help Hillary. She's been grilled, pressured, and called any terrible thing you can think of, but she persists and survives. Donnie flips out at a slight and berates whoever he sees as an attacker in the most basic, crass way possible. He can rile up his base, but as was said at the coverage of the Phoenix debacle where he flipped from "we didn't talk about the wall" to "Mexico will pay for it, 100%" in a matter of hours, that's primary period rabble rousing, not general election base-building.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:16 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


I came to realize that there is a whole sector of society in which the privilege of whiteness and maleness didn’t really trickle down.

Yeah, that's because they confuse "privilege" with "wealth and power," and they're not the same things.
posted by chonus at 11:20 AM on September 6, 2016 [33 favorites]


palomar: It's disappointing to see otherwise intelligent people braying that shit all over the place.

And worse, no thought of what kind of "warhawk" Donnie is. You're not comparing Hillary to some ideal person in an ideal world, you're comparing her to the Orange Fuhrer. But that's easy to focus on Hillary, because Donny has no coherent plan on military spending, at least as of Aug 5, 2016 (Politico article).

You can't focus on smoke and mirrors, and that's by design.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [30 favorites]


The reality was that all those individuals did benefit from their race and gender - it's just that it happens in such a quiet way that they don't realize it.

Exactly. The problem with the phrase "XXX privilege" is that people equate it with something huge. They see it as being akin to getting a winning lottery ticket or becoming a major movie star, rather than as a banal (but incredibly powerful) exclusion from suffering from structural racism or sexism. It's basically the same argument nerdy white boys make in a different register about not being privileged.
posted by OmieWise at 11:21 AM on September 6, 2016 [18 favorites]


Epistemic closure is bad for Democrats just like it's bad for Republicans. You can't adapt to changing circumstances if you react to everything that happens with the same prefabricated slogans (sexism, Clinton Rules, etc), or if you refuse to discuss issues you find uncomfortable or displeasing (emails, the Foundation, the wars, etc). I've read every word of these threads and the refusal to take seriously the idea that Clinton and her campaign have some serious credibility problems is pretty worrying, both in terms of actually getting the left coalition over the finish line this November as well as in terms of what things are going to be like once she's president.
posted by gerryblog at 11:22 AM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


Do we need to call him "Donnie" "Donny" etc? No one calls him that and I find the constant nicknaming distracting and irritating.
posted by zutalors! at 11:22 AM on September 6, 2016 [14 favorites]


I think the debates will help Hillary.

I'm not so sure. I think God and Sonny Jesus could come and put their arms around Hillary at the first debate, and the people who don't intend to vote for her today will be no more likely to do so the next morning.

I just want to see how the percentages play out, 'cause I believe that will be the United States' new asshole quotient.
posted by Mooski at 11:24 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


if you refuse to discuss

You mean, refuse to continue to rehash, over and over and over and over and over and over.
posted by cashman at 11:27 AM on September 6, 2016 [45 favorites]



I want people to be talking about these things right now, because they matter.


A lot of the things you listed have been discussed at length throughout the previous threads stretching all the way back to the conventions. Try going back and rereading some of those threads because I promise there won't be any novel argument put forth now and we will only drive the mods nuts if we rehash every possible issue every single time someone decides they want to regrind a particular axe.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:29 AM on September 6, 2016 [26 favorites]


palomar: "The problem with all the "valid complaints" about her is that they appear to come from a world of pure black and white thinking.

I think people being afraid of talking about them is a sign of black-and-white thinking.

There's no room for nuance in a worldview that labels Hillary Clinton a warhawk without considering any of the facts of the world we currently live in.

I'm really not sure how to respond to that. I made it pretty obvious I'm voting for her. If I had no capacity for nuance, I'd be writing in Lessig or something.

In the past 15 years, the people who use "the facts of the world we currently live in" to justify war have had a pretty bad track record.
posted by roll truck roll at 11:29 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Seriously, what is the point of discussing something when we've gone over and over and over and over and over and over and over it, and the other side of the discussion basically amounts to BUT EMAILS!!!! or BUT COLLUSION!!!! and has no actual substance?
posted by palomar at 11:30 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Yeah, I think we have a responsibility to take questions about Hillary Clinton's credibility seriously... But part of taking a question seriously is acknowledging when it has been answered. Clinton has been investigated in unprecedented depth by both the government and thr press corps, and had written multiple books explaining her actions and her thinking. I believe the questions regarding her credibility have been answered.
posted by OnceUponATime at 11:31 AM on September 6, 2016 [41 favorites]


Somebody should come up with a list of what topics of discussion are permissible and which topics lead to Objectively-Pro-Terrorist-Trump crimethink

y'know, until it's safe to talk again
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:31 AM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


Individual national polls will occasionally show Trump with a narrow lead as long as the election remains in the 7-8 point Hillary lead. Probably best not to freak out unless there is a clear trend where the election is closer. Also remember the national popular vote doesn't really matter; what matters is the stability of Clinton's lead in the electoral college where her lead remains strong..
posted by humanfont at 11:31 AM on September 6, 2016


C'est la D.C.: "Try going back and rereading some of those threads"

I have been following them, mostly quietly, and mostly enjoying them. But it's easy to see the change in tone in response to anyone saying anything bad about Clinton. It's mostly just characterized as "EMAILS!"
posted by roll truck roll at 11:32 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


What some people see as fear of discussion is actually exhaustion at the tedium of having the exact same discussion over and over with no change. I've stopped trying to have the discussions you seem to want, roll truck roll, because I can no longer deal with people refusing to actually listen in favor of bleating out their favored talking points to prove how much smarter they are for not being sheeple.
posted by palomar at 11:32 AM on September 6, 2016 [47 favorites]


I've read every word of these threads and the refusal to take seriously the idea that Clinton and her campaign have some serious credibility problems is pretty worrying, both in terms of actually getting the left coalition over the finish line this November as well as in terms of what things are going to be like once she's president.

Bring me evidence, and I'll take the idea seriously.

Bring me innuendo, and I'll laugh in your face.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:32 AM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


I believe the questions regarding her credibility have been answered.

I agree, but acknowledging that means unpacking why they can't let it go.
posted by Mooski at 11:33 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


gerryblog: I've read every word of these threads and the refusal to take seriously the idea that Clinton and her campaign have some serious credibility problems is pretty worrying, both in terms of actually getting the left coalition over the finish line this November as well as in terms of what things are going to be like once she's president.

I don't think there are any blind Clinton voters here (maybe one or two, but nowhere near even a percent that counts). We are aware. It's just that we're in an vastly unprecedented situation where it is IMPERATIVE that the Republican candidate does not take office. It may seem like that gets said every election year (c.f. George W. Bush, but also c.f. how we were kinda TOTALLY RIGHT about that), but Holy Jesus if you (general you) can't see the forest for the trees on this one, I don't know what to tell you. Clinton has Issues. She has Subscriptions, even. But she is not going to leave the country a flaming wreckage, and Trump will. His election brings global carnage the likes of which most of us currently living have never seen. This is a binary election. It's 1 or 0. Choose.
posted by chonus at 11:34 AM on September 6, 2016 [47 favorites]


issues you find uncomfortable or displeasing

I'm just going to lay right out here on the table that I am not uncomfortable or displeased, I am COMPLETELY FUCKING TERRIFIED TO MY VERY CORE. Like, actually losing-sleep-at-night, I-have-gained-5-pounds-from-stress-eating, sick-feeling-in-the-pit-of-my-stomach screaming fantods. There's a time for beard-stroking and digging up old issues of Foreign Policy to debate the finer points of multilateral intervention in Syria, but I literally cannot do that at this time. I am operating straight from my brain stem. I fully admit to not being rational here because I truly believe we're looking at an existential threat to our nation, if not an actual nuclear war in our future.

So yeah, uncomfortable and displeased doesn't really cover it.
posted by soren_lorensen at 11:35 AM on September 6, 2016 [57 favorites]


Fred Clark - A red traffic light: This election is about one idea:
The point here, though, is that not every question is equally important. Some carry more weight than others. Priority means more than percentages. Some questions can be tallied among the general mass of questions that produce a final score. But other questions are fundamentally important and the wrong answer on those questions should be, all by themselves, disqualifying.

This is a problem with our politics, and with the way we talk about and think about our politics. We see this in those little online quizzes that attempt to tell you which candidate for office is “best” for you. They go by percentages, but have no way of accounting for priorities. Thus, for example, it may ask for your opinions about 50 different topics and then tell you, based on your responses, that the candidate for the Hey Everybody, Let’s Nuke Canada Party is your ideal match — agreeing with you on 98 percent of all topics, everything except his signature plan to nuke Canada.

That result is misleading or, at best, meaningless, because it doesn’t account for the fact that this guy is the nothing-matters-except-nuking-Canada guy. If you agree with him about everything else, but disagree with him about that, then you don’t really agree with him at all.
posted by palindromic at 11:36 AM on September 6, 2016 [18 favorites]


I'm really not sure how to respond to that. I made it pretty obvious I'm voting for her.

The argument isn't "are you voting for her", it's "is she a warhawk?" And frankly, I don't think the evidence is there to make that assertion. Yes, she's more ready to use force, but I think that's due to the conflation of a few factors. More to the point, I don't see her looking to pursue the use of force directly, but to use it as part of the "velvet fist".
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:38 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


We were at the point of exhaustion with these arguments by, like, March. Trust me, people who want to keep having the "warhawk or MEGA-warhawk?" arguments, you are not bringing the light of critical inquiry to closed minds at this late date. btdt
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:43 AM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


Please stop pretending that hawkishness is a single-spectrum thing where "We should take over countries to steal their oil" (Trump) is the same thing as "We should use military force, as a last resort, to stop humanitarian disasters" (Clinton)
posted by 0xFCAF at 11:45 AM on September 6, 2016 [63 favorites]


It's been a slow news cycle, obviously. These threads have been entertaining when there have been speeches to deconstruct, the trip to mexico, the coughing fit (i jest) and more newsworthy events.
I'm glad the mods have put the brakes on the email re-hash, but we're still basically just chatting while we wait for the next big thing.
It's a long way til november folks.
posted by OHenryPacey at 11:45 AM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


zutalors!: Do we need to call him "Donnie" "Donny" etc? No one calls him that and I find the constant nicknaming distracting and irritating.

It's my personal, somewhat childish jab at a childish man.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:46 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


These threads have been entertaining when there have been speeches to deconstruct, the trip to mexico, the coughing fit (i jest) and more newsworthy events.

MORE NEWSWORTHY EVENTS LIKE PILLOWGHAZI AMIRITE
posted by dersins at 11:47 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


You're not comparing Hillary to some ideal person in an ideal world, you're comparing her to the Orange Fuhrer

QFT. I'm answering all criticism (valid and invalid, both exist) now with, "And that's worse than Trump how?" Because that's what it is, folks. This or that. Choose.
posted by ctmf at 11:47 AM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]


oneswellfoop: So what was I saying? Compared to his "TV popularity", he shouldn't be polling over 20%. Maybe if he were running against Tyrion Lannister or Rick Grimes...

The Apprentice ran for 14 seasons. That's 7 seasons of The Apprentice and 7 of Celebrity Apprentice. The show spawned three spinoffs, including a UK version, an Apprentice show run by Martha Stewart and a dating game show hosted by Donald Trump called The Ultimate Merger. It was an unqualified success by anyone's standards.

Trump himself, his family, his properties and retail businesses have been the beneficiary of a relentlessly positive 12-year promotional campaign on national television. His brand and everything it touches has benefited. His family has benefited. People who went on the show often did too.

The show made Trump a household name, established his businessman bona fides, and was an hour-long, 185 episodes-over-15-years video advertisement for Everything Trump™. Every single episode, Trump would talk about how successful he was. The show constantly went on location at Trump properties, promoting a lavish lifestyle and associating it with him. Every single Trump venture, from Trump University to Trump Water to Trump Steaks got extensive airtime on a major network in primetime. As you mentioned earlier, NBC promoted the show by making Trump out to be a genius business dealmaker. In fact, NBC helped create the Donald Trump we know today.

"TV popularity" translates to real world popularity, especially for reality tv stars, because those heavily-edited shows are designed to make people think a fake narrative is real life. People who barely pay attention to the campaigns but know him from the TV show will remember a lot of things they liked. He doesn't take shit from people, he seems uber competent and he's attacking all the things they loathe, like the government, politicians, Congress, the media, immigrants, minorities and poor people.

His poll numbers are high for a lot of reasons. But the show is a big reason many people think of him as successful. And possibly even Presidential.
posted by zarq at 11:48 AM on September 6, 2016 [40 favorites]


Do we need to call him "Donnie" "Donny" etc?

My SO offers, The Frito Bandito.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:50 AM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


The problem is when new information comes in, discussing it is sometimes treated as a "rehash", when it's new data on an old subject.
posted by corb at 11:51 AM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Actually...about that coughing fit...I have been really curious to see what that's about, but I don't want to add to Breitbart's traffic or clicks or SEO et ceteras. Is this a safe space to discuss that without linking out to anyone evil?

I accidentally clicked on it when "trending" on Facebook, and
a) I really resent that they sent me to Breitbart, but also
b) I learned of yet another irrelevant conspiracy theory, which is that HRC has contracted esophageal cancer from performing cunnilingus (there is a Yoko Ono component that I did not care to explore).

How seriously do people believe this? Is this news considered actual news to people outside my own personal cultural milieu? I really want to know, but I also really don't want to type any of those words into a search engine and give it more fuel. I am morbidly, darkly fascinated by how far this campaign has careened off the course of reality and into just straight-up a creative writing workshop at Liberty University.
posted by witchen at 11:51 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm answering all criticism

To be clear, non-mefi criticism, though I'm tiring of "same old" here as well.
posted by ctmf at 11:52 AM on September 6, 2016


The problem is when new information comes in, discussing it is sometimes treated as a "rehash", when it's new data on an old subject.

To borrow from ctmf: even if it is new data, that old subject makes her worse than Trump how?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:53 AM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


How seriously do people believe this?

Kayfabe level, for the most part. Hoping to persuade the persuadable and/or distract others.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:55 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


The thing about the issues with Clinton's credibility: Clinton has been pilloried for over 20 years, with people basically dedicating their lives to investigating and derailing hers. Much of what she's been accused of has been tissue-thin conspiracy based stuff for which there is no evidence AT ALL. These false and baseless attacks are then used as the "evidence" for further attacks. Afterall, there must be something going on, there have been all of these investigations. Add to that the obvious sexism inherent in the attacks, as well as people using facts that mean one thing in true context as if they were in another context (e.g., when things fall on a timeline, like B. Clinton's job), and it's a perfect recipe for not every being able to respond adequately. Indeed, that's the point. There is no proving a negative, and there is no possibility that anyone will take no for an answer. See the recent (re)discussion of an issue that had literally already been investigated and dismissed by the FBI.

Clinton has developed a secrecy problem, probably as a result of this. That problem may be worse than the disease it seeks to cure, in that it results in questionable decisions and the exercise of poor judgement, where secrecy is prized more than ethics. Both Clinton and her husband have sought to enrich themselves based on their political work. This is both very common, and very odious. But it is common, is pretty understandable given their circumstances (both their origins and their access to the superrich now that Bill has been President and Clinton a Senator), and, in this race, so much less than the literal scam that is Donald Trump, that harping on it seems strange.

As I've said before, there are real issue's with Clinton and her campaign. I say that as a wholehearted Clinton supporter. There are credibility issues that should be discussed. This is true not because Clinton has a particularly bad record (I would argue that she does not) but because she is a major party candidate for President of the United States. Politics at that level is a dirty business. That doesn't obviate the issues, but it's really important to put them in context. Why do you think so many first term Senators are starting to run for President? Because there is less to dig up on them, and less time for them to have had to decide how they needed to vote on a particular issue if they were going to preserve their Presidential ambitions. But given what we know to be the very real double, triple, quadruple standard applied to Clinton, I think discussions of her short comings and problems have to be carefully framed to have prima facie validity. Especially in the case where the arguments and inuendos are virtually indistinguishable, save for the absence of words like b* and c* in the descriptions, from those from the Right Wing.
posted by OmieWise at 11:55 AM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


Vox: This study shows American federalism is a total joke:
Wisconsin, Florida, Ohio, and Michigan have all voted Democratic in the past two presidential elections. But Republicans have complete control over their state legislatures and governorships, paving the way for them to enact far-reaching conservative policy agendas.

A new study takes a closer look at why. Professor Steven Rogers of Saint Louis University found that voters don’t make decisions about whether to reelect their state lawmakers because of their specific policies, campaign promises, voting records, or any of the other things you’d normally expect to be relevant to their position as local lawmakers.

That’s because the politics of statehouses turn out not to be local at all. Instead, Rogers finds there’s one major factor in deciding who controls the statehouse: the popularity of the American president.
This article touches on the lack of local political coverage in local news, a major source of irritation for me. My proposed solution is to have high school newspapers become online only, and have student reporters assigned to attend school board meetings, city council meetings, interview local political candidates, etc. This has the dual benefit of informing the community and educating students as to how political sausage is made, especially if it's the same student-reporter attending, for example, school board meetings all year.

Note: My school paper was garbage that I did not improve by submitting only sardonic leftist short fiction and reviews for arthouse movies and indie rock albums.
posted by palindromic at 11:58 AM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


Oops. A correction to my last comment... The Apprentice premiered in 2004. Trump's involvement with the show was terminated last year. So it ran for 11 years, not 15.
posted by zarq at 12:00 PM on September 6, 2016


But the show is a big reason many people think of him as successful. And possibly even Presidential.

I wonder if there is a way to counter this image among low information voters. Could you for example start an email chain letter with a clickbaity subject line and alarming but easily digestible talking points?
posted by Waiting for Pierce Inverarity at 12:00 PM on September 6, 2016


It IS imperative that Trump not win this thing. I don't care if he's immediately strapped to a chair with a muzzle by his handlers and a puppet makes all his appearances. His mere candidacy has caused strife, an uptick in violence and world-wide bemusement, if not outright fear. If he is elected, the credibility (such as it currently is) of the US is utterly gone and we can add "tin-pot dictatorship" to our image along with naive, brash "ugly American" stereotypes we already enjoy. I see it as the WORLD against Trump; voters must save the ignorant or racist or "party-line" or what-have-you Trump voters from themselves.
posted by thebrokedown at 12:00 PM on September 6, 2016 [18 favorites]


The conclusion that Hillary is a war hawk is only reached through examining a cherry picked set of facts and ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

Meanwhile Trump has stated that he wants to carpet bomb civilian areas where terrorists might live, resume water boarding and "way more severe interrogations" and murder the relatives of terrorists. Trump has gone around saying he was opposed to the Iraq war, but his interview transcripts say otherwise. Trump demands our NATO allies and Japan pay tribute or else. He wants to undo our deal with Iran. Just today he was boasting about rebuilding our military and getting tough. These are the words of a reckless war monger and hawk.

The fact that you want to raise and argue the issue of Clinton's alleged status as a war monger / hawk makes me wonder how you could reach this conclusion and what your motivations are.
posted by humanfont at 12:01 PM on September 6, 2016 [52 favorites]


"With flags," they said. Can you believe it? "You have to compile it with flags."
gcc -O3 -Wgold-fringe email.c -o email
posted by schmod at 12:10 PM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


I'm hoping this type of statement will help alienate from Trump some of the older white women who ordinarily vote Republican. TPM: Trump Remembers Anti-Feminist Activist Schlafly As ‘Champion For Women’
posted by palindromic at 12:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


Ugh. The worst thing of that WaPo article is that they linked to Brietbart and InfoWars.

I apologize for the time I gave them grief for quoting me without linking back (and for only identifying me as "a writer at a local blog" just to add insult to poor internet manners).
posted by phearlez at 12:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, one reason people might think Clinton is a hawk is because she frequently talks about establishing safe zones in Syria, something that would require US military assets to achieve, including operating those assets in close proximity with Russian/Assad-loyal forces.

If your answer to talking about that is "but Trump", then there's really no reason to talk about anything political at all, because Trump will always be worse. But if you think it's possible that -- stay with me here -- talking about things is the first step to building a consensus to move candidates in a more progressive direction, candidates like Clinton (when has that ever happened, amirite), then that sort of discussion might be important.

Otherwise this thread is just "Ain't Hillary totes adorbs" or "Ain't Tim Kaine totes amazeballs" and "Ain't Bill Clinton totes adorbsballs"
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:18 PM on September 6, 2016 [15 favorites]


Both Clinton and her husband have sought to enrich themselves based on their political work. This is both very common, and very odious.

Except that they really haven't, besides banking on their name for honoraria. And if you're going to argue that is somehow odious, I'd daresay you've lost the plot.
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:18 PM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


I'm hoping this type of statement will help alienate from Trump some of the older white women who ordinarily vote Republican. TPM: Trump Remembers Anti-Feminist Activist Schlafly As ‘Champion For Women’

Older white women who ordinarily vote Republican prolly share the sentiment.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 12:25 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's because of ray walston that I am now 100% pro-Trump. I'm wearing the shitty red hat and jacking off to a picture of Tsar Bomba
posted by Greg Nog at 12:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


Ray Walston, Luck Dragon: if you think it's possible that -- stay with me here -- talking about things is the first step to building a consensus to move candidates in a more progressive direction, candidates like Clinton (when has that ever happened, amirite), then that sort of discussion might be important.

Talking about these things to/with the candidate and her representatives, sure. Talking about them on an message board, not so much.

candidates like Clinton (when has that ever happened, amirite)

Worked okay with Obama and gay marriage. After the election, even!
posted by chonus at 12:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


[One comment deleted. Some people want to talk Clinton criticism, some don't, that is okay. These threads will go a lot better if people don't get into drawing conclusions/making personal accusations about who's a bad person, who's a sheeple, who's secretly really trying to help evil, etc. Don't make me turn this thread around.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 12:28 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]


she frequently talks about establishing safe zones in Syria,

Wait hang on, is this why people call her a war hawk?

Man, one thing these threads have clued me into is how apparently I am not the progressive I always thought I was back when I was marching in Pride parades and protesting the death penalty in the early 90s. Have... have I been kicked out of the secret leftist club when I wasn't looking? I think I probably have. I'm over 40 and the ideological bar you have to clear these days is too high for these old knees to make the jump.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:28 PM on September 6, 2016 [57 favorites]


If you think the Clintons are in politics to enrich themselves, you must think them to be incredibly stupid. Like, stupider than could be reasonably believed of two humans who can speak in complete sentences. For starters, they both left behind what would be been incredibly lucrative careers in high-powered law firms.

Today, Bill and Hillary Clinton can both command six-figure speaking fees for as many speeches as is practical for them to fly to. They can command seven-figure salaries at board positions. They could easily pull in tens of millions of dollars a year without stressing themselves too hard. Instead, one of them is running for president. Why? So she can cash in after 8 years in office in the hardest job in the world, for the sake of really raking in the corruption dollars with the last decade of her life? Does that make any sense at all?

These are two people who could have been partners at white-shoe law firms before they were 35. These are two people who have repeatedly turned down the opportunity to retire into a life of total luxury funded by being fawned on by rooms full of people paying them tens of thousands of dollars just to be near the hems of their garments. Instead, they're out on the campaign trail, again, getting raked over the coals for made-up nothingburger psuedoscandals. Enriching themselves, give me a break.
posted by 0xFCAF at 12:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [162 favorites]


It's true, I am the devil
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Tom Levenson at Balloon Juice on the Laureate University story:
Most important: it had nothing at all to do with Hillary Clinton and her State Department. Not one bit. It’s just a “look, Bill Clinton’s making too much money” story.

And this is what I find both telling (badly) in current campaign coverage, and revealing of the genuine and honest differences between reporters and their audiences in what each thinks of as excellent journalism.

I’ll say again: this is a J-school teachable example of meticulous reporting. With the one exception noted above — inadequately IDing Judicial Watch and their strongly partisan and long-standing campaign against the Clintons — this is exactly as one would wish, a detailed story in which the reporters make clear their evidence, enough so that the careful reader can in this case feel confident of the claims being presented as facts. I can see why reporters would recognize and value that professional accomplishment.

But as a reader, the story is so much of what I’ve hated this campaign season. It’s lede is innuendo: Big Dawg got a pile of money, and so there must be something wrong. Then we get 2,604 words that add up to…no scandal at all; really, nothing there….and a piece that ends, in what reads to me like classic DC pearl-clutching, “it does seem unseemly.”

IOW To me, this story really was a one liner: “There is no evidence….” Everything before and after that is a mass of suggestion and ultimately innocuous incidents presented as indicators of impropriety.
posted by palindromic at 12:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


Both Clinton and her husband have sought to enrich themselves based on their political work. This is both very common, and very odious.

My language was imprecise. That should read: "Both Clinton and her husband have used the fame and access (to rich people and companies) developed during their political careers as a means to enrich themselves. This is very common, many Generals, for instance, go on to highly paid jobs at defense contractors, and many politicians go on to jobs as lobbyists."

I don't think they've done anything illegal at all, I think they have done what the Power Elite (Mills) do. I don't like it when Generals do it, and I don't much like it when Clinton's do it, but that is a matter of personal politics, not law.
posted by OmieWise at 12:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


From the Vox article on social psychology of Trump supporters:

Then there were others that I felt who swallowed unpleasant news in a kind of quieter stoicism. It was almost like they were renouncing their right to a clean environment. One respondent told me: Pollution is the price we pay for capitalism. Sometimes people accepted loss as part of God’s plan.

Sadly, very sadly, this checks out.
posted by petebest at 12:33 PM on September 6, 2016


I dunno, safe zones in Syria sound like concentration camps no matter who says it.
posted by zutalors! at 12:34 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, one reason people might think Clinton is a hawk is because she frequently talks about establishing safe zones in Syria, something that would require US military assets to achieve, including operating those assets in close proximity with Russian/Assad-loyal forces.

Well, she's said repeatedly that as President she would prioritize a diplomatic solution over a military one, but ok.

So, just out of curiosity, what's your preferred non-"hawkish "solution to the Syrian clusterfuck? Should we pretend it isn't happening? Decide Assad's really an OK guy after all? Throw up our hands and say "Oh well, guess there's nothing we can do..."?
posted by dersins at 12:34 PM on September 6, 2016 [17 favorites]


If you think the Clintons are in politics to enrich themselves, you must think them to be incredibly stupid. Like, stupider than could be reasonably believed of two humans who can speak in complete sentences. For starters, they both left behind what would be been incredibly lucrative careers in high-powered law firms.

I'm not sure if this is directed to me, because I said no such thing and think it would be a weird representation from someone who in these threads has repeatedly said that he's a very strong Clinton supporter.

I said that having left politics, or in the interstices, they have sought to enrich themselves with their access and reputations.
posted by OmieWise at 12:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, one reason people might think Clinton is a hawk is because she frequently talks about establishing safe zones in Syria, something that would require US military assets to achieve, including operating those assets in close proximity with Russian/Assad-loyal forces. [...] talking about things is the first step to building a consensus to move candidates in a more progressive direction [...] Otherwise this thread is just "Ain't Hillary totes adorbs

So I think that is indeed an important and meaningful issue. But I don't think saying "Hillary is a war hawk" really furthers the discussion of the question whether we should establish safe zones in Syria or not. Instead of evaluating Hillary Clinton as a person on, like, a scale from 1 - 10, can we actually talk about those issues? Because there's very little point in evaluating her on some kind of absolute scale right now when we know the alternative is worse. The relative evaluation is the only one that matters to the decisions we individually and collectively face right now.

But I think there's a lot to be gained from talking about issues, like what if anything we should do about the situation in Syria, because these are knotty problems and the more people thinking and talking about them, the better the consensus we come to as a society about what should be done.

It is not at all obvious to me that only a war hawk would want to do something to stop the civil war in Syria, or that there are effective non-military ways to do that.

But I am pretty sympathetic to the position that military intervention often if not usually causes more harm than it prevents, so I would likely be sympathetic to a specific argument as to why we shouldn't intervene (or moral grounds or pragmatic ones? In the interests of Syrians or Americans?) or how we might intervene in non-military ways (economic sanctions? Economic aid? Military aid/arms supplies? Diplomatic sanctions? Espionage? Secret special ops missions? What specific non-military interventions could we consider if we believe that the Syrian civil war is a travesty which is killing and maiming children and endangering world peace, but don't want to send in troops?

That is a discussion that's a lot more substantive that either "Hillary is a war hawk" or "Hillary is totes adorbs" which I would very much welcome.
posted by OnceUponATime at 12:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [17 favorites]


I heard some pretty persuasive reporting the other day that suggests that the various factors in the Syrian Civil War, when compared to other similar conflicts and their durations, add up to something that could go on for at least another decade if not longer. I'm all ears for any and all workable solutions, even military ones at this point.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:38 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Rehashing my old posts;

We're having dinner. The choice is chicken or steak, there are no other choices. Oh, but the chicken is contaminated and people are getting sick all around. You want to talk about whether the beef is grass fed, and will not stop talking about it. There are no other choices.

I honestly do not find your conversation as enlightening as you imagine. I will not have dinner with you any more.
posted by bongo_x at 12:40 PM on September 6, 2016 [101 favorites]


The Frito Bandito.

Frito Benito, obvs.
posted by stolyarova at 12:42 PM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


Metafilter: there is a Yoko Ono component that I did not care to explore
posted by DiscountDeity at 12:42 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


zutalors!: I dunno, safe zones in Syria sound like concentration camps no matter who says it.

That's a mind-bogglingly far leap to make, IMO.
posted by chonus at 12:42 PM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


No, wait. Cheeto Benito.
posted by stolyarova at 12:42 PM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


Frito Benito, obvs.

CHEETO Benito. He's much more Cheeto-colored than Frito-colored.

(Though one could argue for Dorito...)
posted by chonus at 12:43 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Jinx, Stoly!
posted by chonus at 12:43 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]



That's a mind-bogglingly far leap to make, IMO.


how so? i feel like we've said that often in these threads when Trump says "safe zones." The way they would be organized and policed would put them in that category for sure.
posted by zutalors! at 12:44 PM on September 6, 2016


how so? i feel like we've said that often in these threads when Trump says "safe zones."

Consider each source. Context matters.
posted by chonus at 12:47 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


i think the practical effect would be the same, honestly, whether it's a Trump or Clinton safe zone.
posted by zutalors! at 12:48 PM on September 6, 2016


> Older white women who ordinarily vote Republican prolly share the sentiment.

The Republican-voting white women I know do so for a whole lot of reasons not related to female submission politics. I know at least two Republican women who are not voting for Trump (one is for Clinton, the other for Johnson), whose husbands definitely assume they are still aboard the Trump train. The Trump campaign's treatment of women is the first reason both of those women gave for not voting straight-ticket this November. Obviously anecdotes are only so informative, and they are not particularly unusual as female Republican voters in most respects - they're white, suburban, 50-something, mothers and grandmothers, voted for McCain and Romney - but talking up Schlafly as a champion for women cannot really be all that helpful to Trump's women voter outreach.

Heck, even women who advocate for the politics of female submission aren't Trump supporters, From the TPM article:
Some of Schlafly’s own children told the press that they disagreed with her support for Trump, and Eagle Forum’s president of 23 years, Cathie Adams, said that the group had “no respect for that man.”
posted by palindromic at 12:49 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


I dunno, safe zones in Syria sound like concentration camps no matter who says it. [...] i think the practical effect would be the same, honestly, whether it's a Trump or Clinton safe zone.

This argument needs some support. It's not at all self evident.

For one thing Nazi concentration camps were definitely not actually "safe"... right? They actively killed people in concentration camps? Are you suggesting that's what Hillary Clinton wants to do? Or are you thinking of "concentration camps" in a more generic sense that might include, say, the camps in which Japanese Americans were interned during WWII?

For another thing, Syrians are currently NOT safe in their homes, so it's very plausible to imagine that they will be SAFER elsewhere. Hence the overwhelming number of Syrian refugees flooding in neighboring countries and spilling over into Europe. Whereas German Jews (and American Japanese people) were relatively safe in their homes, and there was no reason to believe they would be safer in camps. They were not fleeing their homes. They wanted to stay in them.

For a third thing, has Clinton or anyone suggested transporting anyone involuntarily into these safe zones? Because I have yet to hear of a concentration camp occupied by people who voluntarily came and voluntarily stay. In fact, I would say that seems to be a defining feature of concentration camps -- people are brought there against their will.

Basically I've very confused. In what sense are the proposed "safe zones" at all similar to "concentration camps"?
posted by OnceUponATime at 12:55 PM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


I mean, one reason people might think Clinton is a hawk is because she frequently talks about establishing safe zones in Syria, something that would require US military assets to achieve, including operating those assets in close proximity with Russian/Assad-loyal forces.

If your answer to talking about that is "but Trump",


But no one here was actually talking about that, until you said it just now. The comment which sparked off this back-and-forth on whether or not Clinton actually has talons capable of rending flesh, and whether or not she is capable of independent flight and target acquisition at-a-distance, said, re: hawkishness, I quote: "She's a war hawk. (To people who respond to every criticism of Clinton asking for "evidence," what evidence could you possibly need? The entirety of the primary debates?)"

'She is a war hawk' is a policy-neutral statement. Is it about Syria? Maybe! It might be! But that's reading meaning into an unclear statement. It might also not be about Syria at all.

When people make a specific policy critique -- like you just did, now, with her statements on Syria -- it is much, much easier to make a specific response rather than generalizing to 'but Trump.' We can talk about why we think she is or isn't, and we can talk about whether or not those things matter in different contexts (in the election, after the election, here or in conversation with the campaign). But as long as we're in a contested election with Trump on one side, criticisms without specificity or clarify don't deserve much more than 'but Trump' because they're not saying much more than 'but I dislike Clinton.' That's the only clear message that calling her 'a war hawk' absent any explanation of what that means conveys; it's not, in the context of this discussion, a critique or her politics or her policies.

That is, explicitly, not to say you can't make statements about her policies. But it's more conducive to discussion to actually make those statements, rather than just skip to the conclusion that follows from them. Because this:

if you think it's possible that -- stay with me here -- talking about things is the first step to building a consensus to move candidates in a more progressive direction, candidates like Clinton (when has that ever happened, amirite), then that sort of discussion might be important.

That requires actually talking about specific things. 'Clinton is a war hawk' or other comments of their ilk, don't serve to build consensus in any progressive direction towards foreign policy because people reading it don't know what, if anything, the alternative is, or even why the writer is saying that.

I think this is a fairly common tension point in talking about politics: if you're coming to the table with a set of what you think are shared values and assumptions, it's easy to want to shortcut discussion by jumping past stating those ('She's advocated for the following positions...') because you'd rather talk about what follows from them ('I think she's a war hawk'), and, probably, some course of action that follows from that. But those conversational shortcuts are incredibly hard to work backwards from; they're lossy compression in the world of ideas. We're tens of thousands of comments into this election and people are still making identical comments. 'She's a war hawk,' 'she voted for Iraq.' But the people saying those identical comments actually mean different things: when we've hashed out these conversations before, it turns out that 'she's a war hawk' comes from all sorts of places. It's bad shorthand, but it's exhausting to figure out -- by going back and forth with commenters -- to find out what they actually mean.

So, instead, 'but Trump.' Not because anyone's intolerant of dissent, but because people are tired of figuring out what other people's dissent is actually dissenting about.
posted by cjelli at 12:56 PM on September 6, 2016 [32 favorites]


We're having dinner. The choice is chicken or steak, there are no other choices. Oh, but the chicken is contaminated and people are getting sick all around. You want to talk about whether the beef is grass fed, and will not stop talking about it. There are no other choices.

For me, it's kind of like I'm having dinner. There's perfectly acceptable chicken, but it's from a megafarm and although they follow all applicable laws, you think their farming and labor practices are ethically problematic. You think maybe it should be considered unethical to farm the way they farm, and that it's bad for farming as a whole, but that's how everyone else does it, so what are you gonna do? Then there's an overcooked steak hard as a rock that, paradoxically, is also contaminated with listeria, which gives it an orange hue. It got to market by bribing and intimidating food regulators, and you're not sure, it might actually be horse meat. It says Grown in the USA but when you peel that sticker off you see some Cyrillic.

There are no other choices. A lot of people say the chicken is pretty good and I should just go ahead and eat it. But they're pretty sure the steak will kill me. Some people think the chicken is the poison, even as they vomit up the steak and run a high fever. They're clearly insane.

I'd eat the chicken, but I'm a vegetarian.

There are no other choices.

I eat the chicken.
posted by dis_integration at 12:57 PM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


Perhaps for the sake of quickly and easily replying to rehashed issues related to the election, we can devise a system of standardized numbered replies. That way instead of lengthy repeats of rebuttals, we can all simply type things like:

In regards to emails, 2, 17 and 34.

It still save time and energy.
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:58 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


I have in the past said things like "Clinton is somewhat more hawkish than I would like," as a shorthand for "she has in the past advocated or accepted the use of military force in instances where I would prefer pacifism." I'm no longer using that kind of phrasing, as "hawkish" implies a sort of eagerness for war that I don't believe is reflected in Clinton's record. This doesn't mean I agree with her decisions now, nor will it stop me from criticizing similar decisions of hers in the future. But I believe her record shows that she's a political pragmatist who believes that the threat of, or less frequently the use of, military force can be a tool for protecting imperiled people throughout the world. Considering some of the worst humanitarian crises from the 90s (notably the Rwandan genocide and the civil war in Kosovo), her perspective is understandable.

Clinton isn't a war hawk. Neither is she a dove. The real world is complex, and effective leaders make hard decisions based on the realities on the ground, rather than ideologically pure worldviews. They don't always get it right, but it is still better than refusing to act, or refusing to recognize the messy facts of the world.

On the flip side, Trump's decision-making seems to be based neither or reality or ideological purity, but whatever kayfabe lets him keep playing the character of the Successful Powerful Man.
posted by biogeo at 12:59 PM on September 6, 2016 [44 favorites]


They actively killed people in concentration camps? Are you suggesting that's what Hillary Clinton wants to do?

FFS. Of course not.

Here is a good article about why safe zones are a bad idea.

If you think concentration camps only means Nazis I don't know what to say to that. But "safe zones" does imply internment, concentration, restriction of a serious kind.
posted by zutalors! at 1:00 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


If you think concentration camps only means Nazis I don't know what to say to that.

OnceUponATime was not the only person who made that connection. It's a term that many, many people associate primarily with the Nazi death camps of World War II.
posted by Etrigan at 1:03 PM on September 6, 2016 [23 favorites]


Perhaps for the sake of quickly and easily replying to rehashed issues related to the election, we can devise a system of standardized numbered replies. That way instead of lengthy repeats of rebuttals, we can all simply type things like:

In regards to emails, 2, 17 and 34.

It still save time and energy.


And then the newbie, frustrated at the confusing system, posted a number she knew would be unassigned: "38172!" And every Mefite in the thread favorited her comment. They'd never heard that point before!
posted by biogeo at 1:03 PM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


For one thing Nazi concentration camps were definitely not actually "safe"... right? They actively killed people in concentration camps? Are you suggesting that's what Hillary Clinton wants to do? Or are you thinking of "concentration camps" in a more generic sense that might include, say, the camps in which Japanese Americans were incarcerated during WWII?

The Nazi "concentration camps" you're talking about were extermination or death camps, which they are mostly called to avoid the confusion you identify. I don't know anyone who refers to Auschwitz, for instance, as anything other than a death camp or an extermination camp.

From Wikipedia: "Holocaust scholars draw a distinction between concentration camps (described in this article) and extermination camps, which were established by Nazi Germany for the industrial-scale mass murder of Jews in the ghettos and concentration camp populations."
posted by OmieWise at 1:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]



OnceUponATime was not the only person who made that connection. It's a term that many, many people associate primarily with the Nazi death camps of World War II.


I also used it to refer to Trump's internment camps for illegal immigrants. Basically these safe zones, restriction/detainment areas that are proposed are potential human rights disasters, distaste for the word "concentration" even considered.
posted by zutalors! at 1:10 PM on September 6, 2016


OnceUponATime was not the only person who made that connection. It's a term that many, many people associate primarily with the Nazi death camps of World War II.

Yes, that's what I asked for clarification, because I figured that's how a lot of people would read it! But then I specifically asked if you, Zulators!, meant something like the Japanese internment camps instead, because I was genuinely trying to understand what you meant by "concentration camps." Can you give a historical example to illuminate the comparison you're trying to make?

Also, you didn't answer any of my other questions... and neither did the short article you linked. That article says that safe zones are not an effective solution to the refugee crisis (probably not, and I am in favor of the US accepting a lot more Syrian refugees). But it doesn't say in what way, if any, safe zones are like concentration camps! If they are actually safer than the rest of the country, and if people enter and remain in them voluntarily, then I can't see how they are like anything which has historically been called a concentration camp.

And there are reasons for wanting to establish them besides stemming the tide of refugees. That link talks about some of the possible ways a "safe zones" plan could go terribly wrong, but also suggests an entirely different set of motivations for them:
It would not have to focus on immediate regime change, but rather on mitigating the spiraling death toll, providing a safe space for moderate opposition to form governing structures and rebuild civil society, and allow for the introduction of humanitarian assistance. If properly enforced, refugees could resettle in these protected areas and begin the process of building an alternative to Mr. Assad, which can be leveraged in future negotiations to end the conflict.
posted by OnceUponATime at 1:11 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I don't know anyone who refers to Auschwitz, for instance, as anything other than a death camp or an extermination camp.

Really? You don't know a single person who calls the Nazi death camps "concentration camps?"

Because, rightly or wrongly, like 90% of everybody[*] calls them concentration camps, and like 90% of everybody [**] thinks "Holocaust" when they hear "concentration camps."



[*] Note: Statistic made up but I mean come on.

[**] ibid.
posted by dersins at 1:11 PM on September 6, 2016 [49 favorites]


The Turkish military invaded Syria this last week and has started setting up a safe zone. The presidential level problem of the moment in Syria is how will the US keep Turkey and our SDF allies from going to war with each other. Who do you want working on this problem Trump or Clinton?
posted by humanfont at 1:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


whether it's a Trump or Clinton safe zone.

The difference is the Clinton zone is keeping them safe while the Trump zone is keeping us safe from them.
posted by chris24 at 1:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


OnceUponATime was not the only person who made that connection. It's a term that many, many people associate primarily with the Nazi death camps of World War II.

Yes, but that's obviously not the only definition, and it would be helpful if we don't all automatically jump to the worst historical example and assume that zutalors! is referring to extermination camps used for genocide. The US ran concentration camps where Japanese Americans, Italian Americans and German Americans were interred during WWII. Guantanamo prison can also be defined as a concentration camp. In recent years, concentration camps in Myanmar were used to mistreat Muslims through starvation and lack of medical treatment.
posted by zarq at 1:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]




I don't know anyone who refers to Auschwitz, for instance, as anything other than a death camp or an extermination camp.

When I was going through school and discussing this period of history, we used "concentration camp" as a blanket term, including Auschwitz. The distinction between concentration camps and extermination camps is useful, but I never encountered it until I was an adult. Maybe this is something that varies depending on where you grow up.
posted by biogeo at 1:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


I don't know anyone who refers to Auschwitz, for instance, as anything other than a death camp or an extermination camp.

From Wikipedia:


The title of that article is "Nazi concentration camps" and includes, as one of the subcategories, "Extermination camps", and specifically cites Auschwitz as a combined concentration and extermination camp.

There are plenty of people -- perhaps not Holocaust scholars -- who read "concentration camp" and think of Auschwitz and Dachau and Treblinka, and people who want to use the phrase should keep in mind that those people may read it that way and not act as though something is wrong with anyone who makes that conncetion.
posted by Etrigan at 1:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


Clinton's not a hawk - she's an interventionist; a group that often makes common cause with hawks. Her quote on Gadaffi was, in so many words, "We came. We saw. He died." She believes in diplomatic intervention, with military intervention as one tool in that locker (all part of making the world a better place) and having been in the White House for both the Rwandan Genocide and the breakup of the Former Yugoslavia I have every sympathy with her approach.

She is also one of the very few people whose rationale for supporting the enabling motion for the Iraq War I actually believe. The motion she voted for wasn't a motion to go to war. It was a motion to empower the President for muscular sabre rattling and to go to war if diplomatic means failed. Hillary supported that because Hussein was a piece of work and diplomacy looking for a win-win but backed by a stout stick is her preference for foreign policy. She just assumed that the argument was being offered in good faith because it was what she would have done.

And on a hopefully unrelated subject I'd refer to the Nazi death camps as concentration camps.
posted by Francis at 1:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]



The difference is the Clinton zone is keeping them safe while the Trump zone is keeping us safe from them.


I disagree, as the article I linked pointed out, i don't think we would have much luck keeping them safe.
posted by zutalors! at 1:13 PM on September 6, 2016




Yes, but that's obviously not the only definition, and it would be helpful if we don't all automatically jump to the worst historical example and assume that zutalors! is referring to extermination camps used for genocide. The US ran concentration camps where Japanese Americans, Italian Americans and German Americans were interred during WWII. Guantanamo prison can also be defined as a concentration camp. In recent years, concentration camps in Myanmar were used to mistreat Muslims through starvation and lack of medical treatment.


Thanks zarq.
posted by zutalors! at 1:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Every pro-Trump person I've talked with thinks the solution in Syria is to get out and not worry or care about what happens afterwards.
posted by charred husk at 1:14 PM on September 6, 2016


Really? You don't know a single person who calls the Nazi death camps "concentration camps?"

Sure. 100% of the people I talk about the Holocaust* with, and there are quite a few, know the difference. This isn't some weird boast, it's just a matter of who is in my family and social circle. I'm aware that people conflate the two, it just doesn't happen much among the people I know.

* Most call it the Shoah as well.
posted by OmieWise at 1:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


The US ran concentration camps where Japanese Americans, Italian Americans and German Americans were interred during WWII.

I think you mean "interned," unless this chapter of American history is considerably darker than I realized.
posted by biogeo at 1:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


Zulators, I usually agree with your comments here, which is what makes it more frustrating that you won't engage with my actual questions about the comparison you made.

it would be helpful if we don't all automatically jump to the worst historical example and assume that zutalors! is referring to extermination camps used for genocide.


I didn't assume. I asked, so that Zulators! could clarify and avoid this very derail. Oh well.

The US ran concentration camps where Japanese Americans, Italian Americans and German Americans were interned during WWII

Yes, I mentioned those in my comment and asked if perhaps that was the kind of thing which was meant instead.
posted by OnceUponATime at 1:16 PM on September 6, 2016


>Do you count it as a hang-up if someone says something first?

If someone politely says they can't talk/don't want to talk/whatever, I mark them as "refused" and move along. If someone just hangs up without saying anything, I mark them as "not home" or maybe even "call back" because MWAH HAH HAH HAH THE POWER THE POWER.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 1:17 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


100% of the people I talk about networks with properly distinguish a "router" from a "modem", but that doesn't mean I assume that normal people saying they "have WiFi" mean that as having an 802.11x network as a separate question from whether or not that network can access the internet.
posted by 0xFCAF at 1:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


>And Greenwald has crawled up his own ass again regarding the pushback on media reporting on the Clinton Foundation.

Scott Lemieux at Lawyers, Guns & Money - Did Democrats Unfairly “Demonize” Republicans Like John McCain and Mitt Romney? (SPOILER: No.):
[S]ince the views Glenn [Greenwald] expressed in the interview that Beth found objectionable aren’t particularly unusual, it’s worth explaining the two key problems with what he was arguing. Let’s go to the relevant quote:
I mean, the tactic of the Democratic Party in the last 25 years—they know that ever since they became the party of sort of corporatism and Wall Street, they don’t inspire anybody, so their tactic is to say the Republican Party is the epitome of evil.
Let’s stop here for a second, since this kind of ahistorical assertion — the Democratic Party used to be good but it’s now the party of evil neoliberalism — is a very common move. It is also a rather absurd fiction. Whatever its faults and limitations the Democratic Party of Obama/Pelosi/Reid is one of the most progressive iterations of the party’s nearly 190 year history. The overall trajectory of the party for the past decade is clearly to the left, not to the right. And this nostalgia for the mythical Golden Age of the Democratic Party is particularly strange coming from someone with Glenn’s priorities. What Democratic Party of the past are we supposed to be pining for — when LBJ and JFK were going to Vietnam and wiretapping Martin Luther King? When FDR was sending people of Japanese descent to concentration camps? When Truman was loading the Supreme Court with First Amendment-eviscerating poker buddies? When Jackson was cleansing Georgia of Native Americans? Help me out here. It’s true that the party has changed — in the New Deal era, the conservative Democrats that worked with Republicans to control Congress between 1938-1964 were more likely to be southern segregationists than Wall-Street influenced northerners. This was…not better.

As I’ve observed before, there is a reason for this imaginary history of the Democratic Party — namely, it allows people to avoid confrontation with the massive structural barriers that stand in the way of even left-liberal national coalitions: numerous veto points in a political system awash with money, electoral systems that privilege conservative rural areas, the preponderance of low-turnout midterm elections, etc. etc. The vast majority of major liberal federal legislation was passed in three brief periods under FDR, LBJ and Obama, and even in those cases it wasn’t so much that liberals controlled Congress as that there were political contexts that compelled moderate and conservative Democrats (and, in the case of LBJ, moderate and liberal Republicans) to go along with an unusually influential liberal minority. At some point, you have to consider the possibility that the Democratic Party isn’t suppressing a natural social democratic and staunchly civil libertarian governing majority.
posted by palindromic at 1:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [28 favorites]


And if a man answers and says "she's not interested" when I call to speak to a woman, I double mark it "Not Home."
posted by Tevin at 1:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [19 favorites]


I honestly don't understand your analogy.
posted by OmieWise at 1:20 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


[Maybe let's allow the exact semantics of "concentration camp" to rest at this point.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 1:20 PM on September 6, 2016 [19 favorites]


Zulators, I usually agree with your comments here, which is what makes it more frustrating that you won't engage with my actual questions about the comparison you made.

I'm having a hard time engaging with them when they're like "wait are you saying you think Hillary Clinton wants to murder?"

I think zarq made my point pretty well. I didn't misspeak, I meant concentration camp. I think saying "oh internment is a better word" is a slippery slope. I think "safe zones" is a euphemism for a dangerous thing. I think it's scary when Trump mentions them, I can't pretend that's not true if Clinton does the same.
posted by zutalors! at 1:20 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


I think you mean "interned," unless this chapter of American history is considerably darker than I realized.

Ugh. I can't even blame autocorrect for that one. Yes, definitely "interned," not "interred."
posted by zarq at 1:21 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Individual national polls will occasionally show Trump with a narrow lead as long as the election remains in the 7-8 point Hillary lead.

While true, you have to go back 28 polls in the 4way matchup (and like 15 in the 2way) to find one giving Clinton an 8 point lead so I'm not sure what the basis for believing her lead might be that big could be. RCP has it at 2.4 in the 4way matchup, 3.3 in the 2way. CNN's poll of polls has it around 5 (they don't break it down further). Huffpost has it between 4 and 5 in both types of matchups.

It's clear that the race is somewhere in the 4 point range based on polling averages. And 4 points is still a lead. But the trendlines are clearly and obviously for Trump in the last two weeks.
posted by Justinian at 1:22 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


The difference is the Clinton zone is keeping them safe while the Trump zone is keeping us safe from them.

In practice this distinction might be hard to discern. Once you get people into a safe-zone, you have to provide them with meaningful on the groud security, which does not now exist among the US-friendly forces there. You also have to provide them with food, water, medical care, education for their children, and many other things.

I don't know what the solutions is. My foreign policy goals regarding Syria, so far as some D-bag on the internet can have foreign policy goals is to have less blown-up/drowned/shell-shocked Syrian kids. I don't think further US intervention in Syria is going to make it less of a hell hole.

If I were somebody, I guess first I'd be trying to figure out what carrot would make Putin cut Assad loose.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:22 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm glad OpinonWorks polled Maryland instead of, you know, North Carolina or Florida or Virginia or something. Had to make sure that 30 point lead was safe.
posted by Justinian at 1:25 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm having a hard time engaging with them when they're like "wait are you saying you think Hillary Clinton wants to murder?

Okay, so you answered that one, "No, that's not what I'm saying." Great! I didn't really think you did mean that, as I tried to make clear by suggesting some alternative interpretations. But that is the way it originally read to me!

But the questions I want you to engage with are these:


If they are actually safer than the rest of the country, and if people enter and remain in them voluntarily, then how are they like anything which has historically been called a concentration camp?
posted by OnceUponATime at 1:25 PM on September 6, 2016


I dunno, safe zones in Syria sound like concentration camps no matter who says it.

I think you are confusing "safe zones" with "refugee camps" which actually still are a far cry from concentration camps (speaking as someone who WORKS for a damn NGO with a Syrian program so I KNOW stuff).

"Safe Zones", as Hilary is most likely referring to them, probably mean "places in the country where there is not actual war going on 24/7", and if you think that sounds like a concentration camp, then... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 1:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [48 favorites]


Perhaps for the sake of quickly and easily replying to rehashed issues related to the election, we can devise a system of standardized numbered replies.

I don't want to get all metatalk here, but you know that nobody's gonna send you to a safe zone if you just don't respond when someone barfs up some crusty old rehash, right? Do your best Ray Walston voice and snarkily say asked and answered, councilor! to your screen and move on to the next comment. The people on the bus eventually stop scooting farther away as they get used to it and you don't clutter up the thread with what looks like bingo calls.
posted by phearlez at 1:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Ugh. I can't even blame autocorrect for that one. Yes, definitely "interned," not "interred."

On the plus side, you gave me several minutes of interesting reflection on the various dimensions of semantic and moral distance indicated by such a small linguistic difference, so thanks.
posted by biogeo at 1:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


yeah, I'm not interested in 'takin all comers on this topic.

I'll just repeat what I said: I think "safe zones" is a euphemism for a dangerous thing. I think it's scary when Trump mentions them, I can't pretend that's not true if Clinton does the same.

I also think the human rights disasters mentioned in the Hill article I linked answer my concern.
posted by zutalors! at 1:31 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


I don't want to get all metatalk here, but you know that nobody's gonna send you to a safe zone if you just don't respond when someone barfs up some crusty old rehash, right?

Coincidentally, this very quote would be coded "1" in my proposed system.
posted by Joey Michaels at 1:32 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


Argh! You sunk my battleship!
posted by biogeo at 1:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm curious though, are there any examples of a sort of 'safe haven' policy actually working at a national-civil-war level? I can't think of any but I can't actually think of any examples where it has actually been tried (as opposed to being a figleaf for outright internment / "neutralizing" of perceivedly-hostile local populations, cf. the Boer War, Japanese-American internment camps, etc).

I suppose refugee camps are this, in a way -- but I think the idea of 'safe zones' involves actually entering active war zones / contested territory to carve out demilitarized safe spaces that will be defended and policed by forces not party to the actual conflict.

The closest I can think of offhand is the no-fly zone in Iraqi Kurdistan, which I don't think has particularly been a failure, especially if measured against all the other stupid things the US has done in the region over the last 20+ years.

I think it could work? But it would have to be palatable to the Russians and there would have to be buy-in from the UN, Europe and the Arab world as well.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


I don't know what the solutions is. My foreign policy goals regarding Syria, so far as some D-bag on the internet can have foreign policy goals is to have less blown-up/drowned/shell-shocked Syrian kids

See, to me, that's a cop out. Because I really see no reason to doubt that this is Hillary Clinton's goal as well. But she can't just shrug and say "I'm just some D-bag on the internet." She is in a position where she bears responsibility for the consequencies of inaction as well. If America could have stopped mounting total of blown-up/drowned/shell-shocked Syrian kids and didn't, if she personally could have stopped those numbers from continuing to rise, and didn't, she has to live with that.

So there is no point in saying "But Hillary Clinton's proposed solution is bad" without proposing some less bad option. Maybe this is a no win situation and all solutions (including inaction) are bad. Probably so. But "none of the above" isn't one of the choices. We as a country have to pick the least-bad option we can find. Pointing out the badness of all of them is just noise which doesn't help us make anything better.
posted by OnceUponATime at 1:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [34 favorites]


I'm glad OpinonWorks polled Maryland instead of, you know, North Carolina or Florida or Virginia or something. Had to make sure that 30 point lead was safe.

Hey, we elected Hogan. It was a valid concern.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:39 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm curious though, are there any examples of a sort of 'safe haven' policy actually working at a national-civil-war level?

What about when the U.N. went to guard Kosovo?
posted by wenestvedt at 1:40 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Farai Chideya at 538: This Election Is Testing The Republican Loyalties Of Military Voters:
Hale, now a philosophy major at the Miami University of Ohio, is one of 22 million veterans living in the United States, a powerful demographic group that trends Republican. There are also 1.3 million active-duty military members, 1.8 million dependents and nearly 741,000 U.S. civilian direct hires. Active-duty military service members are not allowed to speak on the record to the press about their political affiliations, but a July survey by Military Times (described as unscientific, since respondents opt in) found that they preferred Trump to Clinton 2 to 1, though the majority dislike both candidates (61 percent in Trump’s case and 82 percent in Clinton’s).

An NBC News/Survey Monkey poll in mid-August found that Trump was leading Clinton by 10 points — 51 to 41 percent — in military households, even after he angered many veterans groups by feuding with a Gold Star Muslim family that had lost a son in Iraq. (Blacks and Latinos in military households chose Clinton over Trump, though by lower margins than among the general population.) A Fox News poll in early August found Trump ahead of Clinton by 14 points in early August among veterans. But that lead is smaller than those of previous Republican candidates, possibly because of Trump’s remarks about the Gold Star family and his criticism of military interventions. At this point in the cycle, John McCain had a 22-point lead among veterans in 2008, and Mitt Romney was up 24 points in 2012.
The article looks at the military vote by age, state, which war (if any) a given voter was/is serving during, veterans v. active duty, etc.
posted by palindromic at 1:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Here's excerpts from HRC's last two gaggles (which is apparently what we're calling a presser on a plane.)

Hillary Clinton Suggests Russia Working To Elect Donald Trump | MSNBC
Hillary Clinton: Donald Trump 'Has Something To Hide' In Finances | MSNBC
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:55 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


What about when the U.N. went to guard Kosovo?

Wasn't that primarily NATO rather than the UN? NATO, of course, being the organization Donald Trump thinks we should charge for military protection. Highlighting another vast gulf between the points of difference under discussion here about the appropriate use of American military power to protect civilians, versus the Trumpian view of the U.S. military as a mercenary service which should be used to make a profit.
posted by biogeo at 1:59 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


Hah, in that first video, she quotes a bit of country wisdom, re: Trump and Russia: "you find a turtle on fencepost it didn't get there by accident". I'm charmed.
posted by dis_integration at 2:00 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


The article looks at the military vote by age, state, which war (if any) a given voter was/is serving during, veterans v. active duty, etc.

You'll also note that the dude that they profile has a Three Percenter flag hanging in his living room. So... maybe not exactly representative. I hope?
posted by soren_lorensen at 2:01 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


So there is no point in saying "But Hillary Clinton's proposed solution is bad" without proposing some less bad option.

I think any solution that doesn't involve fighter planes blowing shit up and the Marine Expeditionary Force herding refugees into some kind of mega-Domiz Camp is a less bad option
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:05 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm so far beyond my evens budget with this whole gaggle / press conference game the press is playing.

Trump is literally blacklisting media outlets who aren't demonstrating enough subservience to him, and their response is to... demand subservience from Hillary by dictating the terms of what constitutes an acceptable press conference? These cowards have no pride whatsoever in their professional integrity. It used to be said that one should never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel, but now, I guess you can just use your ability to get TV ratings to work the refs to the point where they're afraid to do their job.
posted by tonycpsu at 2:05 PM on September 6, 2016 [56 favorites]


I think any solution that doesn't involve fighter planes blowing shit up and the Marine Expeditionary Force herding refugees into some kind of mega-Domiz Camp is a less bad option

So, cruise missiles and the Army Rangers it is, then.
posted by dersins at 2:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think any solution that doesn't involve fighter planes blowing shit up and the Marine Expeditionary Force herding refugees into some kind of mega-Domiz Camp is a less bad option

That really doesn't answer the question. "Don't blow shit up" is not a plan.
posted by Ben Trismegistus at 2:10 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


"you find a turtle on fencepost it didn't get there by accident".

Probably it went up there 'cause it saw something good to eat
posted by Greg Nog at 2:11 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


Or it got there like this.
posted by biogeo at 2:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


Or it thought a higher vantage point would let it spot the pyramids full of grain.

I like to loop things back to the earlier times in the election cycle...
posted by phearlez at 2:17 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


Greg Nog: It's because of ray walston that I am now 100% pro-Trump. I'm wearing the shitty red hat and jacking off to a picture of Tsar Bomba

This is why we can't have nice things.
posted by fader at 2:17 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Safe havens already are going up in Syria. There are three. One under Assad/Russia in the west. Another under the FSA/Turkish military newly established west of the Euphrates river along the northern border with Turkey. Finally there is the Rojova regions in the Northwest and Northeast under the control of the the Kurds/SDF with support from US special forces and US air power. There are also refugee camps in Greece, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey.

Why are you arguing about hypothetical consequences of year old policy positions that are no longer relevant to the facts on the ground?

We saw Hillary Clinton's foreign policy work during her time as Secretary of State. She will build multi-lateral coalitions using the United Nations and NATO. She will likely seek to employ military force with the broad backing of the international community and after other options are exhausted.
posted by humanfont at 2:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


My concern is using the safe zones as a campaign tactic against allowing increased immigration from the region.
posted by zutalors! at 2:23 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think any solution that doesn't involve fighter planes blowing shit up and the Marine Expeditionary Force herding refugees into some kind of mega-Domiz Camp is a less bad option

So whose jets are we talking about here? Just US jets? Is it OK for Russian jets to blow shit up and kill civilians en masse? How about Syrian jets? Is it OK for them to do the mass slaughter? If not, then what do you propose to do about it?

And if we're not herding civilians anywhere, them what should happen to them? Should they stay where they are and be targets? Should they starve to death in their besieged cities? No? Then what should happen to them?

Seriously, if you're going to criticize policy, don't give vague bullshit generalizations and loaded terms. Say exactly what you think policy should be, and be willing to have it critiqued.
posted by happyroach at 2:24 PM on September 6, 2016 [14 favorites]


To paraphrase Leroy Carr...

Baby's in the cradle, brother's on the town
Sister's in the parlour, trying on a gown
Mama's in the kitchen, messing all around
And Turtle's on the fencepost, he won't come down

posted by y2karl at 2:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


[Trump and Clinton versions of safe zones would be hard to tell apart]

Once you get people into a safe-zone, you have to provide them with meaningful on the groud security

No, you don't. I mean, it might be your moral responsibility, but just ignoring your moral responsibilities is easy enough to do. One could just herd people into large "safe zones" and then let local bandits rape and murder at will, maintaining only enough security yourself to keep the refugees from leaving. I expect Trump's version would look more or less like that.

You also have to provide them with food, water, medical care, education for their children, and many other things.

Or, you could just not do those things and oh well some people die. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I expect Trump's version wouldn't make more than a token effort in those areas, would result in near-term mass starvation and death from infectious disease, and would boil down to "Hey, why don't y'all die somewhere unobserved?"
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 2:32 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


My concern is the Syrian refugees getting options that work for them. If that is emigration, then we should welcome them as asylum-seekers. If it is temporary relocation within Syria to safe zones, then we should do what we can to make sure those zones are truly safe. I can imagine many reasons why some refugees would prefer to remain in Syria if they can be guaranteed safety: moving across the world to a country where you don't speak the language, the culture is very different, and a vocal minority of people hate you for your race and religion is a pretty intimidating prospect. Better than being killed at home, but still not great. They might prefer to be able to establish protected communities within their home country, if possible. I don't know, and the only way to know is to ask the refugees what they want. Then we can craft a policy that attempts to achieve that while working within the political realities of nativism and anti-Muslim sentiment within the U.S. and Europe. "Safe zones" within Syria that refugees can escape to may be part of that solution, and I think equating it with forced relocation and concentration camps is unhelpful poisoning of the well.
posted by biogeo at 2:34 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


These threads have stopped being fun. I'm very disappointed in all of you.
posted by Scoop at 2:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [23 favorites]


Or, you could just not do those things and oh well some people die. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I expect Trump's version wouldn't make more than a token effort in those areas, would result in near-term mass starvation and death from infectious disease, and would boil down to "Hey, why don't y'all die somewhere unobserved?"

Could we maybe possibly think of this as a ... wait for it... danger zone?
posted by dis_integration at 2:38 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


I expect Trump's version wouldn't make more than a token effort in those areas...

Exactly. Assuming that the intent of the camps wouldn't have an impact on the likelihood and severity of issues seems unrealistic.
posted by chris24 at 2:39 PM on September 6, 2016


Is Trump's rhetorical style an experiment in machine learning/predictive text gone horribly wrong? I mean, can anyone follow the throught process when he went off script at a town hall meeting this afternoon?
"You know, cyber is becoming so big today. It's becoming something that a number of years ago, a short number of years ago, wasn't even a word. Now the cyber is so big. You know you look at what they're doing with the Internet, how they're taking, recruiting people through the Internet. And part of it is the psychology because so many people think they're winning. And you know there's a whole big thing. Even today's psychology, where CNN came out with a big poll, their big poll came out today that Trump is winning. It's good psychology. It's good psychology."
It makes Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens sound like William S. Gibson.
posted by Doktor Zed at 2:41 PM on September 6, 2016 [62 favorites]


Now The Cyber Is So Big, and Other Poems
posted by palomar at 2:42 PM on September 6, 2016 [50 favorites]


As the media continues to try to normalize Donald Trump, Donald Trump continues to normalize behavior like this:
Daily Beast reporter Olivia Nuzzi published a powerful piece Tuesday in which she mused on the current state of political conversation and media engagement in America, pegged to some online harassment she’s recently had to endure.Mike Krawitz, a Republican township committee candidate for West Deptford, New Jersey, drew major attention Monday after he posted a series of alarming comments towards Nuzzi on Facebook. Not the least significant of these remarks was “I. Hope. Somebody. Rapes. You. Today.” [...]

Nuzzi observed that the current social climate has made it so that “bullying has been rebranded as telling it like it is,” and that America has entered a “post-shame era” where political debates have been replaced by flame wars:
“Using obscene or threatening language is a point of pride, proof that you’re beholden to nothing but the truth. And anyone who can’t handle that? Well, they’re just a politically correct loser.

When a former reality TV star can become the Republican nominee while offending and belittling entire genders, races and religions, why wouldn’t a man seeking local office think that encouraging the rape of a woman he hates is OK?”
posted by tonycpsu at 2:44 PM on September 6, 2016 [74 favorites]


Those would make good song lyrics for a Vampire Weekend parody band
posted by dis_integration at 2:44 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Thanks for the links, churchHatesTucker. They were kind of indicative of the campaign so far - clip #1 had 15 seconds of Hillary followed by 4 minutes of a trump talking head speaking nonsense, and clip #2 had Hillary talking convincingly but with the wonkiness level turned up to 10.

But it was great to see Hillary talk rather than T***p and I admit I'm not so jaded that I didn't feel a little surge of pride thinking "this woman is going to be our president".
posted by ianhattwick at 2:49 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


These threads have stopped being fun.

I had fun suggesting that Gamera uses his rocket limbs to get up onto fence posts.
posted by biogeo at 2:52 PM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


Dave Weigel blames voters for him not doing his job.

Your press corps, folks.
posted by NoxAeternum at 2:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


That really doesn't answer the question. "Don't blow shit up" is not a plan.

How much shit do we have to blow up in order to have a plan

Let's blow up precisely that amount of shit and no more

That's my policy proposal

I'll have my staff fax you my White Paper
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


"You know, cyber is becoming so big today. It's becoming something that a number of years ago, a short number of years ago, wasn't even a word."

"Cybernetics" was coined in 1948.
posted by chonus at 2:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


68 is a short number if you write it really small like 68.
posted by biogeo at 2:56 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


This thread gets boring in the daytime when the takers make takes. Now it is dark, where the shakers make [fake]s.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 2:58 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


"You know, cyber is becoming so big today. It's becoming something that a number of years ago, a short number of years ago, wasn't even a word."

"Cybernetics" was coined in 1948.


if you read it carefully you'll see that cyber is becoming something that wasn't a word. What that something is he doesn't say. He has the best words and you don't just give away the best for free.
posted by dis_integration at 3:00 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


Andrew Kaczynski: Ben Carson thinks Trump should apologize for being a birther [with video]

I've noticed that Ben Carson spends a lot of time saying Trump should apologize or Trump should have a softer approach. I don't think Ben is awake enough to understand who Trump actually is-- I believe he is campaigning for "Dream Trump."

I would love for Trump to get hammered on the Birther nonsense. It is a complete cop-out for him to tell the press now that he will not talk about it when a few years ago he wouldn't shut up about the topic. Own it, Trump. Show off your birther credentials!
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:05 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


USA Freedom Girls Sue Trump Campaign for Stiffing Them
After nine months of haggling with Trump staffers, the group sued the campaign in a Sarasota County, Florida for as much as $15,000 in damages.

“This is not an opportunistic thing where we’re suing Donald Trump,” Popick said. “We’re not suing for emotional distress and all that other stuff that people do when the trump up—no pun intended—when they trump up a lawsuit. That’s not what this is. This is tangible dollars I spent under false pretenses.”
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:10 PM on September 6, 2016 [27 favorites]


Or it got there like this.

From that angle, does Gamera look like a pie tin to anyone else?

Bottom + Sides = pie tin.
Shell above = pie crust.

You know, with teeth, claws and rocket legs.
posted by zarq at 3:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'm not going to click that i just want to bask in my imagination of what USA Freedom Girls is.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


Special and better than all the other people who Trump has ripped off, apparently.
posted by Artw at 3:13 PM on September 6, 2016


Wow, I knew he was a racist, a con-man, and a creep, but I until now, I never doubted his commitment to Sparkle Motion.
posted by condour75 at 3:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [44 favorites]


Anyone still worried, in any way, about the emails should go watch Comey's testimony about them. He could not be more clear that he thinks there is nothing there. He could not be more clear that he wishes to God he had been able to recommend prosecution. He did as much damage to Clinton as he could, but even he thought there was no prosecuting.

That she didn't do anything wrong doesn't matter anymore. That's the simple, horrifying beauty of it. By this point it's no more than word association. EMAILS = BAD. Clinton? Emails? Clinton? Emails? Clinton? Emails? CLINTON = BAD. Same with BENGHAZI. All you have to do is mention it. And mention it. And mention it. And mention it.
posted by Vic Morrow's Personal Vietnam at 3:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [35 favorites]


Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine "wrote a book" (like hell they did, she's insanely busy and how long has he even been on the ticket? and I'm the sucker who just bought it on Amazon! Woot woot!
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 3:17 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


If you had just told us from the beginning you were more interested in trolling than engaging in good-faith discussion

I don't think criticizing a plan or a policy requires a bullet-point counterproposal. In my experiences with online forums, insisting it does is more of an attempt to shut down discussion than to foster it.

Saying that an interventionist or violence-based Syrian policy is wrong-headed doesn't automatically mean my preferred policy would be nothing. That's a fine straw man. I greatly appreciate what John Kerry is doing now, in trying to forge multilateral solutions. My personal belief is that ending the violence in Syria isn't compatible with the stated goal of regime change by the United States government; some soft-landing for Assad has to be found, preferably with Russian cooperation. That's my point of view. But saying that making Syria more violent to create refugee camps isn't a solution (and it isn't) does not constitute apathy or pacifism. And the suggestion that it does warrants the response I provided.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 3:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


I was just invited to win a signed copy by my good friends at HFA, tps.
posted by yhbc at 3:19 PM on September 6, 2016


WaPo: McCain portrays immigration record differently in English and Spanish
In English, McCain touts his work to reform the U.S. Border Patrol and to pass laws that “would address the crisis of unaccompanied children coming across Arizona’s border with Mexico.” But in Spanish, there’s no reference to border security or dealing with unaccompanied minors.

Instead, the Spanish site touts McCain as “the central figure who has brought together at the negotiating table Republicans and Democrats to work on immigration reform that is humane and sensible to the needs of the immigrant community. More recently, McCain led the efforts of the Group of Eight, which resulted in passage in the Senate of an historic immigration reform project. John McCain has always said that one of the most important parts of any legislative package of the broken immigration system should be to provide a pathway to citizenship for those who were brought as children by their parents, with no say in the matter.”

But in English, there’s no reference to McCain’s work on the Gang of Eight or his support for a pathway to citizenship for “dreamers,” the children of undocumented immigrants.

I'm not going to click that i just want to bask in my imagination of what USA Freedom Girls is.

You should really read the article. They are pre-teens who perform in sequined flag dresses who got dicked around by the badly-run Trump campaign. The low point was when they were invited to perform in Iowa so they flew there from Florida on their own dime but when they arrived they were told they would not be performing and -by the way- sit where we tell you to sit and don't talk to the press.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:21 PM on September 6, 2016 [17 favorites]


I'm not going to click that i just want to bask in my imagination of what USA Freedom Girls is.

Honestly, it's worse than anything you could imagine.
posted by zachlipton at 3:23 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm not going to click that i just want to bask in my imagination of what USA Freedom Girls is.

Then you're not going to learn to deal from strength

you'll get crushed every time
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 3:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


Ella Dawson, who wrote a wonderful article about a week ago (Hillary Clinton, The Alt-Right, And Me), just got the sweetest letter from Secretary Clinton herself. <3
posted by stolyarova at 3:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [44 favorites]


Oh FFS. Shane Goldmacher:
Update: Gingrich himself just starting coughing! Hannity offers water. Says doesn't compare to Clinton cough fit.

"Her coughs are much deeper than his, and last much longer," Gingrich says, comparing Hillary and Bill's coughing

"This coughing stuff, I hope she's all right," Newt Gingrich weighs in, adding, "it's a little disturbing."
It's not the coughing that is "a little disturbing." It's that the alt/right conspiracy shit about Hillary Clinton's coughing is now being trumpeted everywhere including the MSM. I swear that in 4 years we are going to look back and be shaking our heads over the deep analysis that went into Clinton's cough. Nice little show of faux sympathy though, Gingrich.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


I totally shared the Freedom Girls thing to my people on Facebook. Donald Trump will financially screw over any- and everyone, even little kids who want to come out to support him.
posted by Sublimity at 3:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Great. Now I'm worried about her coughing during the debates. I doubt that it is anything more than a seasonal allergy but god forbid she show any weakness because the headlines will be about her coughing. I can see it now, CNN will have Wolf Blitzer interviewing a doctor after the debate and they will play and replay any coughing so they can analyze it and what it might "say" about the state of her general health.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


At this point, I really want the Clinton campaign to do a bait and switch. Set up a situation that looks mildly suspicious, let the media go after it like ravenous wolves and then after some breathless coverage, surprise! Just a feel good story that the media would have to report on. The person behind the monster mask was Tim Kaine holding a puppy.

10 people have probably already said it because my phone and eyeballs are vastly underperforming the thread, but nah... They'd just report on the suspicious part with the happy ending being a footnote until next summer.
posted by emptythought at 3:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


alt-right jackasses: "have you noticed Clinton keeps blinking? it means her eyes are falling out."

*Clinton blinks, as every human being does*

some of the news media: Do Clinton's Blink-Fits Mean Her Eyes Are Falling Out?
posted by defenestration at 3:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [15 favorites]


Do we need to call him "Donnie" "Donny" etc?

My SO offers, The Frito Bandito.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker


HAHAHA!
You and your SO have a hilarious joke with the punchline "Frito Bandito."
HAHAHA! HILARIOUS.

For those of you young enough not to get the reference, the Frito Bandito, was a cartoon mascot for corn chips based on a "Mexican Bandit." A caricature of a criminal (obviously) with a big sombrero who spoke broken English in a heavy accent. It was so hilarious that due to pressure from Mexican-American groups the character was "retired" in the progressive and overly politically correct year of 1971.

So hilarious that people are still making lazy, stereotyping, racist jokes 45 years later. Don't worry your SO isn't the only one, I also found a link to someone on Stormfront who agrees with you guys.

HAHAHA!

tldr; That thing you said? It sounded racist.
posted by ActingTheGoat at 3:37 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


I think I've discovered Dinild Trimp's secret identity.
posted by stolyarova at 3:38 PM on September 6, 2016


I can't believe they're worrying about HRC's health when Trump hasn't even released the results of his Voight-Kampff Test.
posted by mmoncur at 3:39 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Daily Beast reporter Olivia Nuzzi published a powerful piece Tuesday in which she mused on the current state of political conversation and media engagement in America, pegged to some online harassment she’s recently had to endure. Mike Krawitz, a Republican township committee candidate for West Deptford, New Jersey, drew major attention Monday after he posted a series of alarming comments towards Nuzzi on Facebook. Not the least significant of these remarks was “I. Hope. Somebody. Rapes. You. Today.” [...]

Thankfully, this: New Jersey GOPer Quits Race After He Told Female Reporter He Hopes She Gets 'Raped'
posted by Mister Fabulous at 3:39 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]


I can do the plays too:
Liberal: the media is writing nonsense stories!
Media: (writes a story about nonsense)
Liberal: arghhh!!! (Clicks on it 2000 times & posts it on Facebook with a mad sticker)
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:40 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


"we're here with dr. sanjay gupta to get the scoop on hillary clinton's respiratory condition..."
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 3:40 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]




Go with the organ-grinder, not the monkey.
posted by Artw at 3:47 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


What, the orange-rolling thing is real? I'm going to have to re-evaluate the last couple of seasons of The West Wing.
posted by mmoncur at 3:47 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


Given that the medium makes the message and an orange is arguably the most pro-Trump fruit possible, the question was heavily weighted in Trump's favor and she STILL chose Putin (as, of course, she should - he's a person of actual real-world import while DJT is still, as yet, a pretender).
posted by stolyarova at 3:49 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


So I guess we need some more bad Trump news (I mean, bad for him) and maybe soothing Diamond Joe Biden to stroke our collective heads so that our eyes stop glowing with barely restrained fear/rage and you know I'm surprised Trump pinatas haven't caught on for that reason. The fear/rage, I mean, that at least I feel at this new dawn of American Assholes. I want to smash something.
posted by angrycat at 3:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Jennifer Epstein has deleted her orange tweet. Why? WHAT IS HILLARY HIDING INSIDE THAT ORANGE?
posted by stolyarova at 3:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


Press corps rolls orange to Clinton with a question inked on it: dinner with Trump or Putin? She circled Putin. [real]

Sorry that page does not exist
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Thankfully, this: New Jersey GOPer Quits Race After He Told Female Reporter He Hopes She Gets 'Raped'

I'm honestly surprised, I assumed he would double right on down on his violent woman-hating, seeing as that seems to be the thing to do in the Year Of Our Lord 2016.

Looks like there are one or two violent woman-hating Republicans who have retained a shred of ability to feel shame. That's nice, I guess.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:52 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]




Press corps rolls orange to Clinton with a question inked on it: dinner with Trump or Putin? She circled Putin.

Seems legit, I mean if I have to have dinner with an evil right-wing nationalist prick I figure Putin has some ability to make conversation about something beside his own greatness, whereas the jury's still out on whether Trump is actually able to focus on a not-him topic for more than about three minutes.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:56 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


plus maybe Putin would have cool KGB stories
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:56 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


> David Cay Johnston gives an interesting talk promoting his new book, The Making of Donald Trump, on Slate's Live at Politics & Prose podcast the other day.

Just listened to this. Excellent work. Have downloaded an excerpt from the book. Johnston makes a case that Trump could release tax returns that are too old to even be audited, but says he won't because of fraud in one or two of them (one year in the 1980s & I think maybe one in the 70s).

D. C. Johnston on The Daily Beast. One article he pushes in the P & P talk The Tax Speech That Could Elect President Donald J. Trump (tl;dr -- Trump paid little to no income tax, all the rich folks, including Hilary, do it (Romney didn't work for Bain, he *owned* it with great tax benefits) and it's got to stop, so Trump pledges to pay his fair share from now on)
posted by morganw at 3:57 PM on September 6, 2016


The "I SURVIVED THE METAFILTER ELECTION THREADS OF 2016" memorabilia is gonna have to be pretty goddamned sweet for my having endured round five billion and three of the godforsaken emails. If we start relitigating the primaries yet again, the only drinks I'm buying any of you will be Malort.

Anyway, thanks for a whole new set of things to worry about at the debates, what if Hillary coughs and our pathetic excuse for a functioning and responsible media publishes a week's worth of HOT TAKES about how Hillary is at death's door and how coughing is unpresidential and remember that time Nixon looked real sweaty on tv ahahaha kill me now
posted by yasaman at 3:57 PM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


Sean Spicer has won the coin toss and Trump will go second in the Commander in Chief Forum tomorrow night. Does that mean he gets to watch Clinton and poach her answers?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:58 PM on September 6, 2016


Putin is a (horrible) world leader. This is a no brainer orange.
posted by bearwife at 3:58 PM on September 6, 2016


Looks like there are one or two violent woman-hating Republicans who have retained a shred of ability to feel shame.

that's a leap. someone probably cut his purse strings.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 3:58 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


seriously, just how good would it be to punch Trump in the face now
posted by angrycat at 3:59 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


someone should make one of those punch trump in the face websites.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 4:00 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


WHAT IS HILLARY HIDING INSIDE THAT ORANGE?

EMAILS

obviously
posted by stolyarova at 4:00 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


In an hour, you should turn on Joy Reid on MSNBC. She covers the things we talk about in here. She stays on top of so much of the same things we do, and she's filling in for Chris Hayes again tonight.

If you have complaints about shitty journalism, throw some good ratings her way, please. She's doing it right. 8:00pm Eastern, on MSNBC.

Joy Reid:
TV plans tonight: filling in one more 'gain for @chrislhayes on @allinwithchris -talking media, double standards and "pay to play." Tune in!
posted by cashman at 4:01 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


(also, she said one mo gain. She's freaking awesome.)
posted by cashman at 4:02 PM on September 6, 2016




How Donald Trump shattered his own movement
While global trends may eventually push the Republican Party away from the business class and towards nationalists on immigration restriction, the rest of Trumpism seems bound to go into abeyance.

Trump brags about bringing millions of new voters into the party. And surely, he's inspired some new voters. But the more salient fact of the Trump campaign to Republican officeholders and apparatchiks is the poverty it is bringing the party. Trump doesn't seem like an improvement to them at all. He isn't making the party more popular; he's running well behind Mitt Romney. And this is true despite the fact that Hillary Clinton is a much weaker and less popular opponent than an incumbent Barack Obama.

Further, the party's fundraising base is appalled. The wallets are closed. The party's expert class is demoralized; Trump can't even field a normal slate of advisers.</blockquote
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Jennifer Epstein has deleted her orange tweet. Why? WHAT IS HILLARY HIDING INSIDE THAT ORANGE?

somebody wrote (C) on the orange so they had to redact it
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]


Mrs. Clinton was under the impression the (C) was shorthand for the type of vitamin contained therein.
posted by Atom Eyes at 4:08 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


Greta Van Susteren is leaving FOX News after 14 years.
A courier arrived at Van Susteren's Washington, D.C. home at 9 a.m. Tuesday, hand-delivering two letters that said that Van Susteren "was being taken off the air" immediately, according to her husband, John Coale, who is a high-profile Washington lawyer.

Van Susteren was already planning to leave, but she thought she would be hosting her 7 p.m. program "On the Record" for a few more weeks.

Yanking her off the air without a chance to say goodbye was "a bit immature," Coale remarked.

It was also a message from Rupert Murdoch.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:11 PM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


the republican party AND fox news crumbling into dust? who said 2016 sucks?
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 4:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


dis_integration: Could we maybe possibly think of this as a ... wait for it... danger zone?

I am in favor of the election threads becoming largely Archer/Hamilton mashups.

On that note:
NoxAeternum: Dave Weigel blames voters for him not doing his job. Your press corps, folks.

The media turned around so they could have deniability.
posted by Superplin at 4:18 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


who said 2016 sucks?

I still stand by the sentiment that 2016 sucks.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [28 favorites]


Yeah...

Especially when FOX News losing power and influence may lead to:

The Trumpbart News Network: Where The Alt-Right is All Right
posted by defenestration at 4:21 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


Geez. Definitely out of evens now. Trump welcomes endorsement from 88 military leaders.
posted by vac2003 at 4:23 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


Will give consideration to this point of view when said crumbling has actually occurred and when it is successfully stores in a safe location where nobody can, say, drip blood on to it causing it to reconstitute into its terrifying vampiric form.
posted by Artw at 4:24 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Geez. Definitely out of evens now. Trump welcomes endorsement from 88 military leaders.

exactly 88 huh what a cowinkydink
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [63 favorites]


Donald Trump Live in Greenville, NC

David Mack on twitter has pictures and a few choice quotes:
Rudy now accusing Clinton of sawing her phones in half and tossing them in a river

"We're going to build beautiful safe zones in Syria and other people are going to pay for it," Trump says.

Big cheers for Trump's unnamed friends who supposedly don't holiday in France yearly now but instead are coming to North Carolina.

Trump highlights 88 general supporting him. "These are the fighters, the Warriors, not the political hacks that supported Hillary."

Trump says his generals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:27 PM on September 6, 2016


David Mack: College bro shouts "Hillary killed Harambe"
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:32 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump says his generals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS

Or what?
posted by tzikeh at 4:34 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


Or they're fired?
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


exactly 88 huh what a cowinkydink

How many dogwhistles, anti-semitic 4Chan memes and white supremacist references can one campaign use in a single election?
posted by zarq at 4:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [31 favorites]


all of them
posted by dersins at 4:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [30 favorites]


Apparently.
posted by zarq at 4:37 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Generals, Admirals To Endorse Donald Trump | Andrea Mitchell | MSNBC

"Let's put it into perspective.."
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 4:39 PM on September 6, 2016


I look forward to late-campaign Trump ranting about "normies"
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:40 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trump says his generals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS

This is the military version of the guy who knows nothing about climatology but is convinced he's thought up twenty objections to global warming that anybody sufficiently conversant with the science to have an opinion would know were all answered or debunked decades ago.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:41 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


>plus maybe Putin would have cool KGB stories

Yeah, but don't drink the tea.
posted by pompomtom at 4:41 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


How many dogwhistles, anti-semitic 4Chan memes and white supremacist references can one campaign use in a single election?

TotenkopfHatChallengeAccepted.jpg
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 4:41 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Any of the good Generals or Admirals?
posted by drezdn at 4:42 PM on September 6, 2016


> the republican party AND fox news crumbling into dust?

I don't know about Fox News, but...the GOP has a candidate that its traditional power base and vast swathes of the electorate hate, who can't or won't hire competent employees, who has caused traditional donors to close their wallets, who can't or won't go more than a few days without insulting and/or threatening anyone from individuals to entire racial or religious groups, who has proven himself unable or unwilling to establish the campaign infrastructure one traditionally requires in order to credibly run for president, etc., etc., etc...and yet he's still polling within striking distance of Clinton. How do you think a traditional Republican who knows how and when to say the loud parts quiet would be doing against Hillary? My guess is very well indeed.

> Trump says his generals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS

Not that it matters, but...I thought he already had a foolproof plan? And now he's going to wait for these generals to come up with one? Sad!
posted by The Card Cheat at 4:47 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Not that it matters, but...I thought he already had a foolproof plan?

Not only did he invent a secret plan to fight an invasion, but now he won't support it.
posted by zarq at 4:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


I had fun suggesting that Gamera uses his rocket limbs to get up onto fence posts.

To be sure, Gamera *is* really neat.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 4:57 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]


White supremacist alphanumeric codes are just so...fuckin' stupid. Like, wow, racism with an extra helping of a subtly different type of intellectual sloth as your public traits? Gross.

I find myself upset on multiple axes when I see such codes.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 5:03 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Libby Anne at Love, Joy, Feminism: The Party of Family Values, My Foot!:
I’ve long since realized that much of what I was taught, as a homeschooled evangelical conservative Republican girl, was highly selective, very biased, and even flat-out false. But that’s not why I’m angry today. Oh no, I’m angry for a completely different reason. I’m angry because even on their own terms, Republicans’ claim to be the party of “family values” is spurious and hollow. I’m angry because the GOP holds double standards to beat all other double standards. I’m angry at the deception.

You can’t get much more “family man” than Barack Obama. He’s a loving husband and a dedicated father. His relationship with his wife, Michelle, and with their daughters, Malia and Sasha, is wonderful to behold. He has never been accused of infidelity. He has never been on the cover of Playboy. He has never left a wife for another woman. He speaks of Michelle with respect, honor, and admiration. Pictures of him with his daughters are a sight to behold. And yet, evangelicals accused this family man of being the antichrist, and worse. They have spent the past eight years vilifying him up and down. The hatred has been palpable.
posted by palindromic at 5:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [91 favorites]


*really tries to resist making a Crazy 88 joke*

*fails*
posted by threeturtles at 5:05 PM on September 6, 2016


the republican party AND fox news crumbling into dust? who said 2016 sucks?

I'd be a lot happier if the dust wasn't winning 45% of the popular vote.
posted by mmoncur at 5:08 PM on September 6, 2016 [20 favorites]


I swear that in 4 years we are going to look back and be shaking our heads over the deep analysis that went into Clinton's cough.

I don't know about that. In the 90s, Congressman Dan Burten held hearings to prove that Hillary executed Vincent Foster, including shooting watermelons with his pistol in his backyard. This was all covered by the press. He continued to serve for in Congress for another 15 years. I don't think the press has any head-shaking shame.

By the way, the suicide of Vincent Foster, Hillary's friend and colleague, is attributed to the incessant hounding he received from the press, followed by the press trying to hang a murder on Hillary. But no reason for Hillary to hold a grudge, eh?

Here is his suicide note:
I made mistakes from ignorance, inexperience and overwork

I did not knowingly violate any law or standard of conduct

No one in The White House, to my knowledge, violated any law or standard of conduct, including any action in the travel office. There was no intent to benefit any individual or specific group

The FBI lied in their report to the AG

The press is covering up the illegal benefits they received from the travel staff

The GOP has lied and misrepresented its knowledge and role and covered up a prior investigation

The Ushers Office plotted to have excessive costs incurred, taking advantage of Kaki and HRC

The public will never believe the innocence of the Clintons and their loyal staff

The WSJ editors lie without consequence

I was not meant for the job or the spotlight of public life in Washington. Here ruining people is considered sport.
Sounds depressingly familiar.
posted by JackFlash at 5:08 PM on September 6, 2016 [69 favorites]


Also, I really (feel the) need to chime in about the bit up in the thread about Secretary Clinton 'never' apologizing for mistakes. She has. When Clinton displayed unawareness of how HIV/AIDS activists had led the charge for the government to take notice, I wrote to her campaign. I had a relative die of AIDS in the late 80s, and I expressed my upset feelings about those comments. The campaign responded with the text of her apology.

I felt heard and validated, when I received that mail. If hearing and responding to the voices of LGBTQ+ people is what Democrats need to do to win elections, I have to think that is a good thing for the country.

Has Clinton been the best ally in the past? Maybe not; however, her campaign reached out to me and gave people like me a voice at her convention at center stage in front of the whole country. It seems like she is acting on her words.

Hillary Clinton has apologized at least once in political life.

QED.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 5:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [38 favorites]


I must be low on sleep because I read a line above as

Trump says his genitals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS

and because of the kind of campaign this has been it took me like two full minutes of ruminating on it before I went hey waitaminute and scrolled back up to double-check.
posted by Mothlight at 5:17 PM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


Trump says his genitals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS

seems too short

he may need a small hand with that
posted by Emmy Noether at 5:21 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


exactly 88 huh what a cowinkydink

For people not in the know, 88 is a white supremacist numerical code for "Heil Hitler."
posted by peeedro at 5:22 PM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


"You know, it really doesn't matter what they write as long as you've got a young and beautiful piece of ISIS."

[fake]
posted by box at 5:23 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


For people not in the know, 88 is a white supremacist numerical code for "Heil Hitler."
Well, as one of the organizers of the letter was this man, I think we can be 100% sure that is a coincidence.
posted by kickingtheground at 5:25 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


And since it relates to a discussion we were having in the last thread: Today I learned that a close friend of mine has been denied disability benefits (same as I was.) She was born with multiple birth defects including missing organs, undersized and misshapen organs. Her medical history is extensive and well-documented. As she approaches 40, it's all catching up to her and she's had several life-threatening hospitalizations in recent years. She has a heart condition that requires frequent ER visits if she physically strains herself (and cannot be corrected by surgery due to her birth defects). Her disability is visible and she has a really hard time getting hired as a result of discrimination. She's someone who really was handed a raw deal at birth. And yet, she still is not "disabled enough."

So I'm just putting that out there as an anecdotal point to counter all the "my cousin gets disability for allergies/a hangnail/whatever."
posted by threeturtles at 5:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [30 favorites]


Current Johnson/Weld ad that YouTube is spamming me with.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:41 PM on September 6, 2016


I'd be interested to see who these (alleged) 88 retired generals and admirals are. Something tells me these won't be the respected thinkers or the real movers and shakers of the upper brass. Plus this is retired officers (active duty have no business giving out endorsements), so this list could reach way back to some serious "womenfolk belong in the kitchen" culture.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 5:47 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


On a lighter note, the shirt that I ordered during the convention finally arrived today!
posted by ActingTheGoat at 5:54 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Joy Reid reporting on the "Clinton Rules" right now.
posted by zutalors! at 5:54 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


as the good Lord is my witness, i clicked on this link and the comment number was 666, i swear its the truth
posted by beemerboxer at 5:59 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


posted by ChurchHatesTucker (666 comments total) [remove from activity] [add to favorites] 94 users marked this as a favorite [!]

Checks out.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:01 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Don't worry your SO isn't the only one, I also found a link to someone on Stormfront who agrees with you guys.
[...]
tldr; That thing you said? It sounded racist.


That's... uh... not how you do that thing, generally.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 6:02 PM on September 6, 2016 [14 favorites]


Yeah, well I think we should just leave off the nickname thing, including the "Donnie", which just sounds like a term of endearment to me. He's also not a child, he's a full grown horrible man.
posted by zutalors! at 6:06 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'd be interested to see who these (alleged) 88 retired generals and admirals are.

Link to the pdf with names listed. Some weirdness there, like the phrase "Islamic supremacist adversaries" and this sentence: "As retired senior leaders of America’s military, we believe that such a change can only be made by someone who has not been deeply involved with, and substantially responsible for, the hollowing out of our military and the burgeoning threats facing our country around the world."

So in their words, Hillary Clinton is deeply involved with and substantially responsible for the threats facing our country. She was the MVP for ISIS after all.
posted by peeedro at 6:12 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


One could just herd people into large "safe zones" and then let local bandits rape and murder at will, maintaining only enough security yourself to keep the refugees from leaving.

Ah, you mean a UN peacekeeping mission then?
posted by spitbull at 6:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Threeturtles, I was a mental health counselor years ago, and I had multiple incidents that were maddeningly similar to that (though not AS maddening). I saw a gentleman who lost his arm to the shoulder--on the job--who was battling for disability. He had an 8th grade education and had been doing manual labor his entire life. YEARS of battling, with the judges saying things like, "He could do data entry." I posit if we gave EVERYONE who applied for disability (other than the egregious fakers) the benefits the first go around, we'd probably save money by putting these soulless nay-saying drones out of work. It's a travesty.
posted by thebrokedown at 6:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [16 favorites]


dont mean to interrupt, but ive been here dwelling for 6-7 yrs, finally coughed up the big bucks to join. love this site
posted by beemerboxer at 6:23 PM on September 6, 2016 [109 favorites]


Welcome, Beemerboxer!
posted by Superplin at 6:30 PM on September 6, 2016


Welcome, boxer!
posted by vrakatar at 6:30 PM on September 6, 2016


Good to have you here, bb!
posted by OmieWise at 6:33 PM on September 6, 2016


yay welcome!
posted by zutalors! at 6:35 PM on September 6, 2016


Delete Your Account! Jk
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


Does your blood instantly run cold with a massive infusion of snark upon putting down the $5, or does it build up over a few weeks? I can't remember

also, welcome.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:38 PM on September 6, 2016 [29 favorites]


Does your blood instantly run cold with a massive infusion of snark upon putting down the $5, or does it build up over a few weeks? I can't remember

A shifty man in a trench-coat delivered mine
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:41 PM on September 6, 2016 [13 favorites]


A shifty man in a trench-coat delivered mine

That was probably just cortex.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 6:44 PM on September 6, 2016 [27 favorites]


I got really depressed today reading the NYT article about the trial that is starting today (or this week) over Bridgegate. It's just so horrible. People are so horrible. The stakes were nothing, and those political flacks, and Christie, thought nothing of really fucking up the daily lives of countless people. And it's kind of clear that it's just politics as normal. What a shitty world we live in. And we're (Americans) the lucky ones.
posted by OmieWise at 6:45 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


finally coughed up the big bucks to join. love this site

great, more coughing
posted by um at 6:46 PM on September 6, 2016 [48 favorites]


Generals Indorse Trump

Also, we didn't win the butt. :/
posted by petebest at 6:47 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Is "indorse" different than "endorse"???
Maybe it means even less than nothing!
posted by Golem XIV at 6:48 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


In some parts of the country it's still too hot to campaign outdorse.
posted by Superplin at 6:52 PM on September 6, 2016 [30 favorites]


Is an indorsement like an endorsement but with gold fringe
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:52 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


I went to look at the indorsement and got distracted by this:
Butts will be available for pickup on Friday 09/02 after 12:30PM at Vidalia Communications and must be picked up by 4:00PM.
posted by pxe2000 at 6:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]




Seems legit, I mean if I have to have dinner with an evil right-wing nationalist prick I figure Putin has some ability to make conversation about something beside his own greatness, whereas the jury's still out on whether Trump is actually able to focus on a not-him topic for more than about three minutes.

Didn't someone dig up that Clinton's number 5 reason for appearing on Letterman was to get out of dinner with Donald Trump?
posted by Francis at 7:01 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]




Is an indorsement like an endorsement but with gold fringe

Yes and also there are admirals.
posted by dersins at 7:02 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


In some parts of the country it's still too hot to campaign outdorse.

Inside of a dorse, it's too dark to campaign!
posted by lefty lucky cat at 7:03 PM on September 6, 2016 [16 favorites]


"His campaign announced endorsements from 88 retired generals and admirals. That’s nice, but 500 backed Mitt Romney in 2012."

Jesus fuck how many fucking generals are there?
posted by dersins at 7:05 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


Indorse is apparently a legit variant of endorse.

THE MORE YOU KNOW (*stars*)
posted by dis_integration at 7:05 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


If you need a thread break Comedy Central has posted the Rob Lowe Roast on their mobile app and for streaming. Numerous Ann Coulter jokes.
posted by humanfont at 7:05 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh good. House oversight chair asks for new investigation of deleted Clinton emails

House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz on Tuesday requested yet another Justice Department investigation of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton — this one focused on emails that a tech company staffer deleted in spite of a congressional committee’s request that they be preserved.

In the letter . . . the Utah Republican asks for an investigation to determine whether “Secretary Clinton or her employees and contractors violated statutes that prohibit destruction of records, obstruction of congressional inquiries, and concealment or cover up of evidence material to a congressional investigation.”


DELETED! [/Strongbad]
posted by petebest at 7:08 PM on September 6, 2016


Acceptable indorsements.

(1) A check is properly indorsed when:

(i) The check is indorsed by the payee in a form recognized by general principles of law and commercial usage for negotiation, transfer or collection of negotiable instruments.
posted by clavdivs at 7:08 PM on September 6, 2016


Jesus fuck how many fucking generals are there?

Over 3500 living flag grade officers (i.e. generals and admirals). Having the backing of 88 is nothing to crow about, so it reads as either a blatant dog-whistle for neo-Nazis or yet another indicator that Trump has no clue about reality and is being led around by the more nefarious elements on his campaign staff.
posted by palomar at 7:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [14 favorites]


Iraq. Crime Bill. Super predators.

Her apology for her contribution to Iraq's situation contains some interesting language. She claimed in her book Hard Choices to have acted — in her words — on the best information she had at the time, which was a classified NIE document about WMDs (weaponry that ended up never existing) that it became clear in a 2008 interview on Meet the Press she had not read. Inconsistencies between that same document and an unclassified version convinced prominent Dem. Senators to vote against the war. If she had bothered to read the original classified document, would she have voted differently? Why would she not be up-front about making a decision on the basis of information she chose not to read, about a serious issue with deadly consequences for millions of lives?

It immediately raises obvious questions about her judgement when it comes to matters of using the military for foreign policy. And whether or not her orange-headed opponent is a racist idiot should be completely irrelevant to the importance of asking those kinds of questions of anyone who wants to lead our country.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 7:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


If you think the Clintons are in politics to enrich themselves, you must think them to be incredibly stupid. ... Enriching themselves, give me a break.

These "rich, you don't even know rich" arguments are infuriating. Like, I'm sorry I thought of them as rich, and enriching themselves from their political work, because they only made $38 million in 2014 and 2015.

WaPo: "Bill Clinton was paid more than $100 million for speeches between 2001 and 2013." Not efficient? It doesn't get more efficient than that outside of pure rentier income.

This perverse argument about how much richer they could be, or more easily by different methods, just adds to the list of reasons I'd never vote for a standard-mould politician again. I mean, go ahead and quote that stuff in your Clinton volunteer work, I'm sure it will grab converts left and right.

From way outside the beltway, this is sylvanshine, who describes himself as "both Canadian and on the wrong site".
posted by sylvanshine at 7:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Here's hoping that Hillary Clinton is going to make a few phonecalls and fire back with a couple of hundred retired admirals and generals...
posted by Francis at 7:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Did the 88 endorse him with a certain number of words, perhaps? Jesus, they're not even trying to be subtle about the racist codes anymore.
posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 7:10 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Huh, one of the generals is a holocaust survivor.
posted by clavdivs at 7:11 PM on September 6, 2016


Lawrence O'Donnell has that idiot Boris Trump supporter on.
posted by zutalors! at 7:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


rob lowe: people ask why is ann coulter here tonite? because the right-to-lifers wanted everyone to see what an abortion looks like up close. and you know ann, after seeing your set tonight, i think we've all just witnessed the first bombing you can't blame on a muslim.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 7:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


I think this veterans' forum NBC is doing tomorrow is gimmicky and irresponsible by the way, and i feel bad that the whole MSNBC lineup has to sell it.
posted by zutalors! at 7:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Frm palomar's link above:
retired Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, a hard-core Christian nationalist who said the Christian god is bigger than Allah.

He is so far along the right-wing spectrum that even President George W. Bush had to reprimand him for his statements—made while in uniform—that the U.S. is and should be engaged in a holy war against Islam, that there should be no mosques in America, that Islam is not really a religion, that Muslims should not be protected by the First Amendment, that President Obama is a “secret Muslim” who “cavort[s] with the enemy” and that Jesus is a real “man’s man” who will return to earth carrying an AR-15.


Where at least I know I'm freeeeeee
posted by petebest at 7:18 PM on September 6, 2016 [17 favorites]


this election is making GWB look really good
posted by zutalors! at 7:19 PM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


Man this sekrit mooslim thing will never die, will it. I'll be 79 and reminiscing about my salad days and how good we had it in the Obama years, all things considered, and somebody will be like "but the MADRASSAS" and I'll probably smack their face because all fucks will have run out by then and also it will be waterworld. (in this vision, I'm jeanne tripplehorne don't judge)
posted by dis_integration at 7:23 PM on September 6, 2016 [20 favorites]


This perverse argument about how much richer they could be, or more easily by different methods, just adds to the list of reasons I'd never vote for a standard-mould politician again. I mean, go ahead and quote that stuff in your Clinton volunteer work, I'm sure it will grab converts left and right.

And their income makes them worse than Trump how?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


From that list of 88:

Major General John Miller, US Air Force, Retired

2016 SEASON WRITERS, TRY HARDER
posted by stolyarova at 7:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


I mean, go ahead and quote that stuff in your Clinton volunteer work, I'm sure it will grab converts left and right.

That's not how Clinton volunteer work works, sorry.
posted by zutalors! at 7:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


And their income makes them worse than Trump how?

Literally noone in these threads has ever suggested that the Clintons are worse than Trump. I think maybe we saw one centipede in here like 4 political threads ago, so an eternity.
posted by dis_integration at 7:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Literally noone in these threads has ever suggested that the Clintons are worse than Trump.

for your contextual pleasure
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


I mean, go ahead and quote that stuff in your Clinton volunteer work, I'm sure it will grab converts left and right.

That's not how Clinton volunteer work works


That's not how any of this works!
posted by bongo_x at 7:34 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


Clinton voted for a resolution that authorized Bush to take the United States to war in Iraq if diplomacy and sanctions failed to get UN weapons inspectors back into Iraq and restrain Iraq's alleged WMD programs. She said at the time that it was not a blank check for war and she also supported several amendments to further restrain Bush. Those amendments were blocked by Republicans.
It was not a vote for immediate war. The resolution was effective at getting UN inspectors back in Iraq.

Unfortunately Bush decided to go to war before the inspectors had finished anything; while diplomatic options were still available. He used fake intelligence to claim he had met the provisions of the Congressional resolution.
posted by humanfont at 7:40 PM on September 6, 2016 [35 favorites]


this comedy central roast is pretty great

at Ann Coulter... "how do I roast someone from hell"
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:46 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


2016 SEASON WRITERS, TRY HARDER

please dont provoke them
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:49 PM on September 6, 2016 [20 favorites]


this election is making GWB look really good

It's really not, let's not forget who's power vacuum actually was "the founder" of ISIS. Or maybe you mean he didn't overtly call for the deportation of all Muslims, if so I guess that's one in his column over Trump. Maybe the only one, given that he did fuel the "you're with us or against us" attacks on all Democrats as traitors to America. Seems like it all balanced out to the worst president in American history by a good bit. At least unless Trump wins.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [8 favorites]


New news on Bondi/Trump. Trump held a fundraiser for Bondi a few months after he donated 25k to her.
WASHINGTON ― In March 2014, Donald Trump opened his 126-room Palm Beach resort, Mar-a-Lago, for a $3,000-per-person fundraiser for Pam Bondi, the Florida attorney general who had recently decided not to investigate Trump University and was facing a tough re-election campaign.

Trump, whose personal foundation had given $25,000 to a pro-Bondi group the previous fall, did not write a check to the attorney general that night. But by hosting her at Mar-a-Lago and bringing in some of his own high-profile Florida contacts, he provided her campaign with a nice financial boost.
Bondi got an execution rescheduled so she could kick off her campaign with that fundraiser.

More on the fundraiser, including additional amounts the Trumps gave, and an image of the invite, at the link. Lawrence O'Donnell just mentioned it on his show.
posted by cashman at 7:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [29 favorites]


Is "indorse" different than "endorse"???

It's the Spanish for "to stab oneself in the back"
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:55 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


this election is making GWB look really good

It's really not, let's not forget who's power vacuum actually was "the founder" of ISIS. Or maybe you mean he didn't overtly call for the deportation of all Muslims, if so I guess that's one in his column over Trump.


I'm well aware, "really good" was a joke. But yeah, i would prefer that over the open racism the Trump campaign is inspiring, being a brown person and all.
posted by zutalors! at 7:57 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


That Rob Lowe roast - damn!

"Ann Coulter is one of the most repugnant, hateful bitches alive — but it's not too late to change, Ann. You could kill yourself." — Jimmy Carr

I mean, that's not even a joke. Not that I disagree with the sentiment exactly, but it's just one more example of how we've all apparently decided to go full id this year.
posted by bibliowench at 7:58 PM on September 6, 2016 [16 favorites]


That invite is pretty tacky looking. Meredith can do better.

Also, maybe don't reschedule executions, you cold-blooded lizard Lawyer.
posted by Yowser at 8:03 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Well, it is Jimmy Carr. His whole thing is the id, the horribly hostile jokes, and that weird laugh.
posted by qcubed at 8:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Bondi got an execution rescheduled so she could kick off her campaign with that fundraiser.

Gross as fuck.
posted by Artw at 8:06 PM on September 6, 2016 [22 favorites]


A bit of contextual information I haven't seen and I'm curious about: Does Donald Trump make routine donations to state attorneys general, or only to the ones he hopes will quash investigations?
posted by Emmy Noether at 8:08 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]




The sub header on that article is
"We have 62 days left." I don't think Esquire knows the meaning of the phrase 'Home Stretch'.
posted by Atom Eyes at 8:20 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


"Into the Home Stretch"

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA
posted by tzikeh at 8:22 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


3 Truths of This Campaign as We Head Into the Home Stretch.
More than anything else, and more than any other election in my lifetime, this election will go one way or the other based on how well-informed the electorate is that ultimately turns out.
fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu
posted by dersins at 8:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


more like the seventh-inning stretch amirite?

(am I? I don't actually know that many sports metaphors)
posted by nonasuch at 8:26 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


Hey, I hear some people don't like Hillary Clinton, why is it she never gets any criticism? There must be a reason no one, including the press, wants to confront her for the last couple of decades. Is everyone afraid? I'll dig down and bring the truth to everyone, that's the kind of braveheart I am.

(tagged: so fucking sarcastic I'm getting little specks of spittle on your face.)

I'm not a historian, but odds are we've literally never had someone so qualified and vetted for the job of President, running against someone who's got to be the least qualified and dangerous major candidate in our history, and people want to "well, but" debate and truth-tell it all into the ground.

Stop with the "wake up sheeple" bullshit. If you're spreading the propaganda about Clinton you're the sheeple. All of this wishy washy support for someone who's obviously the best available candidate is just making my commitment stronger.

I can't have 20, 30 at the outside, more years on this earth and I'd like to spend them in the US, mainly because I'm lazy. Just try to keep it together that long and then the rest of y'all can form the world's biggest circular firing squad and do whatever the fuck you want. At least give me 8 if that's all you can do so I can make plans.
posted by bongo_x at 8:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [85 favorites]


bongo_x what is that in response to?
posted by zutalors! at 8:29 PM on September 6, 2016


"We have 62 days left." I don't think Esquire knows the meaning of the phrase 'Home Stretch'.

The first Republican debate was 6 August 2015, which was almost 400 days ago.

62 days is the home stretch.
posted by dersins at 8:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]


Here's what I dug up: 13 donations to state AGs (mostly NY) prior to the donations to Abbott (TX, $35k) and Bondi (FL, $25k). Previous largest donation was $28k to Dennis Vacco of NY in 1998. I wonder what Donald got from him?

There's no way the Abbott and Bondi donations weren't bribes.
posted by Emmy Noether at 8:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [16 favorites]


The first Republican debate was 6 August 2015, which was almost 400 days ago.

And Sherlock still hasn't returned for another series.
posted by tzikeh at 8:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


I made a Trump supporter cry in frustration tonight. Long story short, they really wanted to talk/lecture me about how great Trump is and I wanted nothing to do with it. Being up here in Canada meeting one face to face caught me off guard and I really just wanted them to shut it. I tried the 'I really don't care/don't want to talk about it' strategy and it didn't work. This person really wanted/needed? to talk. I dunno. I finally had enough and said that look it's simple I don't subscribe to bigoted, facist, ignorant and just plain ole stupid ways of looking at the world and other people and there is absolutely nothing you can say that I haven't heard a bajillion times before that will convince me otherwise. So please just can it. I don't give a shit about what you think."

Person said 'So your calling me a bigot etc etc etc.?'

Me with a shrug 'I guess so.'

Person literally teared up, they were so upset and worked up about the whole thing. It was surreal.

I literally left where I was early because I started getting all upset an emotional because now I felt like crap. I cried in the car on the way home. I STILL feel like crap because part of me feels awful that I upset the person so much and part of me feels 'good riddance, you deserve it."

And this isn't even our election! I've never experienced anything like this and I spent several years in actual politics. I've been yelled at on the street, I been called actual horrible names over political differences before. But for some reason that I'm still sitting here trying to parse and figure out this is one of the worst 'political' conversation incidents I have ever experienced.

This election is just so, so bad.
posted by Jalliah at 8:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [95 favorites]


I just did some arithmetic and I think this election has already gone on for 3.4 percent OF MY LIFE. (Counting from the first GOP debate as noted above.)

My birthday is 4/9/85, please tell me I fucked that calculation up.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:44 PM on September 6, 2016 [10 favorites]


Nah Jalliah you did the right thing. Why should you shoulder the burden of making bigots feel ok?
posted by um at 8:44 PM on September 6, 2016 [49 favorites]


Its amazing how the people who have all these insanely bigoted/racist views somehow still see being called a racist/bigot as some horrible thing. The most public example right now is LePage.

They want to have the positions without any stigma or repercussions. I don't feel sorry for them at all. Even the white nationalist types seem to dislike the term now. But it doesn't change their behavior or beliefs, they just don't want to be (accurately) described as racist.
posted by thefoxgod at 8:44 PM on September 6, 2016 [35 favorites]


Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) “says Democrats should move to curtail the filibuster if they win the White House and Senate in November only to run up against persistent use of the tactic by Republicans,” the New York Times reports.

Said Reid: “Unless after this election there is a dramatic change to go back to the way it used to be, the Senate will have to evolve as it has in the past. But it will evolve with a majority vote determining stuff. It is going to happen.”

posted by Chrysostom at 8:50 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Jaliah, if it makes you feel any better I was getting into an argument today over the football player who isn't standing for the national anthem, and actually told a guy who said "We should have respect for the anthem" that he sounded like a teenage Bieber fan who was upset Daddy turned off the radio in the middle of "Baby".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]




Its amazing how the people who have all these insanely bigoted/racist views somehow still see being called a racist/bigot as some horrible thing.


I feel like I need some white people to explain this to me.
posted by zutalors! at 8:55 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


My birthday is 4/9/85, please tell me I fucked that calculation up.

So let's say your life is 31 years. Trump declared his candidacy in June 2015. So 1 year and 2 months ago, or 1.16 years ago. 1.16/31 * 100 = 3.74% of your life.

Pay up.
posted by dis_integration at 8:55 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


please tell me I fucked that calculation up.

The problem is defining when the primaries "started". The first debate? When Trump declared? Jeb was fundraising for a year before that. 3.4 percent is probably the minimum reasonable number. Hope that helps.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:58 PM on September 6, 2016


Nah Jalliah you did the right thing. Why should you shoulder the burden of making bigots feel ok?

Definitely shouldn't and normally it doesn't. I know this. In the past during protests I've been face to face with white nationalists. I said strong things to them. I sang obnoxiously at them. I don't regret anything I said and don't feel bad about that at all. For some reason this really hit me and is different somehow. I'm trying to figure out why.
I dunno maybe it's frustrated emotion on my end as well, it's all very frustrating on so many levels.
posted by Jalliah at 8:59 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Maybe it's that you were witnessing someone experiencing pain and confusion over their own cognitive dissonance, rather that what you have normally experienced: people who are hide-bound and who don't care at all what you think, you pinko, you. This person CARED what you think, and saw themselves, no matter how dimly, through your eyes. It's possible you saw the beginning of some enlightenment. Some people can't reach that without pain. And it's hard to watch another in pain--no matter how abhorrent their views are--if you are a caring person, as you seem to be.
posted by thebrokedown at 9:10 PM on September 6, 2016 [35 favorites]


I feel like I need some white people to explain this to me.

One person explained it to me like this, summarized: You can't call me racist or a bigot because what I am saying is not racist or bigoted. It's rational and logical if you would just listen to my arguments. It's based on true facts. You're calling me that to make me look bad which makes you a liar. ..... plus what you say doesn't matter anyway because you are a traitor to the white race and that makes you the bigot and the racist. (neener neener)


At one time I was involved in a conflict regarding FNs and white nationalists got involved mostly to try to start a fight/war. It was as awful as you can probably imagine but in hindsight at least I got a pretty straight up view on how the types think and what sort of evil crap they try to pull in order to purposely cause trouble.
posted by Jalliah at 9:11 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


> I just did some arithmetic and I think this election has already gone on for 3.4 percent OF MY LIFE. (Counting from the first GOP debate as noted above.) My birthday is 4/9/85, please tell me I fucked that calculation up.

Stand back, I'm a professional!

I converted the following dates to Modified Julian Days (basically counting days from an arbitrary starting point:
1985 04 09 is MJD 46164.5 (Start of your life)
2015 08 06 is MJD 57240.5 (First Republican debate - we'll count the kickoff from here?)
2016 09 07 is MJD 57638.5 (Today, close enough)

(57638.5 - 57240.5)/(57638.5 - 46164.5) * 100 = 3.4687 %

Let's round that to 3.5%, and since the election campaign started before the first debate by any reasonable measure, that's a lower limit.

Now I feel terrible.
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [11 favorites]


thebrokedown, thanks that insight is helpful in figuring it out.
posted by Jalliah at 9:14 PM on September 6, 2016


I feel like I need some white people to explain this to me.

White man reporting in. I have three theories.

1. "Racist" is recognized as an insult like "asshole" but not recognized as a descriptor of behavior. They know is a bad thing to be but don't think it describes them. "I'm not a racist, but..."

2. "Racist" specifically refers to rednecks who aren't refined like the person being accused of racism. In this construct, racist is a synonym for poor white trash, typically southern. "We might not like those people, but we're not racists like those back woods yokels."

3. "Racist" refers to people who actively commit physical violence. "I hate blah people, but I'm not racist. I'd never hurt anyone." #Santorum

Anyhow the point is racists are always somebody else, not you. You just are concerned about your culture or recognizing facts or defending your country.
posted by Joey Michaels at 9:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [38 favorites]


Jalliah's theory is excellent and also rings true.
posted by Joey Michaels at 9:18 PM on September 6, 2016


Oh, and guess who showed up to the party after all?

NYT: Donald Trump’s Donation Is His Latest Brush With Campaign Fund Rules

Donald J. Trump, who has repeatedly denounced pay-to-play politics during his insurgent campaign, is now defending himself against claims that he donated $25,000 to a group supporting the Florida attorney general, Pam Bondi, to sway her office’s review of fraud allegations at Trump University.

[...] Mr. Trump made the donation from his charitable foundation, in violation of tax regulations, and paid the penalty, as first reported by The Washington Post last week.

Shame on you, NYT.
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:18 PM on September 6, 2016 [25 favorites]


Thanks for the explanation, white people. One of the things I love about this site is that you can toss out a request like that and get thoughtful answers.

The thing I don't get though is the visceral anger some white people get when confronted with their own racism. I've seen it from like Paul Lepage down to liberalish friends.

I have lots of privilege and have definitely felt resistance when challenged on or. But nothing like the red faced rage of so many white people.
posted by zutalors! at 9:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]


Haha. You can track Tehund's progress via favorites. Tehund's in the depths of Khansville, atm, which is about midway through the 100 days out thread from early August.
posted by notyou at 9:30 PM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


I just got a Tehund favorite, which made me inordinately proud.
posted by yhbc at 9:31 PM on September 6, 2016 [18 favorites]


I still don't like Donald Trump and I think he would be bad for America.
posted by mazola at 9:32 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


I got a favorite from Tehhund, too! I was thrilled, but it was impossible to explain my "Oh!" exclamation to my husband without feeling exhausted by the prospect.
posted by thebrokedown at 9:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [28 favorites]


The NY Times headline for Trump's bribe:

Donald Trump’s Donation Is His Latest Brush With Campaign Fund Rules

Fuck them. The Fourth Estate is dead.
posted by Talez at 9:35 PM on September 6, 2016 [9 favorites]


Oh wow my browser is acting weird, I swear that RedOrGreen comment wasn't there when I looked.
posted by Talez at 9:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I remember my first Tehund favorite.
posted by chris24 at 9:36 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


Jaliah, if it makes you feel any better I was getting into an argument today over the football player who isn't standing for the national anthem, and actually told a guy who said "We should have respect for the anthem" that he sounded like a teenage Bieber fan who was upset Daddy turned off the radio in the middle of "Baby".

Racist white people: "Black people shouldn't take to the streets to protest *latest extrajudicial killing*, and instead should protest _peacefully_".
Black person *remains seated during national anthem*
Racist white people: "Not like that either!"
posted by sebastienbailard at 9:38 PM on September 6, 2016 [109 favorites]


Merch update: I received my HRC shot glasses and a bunch of buttons on Friday, causing me to post about politics on Facebook for the first time this election season. Now I have to figure out how I will make use of these items when my handbag is leather and the first debate is on a Monday. I put the smallest button on one of my zipper pulls. Dunno about the shot glasses... beer shots?

I also ordered the Vagenda of Manocide pens. Dammit. At least I'll have no problem using those.
posted by sunset in snow country at 9:41 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


Racist white people: "Not like that either!"

I totally stole that for my Facebook page, sebastienbailard.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 9:49 PM on September 6, 2016


My birthday is 4/9/85, please tell me I fucked that calculation up.

Well, I would also point out that you are 11,474 days old, just one hundred days short of the magic moment when you hit one billion seconds.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


this election is making GWB look really good

Miss me yet?
posted by mazola at 9:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


Another thought on the white people racism thing.

Racism, to those unaware of and/or refusing to acknowledge their privilege and the effects of structural racism in US society (i.e. most white folks), is defined as a personal violent hatred, stuff like skinheads and the KKK. To them, racism isn't an action or a statement, it's a state of being basically an irredeemable horrible human being. These folks believe you basically have to self-identify as racist to be racist, and of course they do not self identify as racist so they can't be, regardless of what they say.

You can really only sustain this belief if you believe that racism is pretty much over in America, that slavery and Jim Crow are far, far behind us and irrelevant to modern society. Once you see the structural aspects of modern racism, you realize that everybody is, at the very least, complicit in it. That's a pretty hard realization, and one that some people run away from and refuse to acknowledge rather than dealing with it.
posted by zug at 9:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [21 favorites]


So it seems Russian hackers have now released further DCCC emails, this time directly to the Observer. If you're keeping score at home, that means the foreign government asked by the Republican nominee to hack his opponent has done so and released the info to the paper owned by said nominee's son-in-law, who has published a story smearing said opponent.

The emails - alas for the Trump/Russian conspirators - seem a nothing burger.
posted by chris24 at 9:54 PM on September 6, 2016 [58 favorites]


I totally stole that for my Facebook page, sebastienbailard.

I swiped it from a vaguely remembered imgur post.
posted by sebastienbailard at 9:57 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


You can really only sustain this belief if you believe that racism is pretty much over in America, that slavery and Jim Crow are far, far behind us and irrelevant to modern society.

And, you can really only believe that if you never, ever have to listen to people of color or consider their needs or lives or basic humanity. Which has been relatively easy to sustain for white people over the past, I dunno, fifty years or so, and now suddenly it's not. They are starting to have to listen to our definition of racism, instead of their own stupid made-up shifting-goalposts burning-crosses one, and it's not pretty.
posted by sunset in snow country at 10:01 PM on September 6, 2016 [32 favorites]


What is Trump going to do next? Say the 14 words verbatim? Talk about this great Protocols book that explains everything? Steal an elementary school kid's lunch money? Fly to France and kick their prime minister in the balls?

Who knows? It's so exciting! Just like reality TV!
posted by double block and bleed at 10:21 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]


The emails - alas for the Trump/Russian conspirators - seem a nothing burger.

Was this supposed to be Assange's October surprise?
posted by sebastienbailard at 10:22 PM on September 6, 2016


Person said 'So your calling me a bigot etc etc etc.?'

Me with a shrug 'I guess so.'

Person literally teared up, they were so upset and worked up about the whole thing. It was surreal.


The public school year starts up tomorrow here in Seattle. I teach as a substitute -- less these years, now that I'm mostly a stay-at-home writer, but I still keep my status active. I still work for teachers and classrooms I like. My credential fields are social studies and language arts, but as a sub you can wind up anywhere. All I care about is sticking to the high schools.

This is a very liberal town. 10+ years of teaching in this area says the kids are overwhelmingly left-leaning (like holy shit wow). They all know racism is bad, though like adults they often don't see their own racial biases. And for all this town's liberal attitudes, there will be Trump supporters. Quiet, probably, but they'll be there.

Inevitably, kids will ask me how I'm voting. The ones who know me know I'm not afraid to speak my mind. They really like that I speak plainly and honestly and don't put on a "teacher voice" or water things down for them. They know my approach to political bias is to make mine plain and let them filter as they will.

I can tell them I'm voting for Clinton, sure, and that I think she's the most qualified. But if the conversation goes beyond that? I don't see how I can say anything other than, "You don't have to be a bigot to support Trump, but you have to be okay with bigotry and that's basically the same thing. The same goes for torture, and misogyny, and the list goes on."

I don't know how that's gonna fly with parents or administrators. But thank god teaching is no longer my primary income.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 10:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [44 favorites]


I remember my first Tehund favorite.

I remember my first Fiberoptic Zebroid and The Hypnagogic Jerks favorite.
posted by y2karl at 10:51 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


My niece won her class presidential election last week. Her opponent was a loudmouth who did double duty as the class clown & bully. She told me she hadn't planned on going negative, but he attacked her first. In addition, he was making too many promises, too many jokes, and really didn't seem to have a good grasp on what the class president does. Despite not being particularly popular, my niece won. She thinks it was mostly on the basis of her mocking his frequent mistakes in grammar. If any Clinton staffer is reading this, I hope you'll encourage this tactic in the debate. Really can't lose with it.

So, I bought her a "Madame President" leather-ish notebook from the campaign store in the hope this class election is a good omen for both Clinton and my niece's political futures.

On a side note, she tells me that probably half the class supports Clinton. The other half dislikes both candidates. Most supported Sanders in the primary. Only one student is stridently pro-Trump and another one is quietly so. This is in a small Kansas town which generally goes 75-25 for the R in presidential years.
posted by honestcoyote at 10:55 PM on September 6, 2016 [36 favorites]


During the 2008 campaign, remember when McCain wanted to meet with Obama at the Whote House I forget why but when things started getting weird, Bush turned to Pelosi and said: "you guys are going to miss me". Pelosi had to contain her laugh.

The October suprise is going to be Obama.
Shovel ready and gearing to go. And if all goes well, he can do the Howard Taft thing.
posted by clavdivs at 11:34 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


I wouldn't worry too much that all the generals get the 88 thing. I'd never heard of it before I married a guy who did antifa and he started pointing out street tattoos.
posted by corb at 11:54 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


So it seems Russian hackers have now released further DCCC emails, this time directly to the Observer.

Owned by Trump's son-in-law. What a coincidence.
posted by PenDevil at 12:02 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


Trump Living Large on Donors' Dime

HuffPost follows the money through "a pattern of needless spending" since the Trump campaign gained access to RNC donor funds, in which the main beneficiaries are Trump businesses (and whoever supplies the jet fuel for that 757).
Trump’s preference for expensive venues that he happens to own has also extended to his campaign airplane: his 25-year-old 757 jetliner that, thanks to its older, less efficient engines, burns some $10,000 in fuel every hour.
...

Both anti-Trump Republicans and RNC members supporting Trump said most GOP donors probably don’t know the details about how Trump’s campaign is spending their money. “I think they’re only vaguely aware,” said Florida strategist Rick Wilson. “It’s Putinesque.”
posted by valetta at 12:22 AM on September 7, 2016 [17 favorites]


They want to have the positions without any stigma or repercussions.

They love that "Alt-Right" rebranding, too. It makes them feel all new and progressive even when they're talking exactly like their bigoted ol' granddaddies used to talk. I'm waiting for them to try "k3" or something on us.
posted by pracowity at 1:31 AM on September 7, 2016 [29 favorites]


HuffPost follows the money through "a pattern of needless spending" since the Trump campaign gained access to RNC donor funds, in which the main beneficiaries are Trump businesses (and whoever supplies the jet fuel for that 757).

Why are no Republicans shouting about this? Does the GOP really not see that they've been played for suckers?
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:55 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Why are no Republicans shouting about this? Does the GOP really not see that they've been played for suckers?

Because, to put it mildly, the party is probably well aware that a) it's happening and b) that it's pissing away the last hopes of victory to call their own candidate a grifter.
posted by jaduncan at 2:12 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Why are no Republicans shouting about this? Does the GOP really not see that they've been played for suckers?

Many of the PACs and organisations that target the GOP electorate are little more than mail fraud, including allegedly Ben Carson's entire presidential campaign. I wouldn't be surprised if some want to get in on the action at some point.
posted by PenDevil at 2:17 AM on September 7, 2016 [16 favorites]


Why are no Republicans shouting about this? Does the GOP really not see that they've been played for suckers?

I imagine there are some lively conversations going on behind closed doors. Sadly, we might have to wait for the post-election blood-letting for them to be made public.
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 2:30 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]




we might have to wait for the post-election blood-letting for them to be made public…

That’d assuming Trump loses, of course, although the polls are doing my head in at the moment. I have a certain morbid curiosity: is there any polling situation which would flush out, say, John McCain? It’s bad enough to endorse Trump through gritted teeth when you don’t think he’s going to win. But if, god forbid, Trump was two points ahead with three weeks to go… would any of these people be willing to publicly reverse their positions? Or having debased themselves by endorsing him in the first place, do they feel they have to follow it through to the bitter end?
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 2:56 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


That’d assuming Trump loses, of course, although the polls are doing my head in at the moment. I have a certain morbid curiosity: is there any polling situation which would flush out, say, John McCain? It’s bad enough to endorse Trump through gritted teeth when you don’t think he’s going to win. But if, god forbid, Trump was two points ahead with three weeks to go… would any of these people be willing to publicly reverse their positions? Or having debased themselves by endorsing him in the first place, do they feel they have to follow it through to the bitter end?

Unofficial rule: nobody retracts if the candidate looks like a winner. It's much more likely to happen when nobody will blame the people retracting for the candidate's loss.
posted by jaduncan at 3:52 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I’m assuming that this isn’t a typical election, and that there are a lot of Republicans who really don’t want Trump to be president, perhaps even to the point where it would outweigh all the normal calculations. Or maybe that’s giving them too much credit.
posted by Bloxworth Snout at 4:25 AM on September 7, 2016


I think the rule largely holds this year even in the face of Trump. Example: Marco Rubio promptly rescinding almost all of his criticism of Trump and endorsing voting for him. In other unrelated news news, Rubio is running to get a seat again.

Really this cycle has killed any remaining respect I had for the Republican party as an organisation. "Not racist, but #1 with racists."
posted by jaduncan at 4:33 AM on September 7, 2016 [12 favorites]


I dunno if it's because I'm a snob or a teacher or both, but I die a little bit inside when I hear a college-educated Trump supporter on the radio. It's like---I so don't get it. Those w/o college degrees, okay, sort of a demographic extinction event, everybody freaks out. Those who have it good/okay and are saying WE MUST HAVE CHANGE?

I just so one hundred percent do not totally fucking get it.
posted by angrycat at 4:33 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh yes, college. Where morality is learned. 🙄
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:36 AM on September 7, 2016 [11 favorites]


Well, hopefully where history and basic science facts and critical thinking are learned.
posted by OnceUponATime at 4:45 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Those who have it good/okay and are saying WE MUST HAVE CHANGE?

I suspect that a lot of the motivation is the belief that (as discussed above) those who should be below them shouldn't be anywhere near them in opportunities or resources. The potential loss is being the unquestioned masters of the universe as earned by their naturally better hard work and virtue - of course it's unfair that those that haven't suffered or worked as much get the reward. So, you know, let's stop helping them and start punishing them.

Personal note: The one time I've ever had a glimpse into that world view was when the rules changed one academic year later in a way that would have saved me over $8000 the previous year. Did I have a moment of irritation and jealousy of the next year's students? Yeah, embarrassingly I did. Would I want other people to have a hard time as a result? No, and that's where I think that I (and, from the sound of it, we) differ from that crowd. I'm unwilling to endorse a polity based on malice based on my own occasional regrets and opportunities I didn't have. I hope that other people have more instead, and I'm happier with myself and the world with that generosity of spirit. Really, I'd hope that the core of left wing belief is sharing opportunity and the promotion of equality.
posted by jaduncan at 4:50 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Trump losing Texas and winning Ohio and/or Wisconsin makes sense to me. The people most scared of immigration aren't anywhere near the border. Let's hear what Carl Diggler thinks.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:50 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Well, hopefully where history and basic science facts and critical thinking are learned

Or where you meet people who didn't grow up like you grew up and you get a hint that there might be actual people living actual lives outside of your tiny bubble of awareness.
posted by phunniemee at 4:51 AM on September 7, 2016 [17 favorites]


Or, to add to that, the masters of the universe that they doubtlessly would be if other/Other people hadn't been given unfair advantages. Believe me folks, they get it all whilst laughing at real Americans like you. [etc., ad nauseam]
posted by jaduncan at 4:52 AM on September 7, 2016



Well, hopefully where history and basic science facts and critical thinking are learned.


To be more sincere, going to college doesn't make you a good person. That comment was snobby bullshit.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:53 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


To be more sincere, going to college doesn't make you a good person.

Hang on, I don't think the "college people wouldn't vote for Trump" was a judgement of good/bad, but rather a question of educated/uneducated.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:57 AM on September 7, 2016 [11 favorites]


The Dallas Morning News yesterday not only didn't endorse and railed against the Republican nominee for the first time since '64 and Goldwater, today they endorsed Clinton, the first time they've endorsed a Democrat in over 75 years.
posted by chris24 at 4:58 AM on September 7, 2016 [75 favorites]


thanks to its older, less efficient engines, burns some $10,000 in fuel every hour.

This is hyperbole. A 757-200 burns about 1000 gallons an hour at cruise. Jet fuel runs between about $3.50-$5 a gallon right now depending on where you buy it.
posted by spitbull at 4:59 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


As someone who teaches at the college level, and, at least attempts to teach critical thinking when I'm teaching Statistics, let me point out that critical thinking is easy to do on subjects you care nothing about. But critical thinking in areas that define you and are close to your soul - students tend to resist that.
posted by wittgenstein at 5:00 AM on September 7, 2016 [30 favorites]


rather a question of educated/uneducated.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:57 AM on 9/7


Yah but that isn't why people vote for things. Don't think angrycat meant to be a snob but that's what was said. Voting for Trump is morally wrong and plenty of educated people will do it because education doesn't make you not racist.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:02 AM on September 7, 2016 [12 favorites]


To be more sincere, going to college doesn't make you a good person.

One would hope it improved critical thinking skills at the bare minimum. You aren't magically better just because you can see through bullshit, you're just less likely to fall for bullshit and terrible quality arguments. I would argue that this is likely to lead to disliking Trump.
posted by jaduncan at 5:02 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Yah but that isn't why people vote for things. Don't think angrycat meant to be a snob but that's what was said. Voting for Trump is morally wrong and plenty of educated people will do it because education doesn't make you not racist.

Depends on your definition of plenty. The polling data is not exactly supporting your claim that it doesn't change things. As of Aug. 23:
In 2012 Mitt Romney beat Barack Obama by 14 points among college-educated whites, according to exit polls. The average of top national surveys shows Mr. Trump trailing Hillary Clinton among these voters by nine points, and the latest Pew Research Center survey gives Mrs. Clinton a 14-point edge.
The base of Trump's support isn't college educated even amongst the white, since Clinton is leading there (and that's not even shooting fish in a barrel by looking at the numbers with PoC college grads). Does that mean other voters are morally bad? No, maybe just informed by different information, research skills and life experience. It does however mean that not voting Trump is significantly predicted by education level, and given the relatively vacuous bullshit that he comes out with that doesn't surprise me.
posted by jaduncan at 5:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Those 30 "new" Benghazi emails supposedly found last week? Only 1 was new, and it was a flattering email from a diplomat on her Senate testimony. #nothingburger
posted by chris24 at 5:24 AM on September 7, 2016 [17 favorites]


Those 30 "new" Benghazi emails supposedly found last week? Only 1 was new, and it was a flattering email from a diplomat on her Senate testimony. #nothingburger

Sigh. And yet yesterday, Fox News (in the breakroom at work) had a piece running along the lines of "New Clinton emails show Benghazi investigation may have been tampered with"

Is this over yet.
posted by Twain Device at 5:29 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


New AZ poll out this morning from the Arizona Republic: Clinton 35.1% vs Trump 33.6% in a 4 way race.

When pressed for who the undecideds are leaning, it's Clinton 40% vs. Trump 37%.

So Clinton up 1.5 - 3% in a typically red state.
posted by chris24 at 5:30 AM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


Miss me yet?

Not even for a nanosecond. Your unmitigated disaster of two presidential terms sill reeks with the stench of malcompetence, chaos, greed, and cruelty. May your demise go a long way towards justice for those you've wronged.

Ass.
posted by petebest at 5:39 AM on September 7, 2016 [36 favorites]


House GOP leader vows punishment coming for Democrats over gun sit-in
"There are numerous rules that were broken. That's not the way a democracy works and I think you will see appropriate measure taken in the very near future," McCarthy told reporters in the Capitol, adding, "Are you going to let the House stand with that behavior going forward? I think it would create real damage to the reputation of the House in the long term."

House Republican leaders are discussing several options as potential penalties, including voting on a resolution that condemns the sit-in or leveling fines for rule violations, according to a senior GOP leadership aide familiar with the discussions.
LOL at the " real damage to the reputation of the House."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:39 AM on September 7, 2016 [31 favorites]


education doesn't make you not racist.

It does, but only if education=learning and not rote memorization of test answers. STEM subjects may not apply. For more information, consult your local library.
posted by petebest at 5:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Voting for Trump is morally wrong and plenty of educated people will do it because education doesn't make you not racist.

There seems to be a difference in underlying assumptions here... If you assume the only reason someone would vote for Trump is because they are morally bad, then yeah it sounds like an insult to say people without a college education can be expected to be more likely to vote for Trump.

But I don't assume that. I think most people who are voting for Trump are decent, probably kind and generous to their family and friends, including people of different races and immigrants they know personally, but have a fundamentally incorrect understanding of the world. They think people who have historically had more success in our society have had it because they deserve it and worked hard for it.

I would hope that college would help correct that misunderstanding of American history. And also give you enough quantitative reasoning skills to understand that the "wall" is completely impractical and that global warming is a real threat, and immigrant murderers are not, etc.

I think it is very possible for Good People to do terrible things because they (or we) just don't understand the causes of the problems in the world or the effects of the actions they/we want to take in response. Terrible people are not required to cause atrocities. Just terrible ideas.
posted by OnceUponATime at 5:46 AM on September 7, 2016 [12 favorites]


A little late to the party, but I wanted to share this helpful instructional video on the topic of calling a white person racist.
posted by soren_lorensen at 5:47 AM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


One would hope it [college] improved critical thinking skills at the bare minimum.

In some categories, studies show the college-educated more likely to be victims of fraud than others, if we're talking about the sort of critical thinking skills that would help avoid getting scammed; whereas some times it just matches the population. For example:
Investment fraud victims (p=.000) and business opportunity fraud victims (p=.000) were significantly more likely to have a college education than the general population. Lottery fraud victims (p=.000) and prescription drug/identity theft fraud victims (p=.000) were significantly less likely to have a college education than the general population. Advance fee loan fraud victims (p=.380) were similar to the general population.
Correlation, causation, etc.

The WSJ article is paywalled for me but a 14-point lead should still mean that around 43% of those surveyed supported Trump. The two most ardent and active Trump supporters I know are both college educated women, one with a Masters' degree.
posted by XMLicious at 5:55 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


New book reveals Bill Clinton’s rogue diplomacy against the Iraq War (WaPost)

This article I think highlights how much we make assumptions when we look at the votes of someone like Hillary Clinton and assume that we know what they mean. In this case, people cite her vote for the Iraq war as evidence of either her hawkishness or her bad judgement (i.e., her inability to figure out what was really going on). But I have always considered her vote to be a political calculation based on her presidential ambitions. I think she knew she was going to run for President and made a political decision that voting for the war was going to be important for that. She chose wrong.

Of course, in some ways that makes the vote worse rather than better. Making political calculations with people's lives is not a good thing to do, although it is something that politicians at that level are required to do. But it does suggest that the narrative of Clinton being unable to figure things out, or being hawkish and cavalier about US military involvement is likely wrong.
posted by OmieWise at 5:57 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


A little late to the party, but I wanted to share this helpful instructional video

Never too late for five minutes that great.
posted by kingless at 5:59 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Uh, how does it suggest that Clinton is not cavalier about US military involvement if starting a decade-long war that killed a quarter of a million people and both created ISIS and turned over a chunk of the Middle East to Iranian control, was an acceptable risk to safeguard her future personal political career... the scenario you're positing definitely sounds like it falls under the category of making her look worse.
posted by XMLicious at 6:03 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


But I have always considered her vote to be a political calculation based on her presidential ambitions.

Where is there any evidence for this? Why is it SO IMPOSSIBLE to believe her own explanation for why she did it?
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:07 AM on September 7, 2016 [44 favorites]


chris24: New AZ poll out this morning from the Arizona Republic: Clinton 35.1% vs Trump 33.6% in a 4 way race. When pressed for who the undecideds are leaning, it's Clinton 40% vs. Trump 37%.

Best news to wake up to!
I'm going to try not to get weepy on the phones tonight.
posted by Superplin at 6:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


Best news to wake up to!
I'm going to try not to get weepy on the phones tonight.


Hey, good luck on the phones! Gotta be nice working on a realistic chance of turning AZ blue.
posted by chris24 at 6:12 AM on September 7, 2016


With General Boykin coming out in support of Trump, I can bring back my theory of recent history: It's all Boykin.

General William G. Boykin advised on the Waco raid.
He was in charge of troops at the Black Hawk Down incident.
He participated in the failed raid in 1980 to rescue the American hostages in Iran.
He helped lead the disastrous raid on Panama in 1989.
He advised on how to make Abu Ghraib more like Guantanamo.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:13 AM on September 7, 2016 [26 favorites]


All politicians calculate their decisions wrt future ambitions.

The ones honorable enough to intentionally sink their careers over a moral stand are rare.
posted by spitbull at 6:15 AM on September 7, 2016


It's all Boykin.

He's the Bill Kristol of the Army?
posted by chris24 at 6:15 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]



A little late to the party, but I wanted to share this helpful instructional video yt on the topic of calling a white person racist.
posted by soren


I went to BERKELEY!!!! (Lol)
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:17 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Why are no Republicans shouting about this? Does the GOP really not see that they've been played for suckers?

Filter effect. It's alllllll over my Republican Twitter.
posted by corb at 6:17 AM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


All politicians calculate their decisions wrt future ambitions.

Must be awesome to see into the hearts and souls of, like, thousands and thousands of individual humans. Does this power only extend to politicians or can you also discern the motivations of people in other careers? Bus drivers? Can you tell me why the school bus driver in front of me stopped dead in the middle of an intersection for no reason for like 3 minutes this morning?
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:19 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


Brendan James at the Daily Dot: Anti-Trump Conservatives Keep Getting Trapped in Elevators
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 6:20 AM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


Circling back to an issue I've mentioned before, one thing I don't get about Trump's support among educated and well-informed whites (including the luminaries of his own party) is the issue of competence. If the job of the President was just appointing Supreme Court Justices and vetoing legislation, then, sure, go nuts with finding yourself a partisan toady. But there's kind of a lot more to the job than that; at the end of the day, they're the first word in implementation of American policy and the primary voice for America in the international sphere. That requires someone mentally agile, seasoned by experience in government, and well-informed. Donald Trump is none of these and is stubbornly incurious about the last. This stuff is apparent to anybody paying attention.

So I get that different people have different points of view. I can even get that some people have points of view I find wholly alien and repugnant. What I don't get is that these people have decided that having a representative who shares these points of view is more important than actually being able to do the job in a way which keeps America from falling apart.

I have no love for the likes of Senators Flake and Sasse, but I have to respect the fact that they've consistently articulated a nonpartisan objection to their party's standard-bearer: that he is incapable of discharging the job and would do immeasurable damage to America's abilities both domestically and internationally.
posted by jackbishop at 6:25 AM on September 7, 2016 [29 favorites]


The Republicans have spent so much time convincing themselves that the government is intrinsically useless that it's impossible for them to care as a group about whether their candidates are competent or not. What does it matter, when you believe that what the President should be doing is nothing at all?
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:27 AM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


Meanwhile in the Green Party...

Russian Greens slam Stein for cozying up to Putin: Your silence on his crimes ‘silences our struggle’:
“By silencing Putin’s crimes you are silencing our struggle. By shaking his hand and failing to criticize his regime you are becoming his accomplice. By forgetting what international solidarity means you are insulting the Russian environmental movement,” they concluded, before asking for Stein to address their situation, saying they hoped, “our questions will not go unanswered,” by the Green Party presidential nominee.

According to the Green Party, the plea has been forwarded to Stein, with spokesperson Scott McLarty saying, “I think the letter exaggerates Dr. Stein’s alleged deference to President Putin.”
posted by palindromic at 6:28 AM on September 7, 2016 [22 favorites]


Why is it SO IMPOSSIBLE to believe her own explanation for why she did it?

That's a great article, and enlightening. Thank you. If the political world wasn't focusing on silly shit half the time in this election season, we could be having an adult conversation that included unpacking articles like this and coming up with a coherent version of history.
posted by cashman at 6:28 AM on September 7, 2016 [21 favorites]


Regarding Trump's competence: I'm seeing a fair number of conservatives talk about the presidency like it's just a pen and a teleprompter, with all the real work happening in congress. Like this conversation I overheard at the airport:

Waffling Trump Supporter: I like him, but I don't know how he'll do running the government
True Believer: What is there to run? Congress does everything. Look at Obama, he didn't get anything done because Congress was against him.
Waffling Supporter: Yeah, I guess you're right

That argument is bullshit, obviously. But if you're looking to justify voting for Trump, it's a way to avoid having to worry about his competence.
posted by Banknote of the year at 6:34 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Clinton camp fires back: We have 95 retired general, admiral endorsements
Including the prized endorsement of Retired Air Force Gen. Lloyd "Fig" Newton.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:36 AM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


Holy crap I didn't say non college degree havers were bad just I grok where they're coming from more that's it don't go Santorum on me
posted by angrycat at 6:41 AM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


don't go Santorum on me

Phrasing!
posted by Strange Interlude at 6:47 AM on September 7, 2016 [24 favorites]


thanks to its older, less efficient engines, burns some $10,000 in fuel every hour.

The funny thing is that the old, unscripted Trump already covered this in one of his extended riffs that connected Obama bombing ISIS to Donald's hairspray. That the king of projection took the effort to criticize air force one, it make me think that his plane must be a gas guzzler.
No, this is serious. Now think of it. He talks about the carbon footprint and yet he will fly a very old Air Force one, an old Boeing 747, with the old engines and you know, spewing stuff.

So, he’s got a problem with the carbon footprint. You can’t use hair spray because hair spray is going to affect the ozone. I’m trying to figure out. Let’s see, I’m in my room in New York City and I want to put a little spray so that I can — (laughter and applause) — right? Right?
Anyhow, searching for that quote led me to this bit of perfection: “Buying a 25-year-old 757 is like buying a bag of Cheetos. It’s a lot of food for a low price,”
posted by peeedro at 6:48 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


In retrospect, of course, these final words seem the height of naïveté. Bush did take the resolution as “a vote to rush to war.” And, of course, it turned out that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction or even an active WMD program—though it’s worth recalling that almost everyone, including many opponents of the war, believed he did. (Vice President Dick Cheney and his allies in the Pentagon cherry-picked the intelligence that seemingly supported that conclusion, but it’s clear in retrospect that even they believed Iraq had WMDs, even if the CIA, which they distrusted, was having a hard time locating them.)
[citation needed]
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 6:49 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Orlando Sentinel's Scott Maxwell follows the previously posted 8,491 pages raise more flags about Bondi's Trump money with New records show Bondi needs probing in Trump mess:
If Floridians want action, they should speak up. But it may be up to the U.S. Justice Department.

I understand that the media fascination with this case involves the Trump side of the equation. Especially since Trump has bragged about being able to buy politicians.

But you can like Trump and still know it's wildly inappropriate for a prosecutor to take money from someone she's been asked to probe.

Besides, the Trump media circus will soon move on to the next outrage, gaffe or accusation du jour.

Floridians, meanwhile, will still be stuck with an attorney general who thinks it's OK to take fat campaign checks from would-be subjects of her office’s investigations.
posted by palindromic at 6:49 AM on September 7, 2016 [11 favorites]


So this so-called "commander in chief" forum is tonight. If you're Hillary, going first, what do you do? And by that, I mean knowing that Trump is going to be able to hear what you say, then come behind you after you're done and probably say some ridiculous things.
posted by cashman at 6:53 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Some Trump apologist on MSNBC was gas lighting and the fucking host did nothing. She's useless! Just let him get away with bullshit unchallenged!
posted by Talez at 6:54 AM on September 7, 2016



Clinton camp fires back: We have 95 retired general, admiral endorsements


What is 95 code for?
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:57 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


The 747s (747-200B derived) that currently are Air Force One are due for replacement. I shudder to think how a Trump administration could affect that process.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:57 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Some Trump apologist on MSNBC was gas lighting

Ah, I see you've met Boris Epshteyn.
posted by cashman at 6:58 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


> You can’t use hair spray because hair spray is going to affect the ozone. I’m trying to figure out. Let’s see, I’m in my room in New York City and I want to put a little spray so that I can — (laughter and applause) — right? Right?

It's weird that Trump is unaware that hair spray still exists.

Or that he thinks his audience is unaware that hair spray still exists.

Or that he knows it exists but says it doesn't, despite his audience knowing full well that it does, because he and they are still mad about a U.S. CFC ban that happened in 19fucking78.

we're going to be hearing about incandescent lights for the next fifty years, aren't we? fuck.
posted by Spathe Cadet at 6:58 AM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


For those of you concerned that you haven't been hearing more Republican denunciations of Trump, I give you a Jonah Goldberg on the Trumpen Proletariat.
Every principle used to defend Trump is subjective, graded on a curve. Trump is like a cat trained to piss in a human toilet. It’s amazing! It’s remarkable! Yes, yes, it is: for a cat. But we don’t judge humans by the same standard.
posted by corb at 6:59 AM on September 7, 2016 [48 favorites]


Ugh, sorry guys - it's old, and I forgot to check the year, just the date. I'll find some more stuff once I've gotten the kidlet off to school.
posted by corb at 7:00 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


The 747s (747-200B derived) that currently are Air Force One are due for replacement. I shudder to think how a Trump administration could affect that process.

Gold plating, gold plated everything.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:00 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Some Trump apologist on MSNBC was gas lighting and the fucking host did nothing. She's useless! Just let him get away with bullshit unchallenged!

That host opened her segment by being like "it's nasty jabs back and forth! Is ANYONE winning this thing?"
posted by zutalors! at 7:02 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I feel like they wrote those "jab" talking points as soon as Trump became the nominee.
posted by zutalors! at 7:03 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


less than 3% difference in the national polls according to 538. maybe the tactics of demonizing and dismissing half the country aren't working so well?
posted by andrewcooke at 7:08 AM on September 7, 2016


Julia Azari at 538: Trump May Bring A Republican Recalibration, Not A Realignment:
Conventional accounts of party systems argue that issues of governing philosophy and the country’s relationship with England informed the first party system. The second was driven by different visions of executive power, the proper role of the federal government in “internal improvements” (building and regulating roads and other infrastructure), and central banking. The transition from second to third party system is especially notable in this regard: The Jacksonian Democrats and Whigs were both competitive throughout the North and South, and both parties carried a range of viewpoints about slavery. In the third party system, the two parties became much more clearly sorted by geography (though this was not the only flashpoint). The fourth party system saw new issues emerge in response to industrialization, with Democratic platforms revised around populism and currency. The fifth, “New Deal” system built up a new Democratic majority around a new, more active approach to governing the economy. The civil rights era brought about a permanent change in the parties’ coalitions around race issues.

If this sounds too neat to you, you’re not alone. Sean Trende of RealClearPolitics has written, “it’s like looking for Jesus in your grilled cheese sandwich. If you stare long enough and hard enough, you will eventually find what you are looking for.” Distinguished political scientist David Mayhew1 found little evidence for most of the central claims of the realignment literature. Mayhew concludes that long-term electoral change of the kind that realignment theory describes is quite uncommon. Cyclical theories of party politics also neglect the importance of what scholars like to call “contingent events” (I think normal people just call them “events”) — scandals, economic fluctuations, wars — that drive the issue agenda and shape politics in the long and short term. But despite these critiques, the idea of realignment remains powerful.

So why do people think it’s going to happen this year? First and foremost: Trump.
posted by palindromic at 7:09 AM on September 7, 2016


less than 3% difference in the national polls according to 538. maybe the tactics of demonizing and dismissing half the country aren't working so well?

Wait, I thought the problem was that Hillary was being too nice to Republicans and not trying to tie them to Trump.
posted by Elementary Penguin at 7:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Interesting bit from an old keepin it 1600 that I listened to this morning. They were talking with Chuck Todd and they, the hosts and Todd, all agreed that for substance and voter information Forums were far above Debates because there is no pointless jabbing and posturing. There will be soundbites but for the most part by keeping the two nominees separate you get a better sense of who they are and what they stand for.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:14 AM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


don't go Santorum on me
let me get you a towel.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 7:18 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]




let me get you a towel.

If your bare skin comes in contact with santorum, please wash thoroughly.
posted by jaduncan at 7:30 AM on September 7, 2016


> "less than 3% difference in the national polls according to 538. maybe the tactics of demonizing and dismissing half the country aren't working so well?"

If there's less than 3% difference in the national polls, it sounds like the tactics of demonizing and dismissing half the country are working quite well indeed.
posted by kyrademon at 7:31 AM on September 7, 2016 [23 favorites]


Soren_lorenson whut? It doesn't require seeing "inside someone's head" to observe that politicians don't risk their careers in moral stands very often.

Yes that's true in other professions as well. But there's a reason politicians, used car salesmen, and personal injury lawyers are widely hated in exactly these terms.

I haven't any idea why schoolbus drivers stop in intersections in your world, but I'm sure they make moral calculations pertinent to their chosen line of work too. I haven't noticed bus drivers being widely suspected of moral hypocrisy.

There are politicians who take stands that cost them their careers, of course. That's all we need to know about the others. Your curiously angry snark about "seeing inside their heads" aside, I stand by my position that it is in the very nature of our political system for politicians *in particular* to cover their asses.
posted by spitbull at 7:32 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh yay! Assange wants his fifteen minutes of fame to continue. So he's released a collection of properly authored classified information with headers, footers, and partition marks on every paragraph and is claiming that because Clinton didn't recognise an out of context (C) on an unclassified document as being a partition mark she must be lying.
posted by Francis at 7:39 AM on September 7, 2016


I remember my first Tehund favorite.

Maybe the reason Tehund is taking so long to get caught up is that they will only go until they run out of favorites each day? So the more worth reading the thread is, the longer it will take them. Kind of like a Zeno's paradox for Metafilter.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 7:40 AM on September 7, 2016 [15 favorites]


For those of you concerned that you haven't been hearing more Republican denunciations of Trump, I give you a Jonah Goldberg on the Trumpen Proletariat.

Ah, yes, Jonah Goldberg, who once wrote a book complaining that it's liberals who are the real fascists. Good times.

(I note with sadness that I used to have trouble spelling "fascists" and now, thanks to today's Republican Party, have no difficulty.)
posted by Gelatin at 7:41 AM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


House Republican leaders are discussing several options as potential penalties, including voting on a resolution that condemns the sit-in or leveling fines for rule violations, according to a senior GOP leadership aide familiar with the discussions.

media: Oh no there are some white conservatives and they're coming at you they might CENSURE you are you so worried?!?!?

John Lewis (D, Georgia): i think i'll be ok
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:41 AM on September 7, 2016 [31 favorites]


It just occurred to me that maybe Trump's 757 does require $10k an hour in jet fuel because he buys it from Trump Aviation Fuels Unlimited.
posted by spitbull at 7:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


Since it's still a slow news day (he says while glancing nervously at the other browser tabs), let me just put this out there as an example of how Trump is playing out in our local neighborhood, an oasis of liberal blue in a sea of rural red:

N.Y. College Republicans Rally Behind Cornell Chapter, Say Revocation Violated Federation’s Constitution

A string of college Republican chapters across New York State has issued statements denouncing the state federation’s decision to revoke its recognition of the Cornell Republicans on Sunday.

The decision to revoke Cornell’s chapter came in the wake of the group’s endorsement of Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson — an action the New York Federation of College Republicans called “unacceptable.” The federation said that while the group would have been within its rights to refuse to endorse nominee Donald Trump, it could not endorse another party’s candidate, The Sun previously reported.

posted by RedOrGreen at 7:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


Donald Trump contradicts Mexican president on not paying for wall: ‘He didn’t say that’:
In a new interview with ABC News, Donald Trump's recollection appears to differ with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto’s account of their meeting last week when it comes to a key subject: Whether Peña Nieto actually said that Mexico wouldn’t pay for Trump’s proposed border wall.
Annotated interview
posted by kirkaracha at 7:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


House Republican leaders are discussing several options as potential penalties, including voting on a resolution that condemns the sit-in or leveling fines for rule violations, according to a senior GOP leadership aide familiar with the discussions.

Do the Republicans really want to refresh the public's memory about how embarrassing this incident was for them?
posted by Gelatin at 7:44 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]




For those of you concerned that you haven't been hearing more Republican denunciations of Trump, I give you a Jonah Goldberg on the Trumpen Proletariat.
Dear Reader (if there are any of you left),
lmao
BEHOLD THE TRUMPEN PROLETARIAT
is the heading of a section which gives the impression that the Trumpen Proletariat is just the Breitbart commentator John Nolte, whose display name is currently "CNN is Hitler."
If I sound dismayed, it’s only because I am. Conservatives have spent more than 60 years arguing that ideas and character matter.
The ideas of Richard Nixon, the character of Augusto Pinochet ... a movement we can be proud of ...
I agree that presidents don’t need to be experts on everything. But they do need to do their homework. This is a standard I’ve held for years:
"Like when I wrote a book arguing that the French Revolution was the first fascist revolution."
Karl Marx coined the term lumpenproletariat to describe working-class people who could never relinquish their class consciousness and embrace the idea of a classless socialist society. Hence, they were useless to the revolutionary cause.
lum·pen·pro·le·tar·i·at - n. - (especially in Marxist terminology) the unorganized and unpolitical lower orders of society who are not interested in revolutionary advancement.

lol at this whole article
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 8:01 AM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Or that he knows it exists but says it doesn't, despite his audience knowing full well that it does, because he and they are still mad about a U.S. CFC ban that happened in 19fucking78.

I'm not much surprised that people held onto that so long; I remember commenting to someone in the 90s that my shaving cream can had a proud CFC-FREE label on it and why was I supposed to care that they were still complying with a decades-old requirement? I'm too lazy to walk upstairs but I wouldn't be surprised if it was still on the label. A quick google reveals that it was still on some hairsprays in 2009.
posted by phearlez at 8:03 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm betting that the 11% with a negative view of tacos have only known the hard-shelled bullshit.
posted by rp at 8:03 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Who the fuck are the 43% of voters who lack strong opinions on tacos
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:05 AM on September 7, 2016 [23 favorites]


hard-shell tacos are just tostadas that can't get their shit together
posted by murphy slaw at 8:07 AM on September 7, 2016 [25 favorites]


The ABC News interview is a joint interview with Trump and Pence sitting next to each other. During the interview Pence refers to Trump as "Donald Trump" at least 20 times by my count. "Donald Trump is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life." [fake]
posted by kirkaracha at 8:08 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm betting that the 11% with a negative view of tacos have only known the hard-shelled bullshit.

I'd like to see the age and birth-region demographic breakdowns. For a lot of midwesterners over 70 or so, mexican and chinese food are both the same thing to them: a bunch of rice and strange smells.
posted by dis_integration at 8:08 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Who the fuck are the 43% of voters who lack strong opinions on tacos

In some parts of the country, it can be very hard to acquire tacos, or the ones you acquire are...not good. Even in 2016! It's sad, really. It's possibly the only reason I stayed in Texas.
posted by emjaybee at 8:09 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Who the fuck are the 43% of voters who lack strong opinions on tacos

They are the people who keep Old El Paso in business.
posted by dersins at 8:09 AM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


Annotated interview

This was almost more painful to read than most of Trump's interviews. You can see Pence trying to re-frame Trump's answers in a way that makes them sound like actual policies, but it's clear that Trump has no actual plan at all. After a long back-and-forth on immigration,
MUIR: So when those families do ultimately go home, the ones who have no record who are here, once you get the wall and the criminals out of here, as you say. Is it self-deportation?

TRUMP: No.

MUIR: Or will you deport them?

TRUMP: No.

MUIR: How does it work?

TRUMP: They will-- If they want to become a citizen, they’ll go out and they’ll come back in through a process, but they have to get on line,

MUIR: But what is that called? I mean, most people call it--

TRUMP: They don’t call it anything

MUIR: Will they have to go--

TRUMP: They don’t call it anything, OK? They don’t call it anything.
They will get on line, they’ll go behind people that have been waiting for four, five years. By that time the line, I’m sure, will be much more efficient because we do things efficiently -- right now it’s a bureaucratic mess. It’s a total mess. You know a lot of people don’t come in legally because of the fact that people are just pouring across the border. That’s the way they come into the country, right. So they will get on line and they will come in through an efficient process if they want to become a citizen.

MUIR: And if they don’t want to become a citizen?

TRUMP: They have to make a determination what happens when the border is secure

MUIR: So you’re open to them staying here undocumented?

TRUMP: I’m going to make a decision, or somebody will. Whether it’s me or somebody else because, perhaps, depending on the time -- by that time we’ll have a secure border, we’ll have a wall. We will have stopped the drugs pouring into the country. I mean, you look at states like Ohio you look at states like Pennsylvania or New Hampshire, the biggest thing on their minds is drugs. I say, ‘What’s your biggest problem?’ It’s jobs and it’s drugs. We’re gonna stop the drugs and we’re gonna bring jobs back to our states. We’re going to bring jobs back to our country.
Walking back through that: the original premise of the question was, after a discussion about the wall, what happens to undocumented immigrants still in America after the wall is built and after Trump has deported every criminal? What is Trump's policy regarding that?

Will he ask them to leave and come back? No, he says, he won't do that.
Will he forcibly deport them? No, he says, he won't do that either.

So they're here. They're not being asked to leave voluntarily. They're not being forced to leave. Those are literally the only two options that involve people leaving: there is a lot of variability in what self-deportation or forcible deportation might mean, but those two terms do broadly encompass every possible option involving people leaving.

What, then, is Trump's plan? Oh: they'll leave the country and then apply to come back in. The thing he just literally said he wasn't going to ask them to do, and he just literally said he wasn't going to make them do. So he's asked: it sounds like you're saying it's okay for people to not leave, since you're not articulating any actual plan for getting people to leave?

Trump's response, literally, his actual words: "I’m going to make a decision, or somebody will." We are two months out from the election. Immigration is a centerpiece of his platform. And he cannot state an approach to immigration reform that's internally coherent within one interview, down to the point of claiming that he hasn't actually formulated a plan yet, despite spending several minutes explaining what his plan is.

The whole interview is like that. Every one of his interviews is like that. I know that Trump's lack of competence isn't news, exactly, but it continues to astound me. Leaving aside whatever views he holds, he's simply not competent to be President.
posted by cjelli at 8:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [131 favorites]


> The whole interview is like that.

You should have put on a [Real] label, because this is a literally unbelievable transcript. I had to click through, and yeah, it's really what he said.

HOW???
posted by RedOrGreen at 8:19 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]




Donald Trump contradicts Mexican president on not paying for wall: ‘He didn’t say that’:

To be fair Peña Nieto didn't actually say "Mexico will not pay for the wall".

He said "México no pagará por la pared."
posted by mazola at 8:22 AM on September 7, 2016 [19 favorites]


You should have put on a [Real] label, because this is a literally unbelievable transcript. I had to click through, and yeah, it's really what he said.

HOW???


The most unbelievable thing was that he mentioned he was ahead in FL and OH and I was like "that can't be!" but then I looked and Reuters/Ipsos has him at 48% to 43% in Ohio now and I died a little. Not just inside. All over.
posted by dis_integration at 8:24 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


To be more sincere, going to college doesn't make you a good person. That comment was snobby bullshit.


Well, in some philosophy, one is born bad.
Learned that at university.
posted by clavdivs at 8:25 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


This Jacobin profile of Gary Johnson presents a candidate unworthy of leftie protest votes:
Former colleagues remember Johnson as an ideologue, sincerely committed to his project of dismantling government. “He made it very clear to me that by the time he graduated from third grade, he knew all there was to know about government,” said Raymond Sanchez, who was speaker of New Mexico’s House of Representatives for six years of Johnson’s tenure. “He tried to privatize everything he could think of — everything that was in reach.” By 2003, he had set the state record for vetoes, rejecting 739 bills passed by the Democratic legislature.

But he’s best remembered for the prisons. Johnson originally ran on a platform of privatizing every jail in the state — “that way,” he reasoned, “we’ll always have the latest and greatest and best.” His first budget proposal included $91 million for a new privately run state prison.

As Joseph T. Hallinan reports in his book on the US prison system, Going Up the River, Johnson accepted at least $9,000 in campaign donations from a prison company that ultimately won a state contract. By the time he left office, New Mexico led the country in for-profit prisons, housing 44 percent of its inmates in private facilities. Only Alaska, with 31 percent, came close.
posted by palindromic at 8:28 AM on September 7, 2016 [20 favorites]


I don't see where that comment was "snobby" or being about morality or being a "good person."
posted by zutalors! at 8:28 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


The most unbelievable thing was that he mentioned he was ahead in FL and OH and I was like 'that can't be!' but then I looked and Reuters/Ipsos has him at 48% to 43% in Ohio now and I died a little.

Remain calm. Stop freaking out about individual polls.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:37 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


This Jacobin profile of Gary Johnson presents a candidate unworthy of leftie protest votes:

There is no way around this: if you are thinking of switching your vote from the Democrats to a Libertarian, you are an idiot. Either you are an idiot for ever voting Democrat or thinking of doing that, because you are so deeply opposed to things that are basic Democratic policies, or you are an idiot for switching to a Libertarian who is opposed to basic Democratic positions you agree with.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:38 AM on September 7, 2016 [26 favorites]


More nonsense from that Trump transcript, to add to his long line of bonkers statements about technology:
I mean, she had her emails -- 33,000 emails -- acid washed. The most sophisticated person never heard about acid washing. Acid washing is a very expensive process and that’s to really get rid of them.
See, it's important to acid wash your emails so they get that nice, mid-80s denim look!

Incidentally, bleachbit is free and open source. It involves no acid. Trump, on the other hand, might need to ask his acid supplier if the latest batch was a bummer.
posted by dis_integration at 8:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [27 favorites]


Trump to Ask Generals, Who Know Less Than Trump, for Plan to Defeat ISIS:
So, first Trump claimed to have a secret plan to defeat ISIS. Then he said the generals knew less than he does. Now he will ask the people who know less about ISIS than Trump does to come up with the plan that has already existed for more than a year. If this sounds confusing to you, imagine how confused the enemy must be. It means Trump’s strategy is working.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:46 AM on September 7, 2016 [16 favorites]


The whole interview is like that. Every one of his interviews is like that. I know that Trump's lack of competence isn't news, exactly, but it continues to astound me. Leaving aside whatever views he holds, he's simply not competent to be President.

He may not be competent to be president but he sure as hell can win the election with this strategy.

Trump has the virtue, mostly due to the media's hubris about the whole incredulousness of the American people actually electing a human cheeto for president, of being judged on the Trump curve. Mexico he literally sat there, said the lines, and didn't drool on himself and people said he looked presidential. Every dumb and hateful thing he's ever done is wiped clean every time he appears in public as a human being and the polls respond to that. Half the American electorate literally has the memory and attention span of a goldfish.

These interviews aren't to convince liberals to vote for him. They're a lost cause. This is giving people he may have turned off in the primary a license to vote for him again. He basically walks up to every group and says "I know what I said but I'll look after you, *wink*". He's intentionally vague so they can believe what they want to believe but also so nobody can hold him to it. Just keep bullshitting. Nobody can call you on all of it and all you need is one victory to hold it all together.

See Trump doesn't sell people on policy. He sells people on the man. He sells people on the action. He sells people on the decision in the moment when it really matters. He sells people on results. If he ever fucks it all up he can point to where he said what he wanted to do and it's all about intention rather than what actually happened and if anyone ever accuses him of incompetence he doesn't focus on the failure of execution and turns it immediately back to the original promise of the vision. Like he hasn't failed just temporarily stalled with a flat tyre on the way to point B.

This is a classic businessman thing. Your CEO doesn't have very much vision. Vision is hard. Vision leaves you open to fucking everything up. Vision leads to risks. CEOs let the middle managers and bean crunchers come up with a feasible plan with a high chance of success and will make everyone squillionaires. If someone complains about the company shitting the bed a CEO they have scapegoats and they make sure they get paid before the trustee comes in.

HRC is literally the exact opposite. She's a public servant. She's a wonk. She has detailed policies for everything for anything anyone has ever been mildly annoyed about. She's Leslie fucking Knope personified. But detailed plans are complicated. They require comprehension. But it looks the same as DJT's "plan" on his website and if his isn't a real plan neither is hers. People will go along with the illusion and Trump is ready to go along with it and tout a rally speech as a "plan" while the allied press happily grade Trump on the curve and call it a masterpiece of vision.

So yeah, this interview looks clumsy and inept but it's not for us. It's for all the people who need to consider Trump a lesser evil than Clinton.
posted by Talez at 8:46 AM on September 7, 2016 [26 favorites]


Hey! Trump campaign is lifting his blacklist on media outlets tomorrow.
The so-called "blacklist" took hold last year, when the campaign denied press credential requests from The Huffington Post and the Des Moines Register.

The Daily Beast, BuzzFeed and Politico's credential requests were also rejected by the campaign. At various points Univision has also been blocked.
I'll bet they are all just weeping in relief.
posted by Sophie1 at 8:47 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


More nonsense from that Trump transcript, to add to his long line of bonkers statements about technology:

I mean, she had her emails -- 33,000 emails -- acid washed. The most sophisticated person never heard about acid washing. Acid washing is a very expensive process and that’s to really get rid of them.


I was trying to explain the insanity of the "bleaching" thing, which I first heard him say at the AZ rally, to my partner last night, after yesterday's "the cyber" comments. I just don't think I could even explain the utter, rabid nonsensicality to someone who hasn't heard any of it for herself. Thankfully for her, I listen so she doesn't have to.
posted by rp at 8:47 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]



He may not be competent to be president but he sure as hell can win the election with this strategy.


How, given his demographic challenges?
posted by zutalors! at 8:49 AM on September 7, 2016


Trump still thinks they put Clinton's old phones in acid
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:56 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


How, given his demographic challenges?

If he can pull significant white male turnout in Ohio, PA and FL and WI, to win those states, and then not lose some other GOP strongholds, he could pull it off. Like this map, where I gave him FL, GA, AZ, OH, PA and WI, and 3 of Nebraska's split EVs, gets him to 271.
posted by dis_integration at 8:56 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Donald Trump hasn't practiced a mock debate. He's still got shy of 3 weeks, I guess.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:56 AM on September 7, 2016


Presumably the strategy is to make a vote for Trump acceptable to college educated white republicans. If he vastly increased his share of those votes he could overcome some of the demographic obstacles in key states. It's virtually his only available strategy and it is behind his bullshit "outreach" to black and Latino communities. He'd have to do better than Romney in places like the Philly suburbs.

I don't think it's enough but it's what he has to play with. It's not mathematically impossible.
posted by spitbull at 8:58 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


How, given his demographic challenges?

Honestly I don't know but Trump has lead in the aggregated polls at various points throughout the season so the fundamentals for making it happen are certainly there.

I didn't say he would only that he could.
posted by Talez at 8:59 AM on September 7, 2016


It's not impossible but it's kind of beyond any strategy at this point. it would be a sort of whimsical unprecendented one day mobilization of a certain voter demographic.
posted by zutalors! at 8:59 AM on September 7, 2016


The whole interview is like that. Every one of his interviews is like that. I know that Trump's lack of competence isn't news, exactly, but it continues to astound me. Leaving aside whatever views he holds, he's simply not competent to be President.

....Honestly, GW Bush's interviews in 2000 sounded that way to me.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:00 AM on September 7, 2016 [15 favorites]


Trump has lead in the aggregated polls at various points throughout the season

whenever those leads are tabbed through they have an overrepresentation of white voters.
posted by zutalors! at 9:01 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


GWB definitely knew he was in over his head though and listened to the people advising him. That was the flat out evil Cheney of course, but there was a strategy, unlike in Trump's case.
posted by zutalors! at 9:02 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


whimsical ... mobilization

Is that when you stick daisies in the gun barrels?
posted by achrise at 9:03 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think you're being too optimistic. Clinton's lead is down to like 2 points and the trendlines haven't stabilized. Trump doesn't have to solve his demographic challenges if 44% is a winning number because of third party voting.

whenever those leads are tabbed through they have an overrepresentation of white voters.

Romney hung his hat on this sort of thing and it didn't work out so well.
posted by Justinian at 9:03 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I was considering placing a bet on Clinton winning. It has occurred to me that merely holding US dollars means that the bet is already on.
posted by jaduncan at 9:05 AM on September 7, 2016 [55 favorites]


It's not optimism, it's honestly realism. I think there is a real effort to minimize minority support and turnout, intentional or not.
posted by zutalors! at 9:05 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


whenever those leads are tabbed through they have an overrepresentation of white voters.

Overrepresentation according to what ground truth, though? We don't know who's going to show up on Election Day. We have likely voter models, but they're notoriously poor at predicting actual turnout
posted by tonycpsu at 9:05 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


whenever those leads are tabbed through they have an overrepresentation of white voters.

I'm talking about the RCP aggregated polls not like the CNN bullshit poll with overrepresentation of the Republican electorate.
posted by Talez at 9:06 AM on September 7, 2016



Overrepresentation according to what ground truth, though?


Matched to previous turnout.
posted by zutalors! at 9:07 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


If he can pull significant white male turnout in Ohio, PA and FL and WI, to win those states, and then not lose some other GOP strongholds, he could pull it off. Like this map, where I gave him FL, GA, AZ, OH, PA and WI, and 3 of Nebraska's split EVs, gets him to 271.

See? All he has to do is win Wisconsin - where in 21 polls over the last year he's never led Clinton - and Pennsylvania, where in 29 polls over the last year he's led Clinton twice (October 2015 and the day after the RNC).


Romney hung his hat on this sort of thing and it didn't work out so well.

Romney hung his hat on the fact that, despite being behind Obama literally every day of the campaign, there were some unknown white voters that would pull it out for him. No, that hasn't worked out so well.
posted by one_bean at 9:07 AM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


I didn't see it posted earlier but has anyone listened to the New Yorker podcast interview with Johnson? I hadn't really heard his voice before, only read interviews with him. I think he comes off as a pompous ass. Maybe it's the anti self made successful businessman/libertarian bias that I do heartily admit to.
posted by readery at 9:09 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Miss me yet?

I don't care how bad goddamn Donald Trump gets, I will never miss the aging, disingenuous, ultimate-product-of-goodolboy-nepotism douchebro whose cynical administration actively set the stage for the current shitpile we're stuck with.
posted by aught at 9:09 AM on September 7, 2016 [31 favorites]


If he can pull significant white male turnout in Ohio, PA and FL and WI, to win those states, and then not lose some other GOP strongholds, he could pull it off. Like this map, where I gave him FL, GA, AZ, OH, PA and WI, and 3 of Nebraska's split EVs, gets him to 271.

You have Missouri going blue in this map? That's extremely unlikely.

I think this map is by far Trump's best path to victory. As you can see, he needs either Wisconsin or Pennsylvania in it, not both. Missouri is going red and I don't think there's much doubt about that. Nevada and Iowa are shaky at best though we can hope for high Latino turnout in Nevada.
posted by Justinian at 9:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


whenever those leads are tabbed through they have an overrepresentation of white voters

"Overrepresentation of white voters" is essentially his plan.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Overrepresentation of white voters + drive down Clinton's numbers with relentless negative attacks blatant lies. If enough young people vote third party it could tip the balance.
posted by Justinian at 9:12 AM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


BTW I don't think it's been mentioned, but by virtue of a coin toss, Clinton will go first in MSNBC's CinC Forum (8pm tonight, EDT)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:15 AM on September 7, 2016


It just doesn't make sense to say that I'm too "optimistic" or "head in the sand" or other jabs while trotting out really outlier possibilities in what the turnout might bring and ignoring historical models as "welp whatever might happen". If what I'm saying is somehow not grounded in reality than neither is what you are.
posted by zutalors! at 9:16 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


If enough young people vote third party it could tip the balance.

Or enough old people.
posted by dersins at 9:16 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Except vice versa
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:17 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well, sure, dersins. But third party candidates are polling at between 15 and 20% among 18-34 year olds and mid single digits among old people. Plus old people overwhelmingly support Trump so old folks going third party tends to help Clinton.
posted by Justinian at 9:18 AM on September 7, 2016


In order to get Federal Matching Funds for a campaign a party has to receive 5% of the vote in the previous election. Gary Johnson should play the long-game for his party, announcing that he will caucus with the Republicans if elected to try to siphon off Trump votes.
It's a win for the Libertarian party and best of all, it is a second front against Trump.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 9:18 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


You have Missouri going blue in this map? That's extremely unlikely.

Yeah I didn't notice that. 270towin puts MO blue when you first load it. I assume they do that based on some polling data, leaving toss-up states grey. Swap MO and WI there and you've still got a winning map for Trump.
posted by dis_integration at 9:19 AM on September 7, 2016


I'm betting that if Clinton wins we will see a 300-400 point relief rally on the DJIA over the next few weeks after the election.

So if you want to make that bet I would do it with an index fund. If your bet is mostly on currency as such I think you have a big downside risk but not much upside reward.
posted by spitbull at 9:20 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


> Donald Trump hasn't practiced a mock debate.
That's absolutely true because he said so!

(ETA Trump's Razor, yeah, but still)
posted by farlukar at 9:21 AM on September 7, 2016


Trump has lead in the aggregated polls at various points throughout the season

Trump has never been in the lead according to Huffpost Pollster. Closest is a little over 2 points behind. Now he's 5% behind.

He has led once briefly by 1 point according to RealClearPolitics. He's currently 3% behind.
posted by chris24 at 9:26 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump speaking now, calls for ending the defense sequester, but reduction in the federal "bureaucracy" through "smart attrition". So basically the Ryan budget, military spending is always good, but anything else the government does should be ended, full stop. The 2011 debt ceiling deal that gave us the sequester was the best thing the Republicans achieved in the Obama era, and he walked right into it. The military cutbacks were always going to be temporary, but the rest of the federal budget will never, ever, recover to the pre-sequester trend line.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:29 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


"Smart attrition" is where the smarter employees with better resumes and more marketable skills get the fuck out before their workload goes up because of everyone leaving.

As someone who works on government projects and counts on smart, hard-working government employees to be able to get my own job done, this... does not sound appealing.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:33 AM on September 7, 2016 [36 favorites]


A less-smart government is much easier to drown in a bathtub.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:35 AM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


That theory to be working in Congress lately.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:37 AM on September 7, 2016


So basically the Ryan budget, military spending is always good, but anything else the government does should be ended, full stop.

Already "military spending" goes to some things (a lot of scientific research, for instance) that aren't weapons or salaries for service members.

I can imagine a situation where pretty much all spending eventually gets justified as "military spending" and funneled through the DoD. My farmer grandfather once told me that farm subsidies are a national security issue. (If your country imports most of your food you're going to be in a world of hurt during war time if your supply lines are cut off, so you have to keep farming capacity even when farming becomes an unprofitable activity in the US...) So maybe farm subsidies can become "military spending." And the highway system was originally justified as a means for moving troops around within the US should the need arise... ROTC/GI Bill programs could pay for a lot more college educations if we wanted... And jobs programs for immigrants could cut down on the ability of terrorists to recruit within those populations...

Basically anything can be justified as "military spending" if you try hard enough, is my point. I wonder if Paul Ryan knows this, and is actually totally okay with that approach? I sort of feel like a lot of Republican voters would be, like they just need that "national security" figleaf to justify supporting policies which actually benefit them directly anyway...
posted by OnceUponATime at 9:42 AM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


You know I joked about this above but it seems to me that the Clinton campaign could do much with stoking fear of a market crash if Trump is elected. The very white middle class suburban voters being contested now are the ones who have most of their retirement funds in largely-self-funded 401Ks and 403bs and IRAs, with most of that money being in stock mutual funds (workers with pensions also have huge stock exposure).

"If this guy wins your retirement savings very likely will instantly fall by a double digit percentage" might be more effective with the swing voter crowd than "there might be a nuclear war."
posted by spitbull at 9:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [28 favorites]


I can imagine a situation where pretty much all spending eventually gets justified as "military spending" and funneled through the DoD

And that's how you get this much closer to a military dictatorship.
posted by dis_integration at 9:45 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


So in this speech Trump called for:
- increased military spending and ending the defense sequester
- more money for the VA
- no cuts to "entitlement programs"
- infrastructure spending
- even more "infrastructure spending" on his Taj Ma Wall and increase in immigration officers deportation squads

But remember, the Tea Party started because of research showing that government debt in excess of 90% of GDP would lead to an economic collapse, and austerity measures were *required* for the last 8 years of a Democratic president, even during the worst recession in 70 years. It's about a commitment to small government, doncha know.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:46 AM on September 7, 2016 [23 favorites]


Clinton camp fires back: We have 95 retired general, admiral endorsements

Presidential Candidates in Definitely-Not-Precarious Democracy Vie for Backing of Military
posted by indubitable at 9:48 AM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


And that's how you get this much closer to a military dictatorship.

I wonder if Paul Ryan knows this, and is actually totally okay with that approach?

(I'm not usually that cynical, but...)
posted by OnceUponATime at 9:48 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I feel like this is a good time to drop in this link to the Wikipedia article about herrenvolk democracy.
posted by Pope Guilty at 9:49 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]



But remember, the Tea Party started because of research


Well so some say. Some of us think it started because there was a black guy in charge all of a sudden.
posted by spitbull at 9:50 AM on September 7, 2016 [72 favorites]


More admirals than the Galactic Empire
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:50 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Imagine Hilary gave a speech with all of those policies (minus the wall) on the first day after taking office, what are the odds that the TeabaggerRyan Congress would obstruct every one of them? 100 percent?
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:52 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Really the inciting incident of the Tea Party was Rick Santilli pitching a temper tantrum on national television about the idea of a tiny fraction of the money used to bail out the banks possibly being used to bail out the people the banks defrauded.
posted by Pope Guilty at 9:53 AM on September 7, 2016 [23 favorites]


Clinton will go first in MSNBC's CinC Forum (8pm tonight, EDT)

Aw, that's when my fantasy football draft is. HOW CAN I DIVIDE MY HEART
posted by palindromic at 9:54 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Incidentally, bleachbit is free and open source. It involves no acid. Trump, on the other hand, might need to ask his acid supplier if the latest batch was a bummer.

When your demographic is obsessed with whiteness you badmouth acid, not bleach.
posted by phearlez at 9:54 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Santillis's rant was the mythological initiation event but it had little to do with the actual politics of the Tea Party as a populist movement, and more resembled the establishment cooptation of that populist rage. I think the rage was actually about a black president, not bailouts or stimulus spending, despite the bailouts actually happening under Bush. If McCain had won and done the same thing Obama did with immediate stimulus spending there would have been little popular opposition.

I just think the economic arguments were largely fig leaf covers for deep racist anger.
posted by spitbull at 9:59 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


So in this speech Trump called for:
[...]
- more money for the VA
- no cuts to "entitlement programs"
- infrastructure spending


Cool, OK, this is definitely different from what the current President has advocated [fake] and clearly a list of priorities that Congress will be in favor of funding [fake].
posted by psoas at 10:00 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I just think the economic arguments were largely fig leaf covers for deep racist anger.

Oh absolutely, race was in it even with the bailouts, as the banks deliberately targeted black people for subprime mortgages, even when they more than qualified for much, much better loans.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:04 AM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]




Yes, "begin." (*sobwhimper*)
posted by Spathe Cadet at 10:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Trump’s Miami campaign office is actually just a prank from a Democrat’s New Year’s Eve party:
For more than eight months, the "Donald Trump for President Dade County Office" Facebook page has drawn comments from eager fans looking for a way to help the Republican presidential nominee.

There's the woman who hoped Trump would secure the GOP nomination even if he didn't win 1,237 party delegates. There's the Cuban immigrant who wrote he's "never been so proud to be an American now that I can vote for a true leader that really wants to make America great again." There's the would-be volunteer who tried unsuccessfully to book someone from Trump's local operation on Fox News.

All the support might come as a shock to Trump: His campaign has no Miami office.

The Facebook page? It's a gag, created by 39-year-old Democrat Mark Bernstein to amuse guests at a Trump-themed New Year's Eve party he threw last December.

"I didn't think it would ever last this long," he told the Miami Herald. "But in the void left by him not actually having any infrastructure, it's been listed on Google Maps!"
posted by palindromic at 10:13 AM on September 7, 2016 [75 favorites]


Trump’s Miami campaign office is actually just a prank from a Democrat’s New Year’s Eve party

Bravo! I'm standing up and applauding at my desk. All he needed to do was to ask for some money from the national campaign too, and it would be perfect.

And this - this - disorganized mess is polling at 44%?
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:16 AM on September 7, 2016 [36 favorites]


> Trump’s Miami campaign office is actually just a prank from a Democrat’s New Year’s Eve party

I have come here to can't even and post snark... and I'm all out of evens.
posted by farlukar at 10:17 AM on September 7, 2016 [11 favorites]


farlukar: I have come here to can't even and post snark... and I'm all out of evens.

Could you maybe make a crude "fuck" out of your username and give that for a while?
posted by wenestvedt at 10:21 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


And this - this - disorganized mess is polling at 44%?

Most of what campaigns do is what the political consultants tell them they need to do, which is probably more oriented to getting the consultants a new deck on their Alexandria mansion or a new paintjob for their yacht. Certainly Hillary got burned by Mark Penn's really bad ideas in 2008. So maybe you don't need campaign offices? Maybe you don't need GOTV efforts? Maybe canvassing is ineffective? Maybe all you need is wall-to-wall media coverage and dank memes. Maybe the rare pepes will win this on their own. We'll find out soon enough. Well, not soon enough. But soon.
posted by dis_integration at 10:22 AM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


My YouTube recommendations are now breathless cable news clips about the election interspersed with "3 hours of waves on a beach--zen!!!"

Sounds about right.

Edit because I totally posted this to the wrong FPP but it kind of works for both.
posted by soren_lorensen at 10:23 AM on September 7, 2016 [16 favorites]


We'll find out soon enough. Well, not soon enough. But soon.

Well, we'll find out.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:24 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


WaPo: Donald Trump says only he can fix a corrupt system. Now we’ve learned that’s another pipe dream.

Not only is Trump corrupt, he sucks at being corrupt. And this tidbit about the Bondi issue:

"Not only did Trump give Bondi that donation, a few months later he hosted a $3,000-a-person fundraiser for her reelection at his Mar-a-Lago resort. And he gave her what he might call a fantastic deal: While this year he has charged his campaign $140,000 every time it uses the mansion for an event, the Republican Party of Florida paid Mar-a-Lago less than $5,000 for Bondi’s fundraiser."
posted by chris24 at 10:26 AM on September 7, 2016 [39 favorites]


Some of us think it started because there was a black guy in charge all of a sudden.

That, and the 27% of hardcore Republicans who still believed George W. Bush did a good job as President needed rebranding once the miserable failure was no longer in office.
posted by Gelatin at 10:27 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


On college/non-college: think about who gets scammed and by what scams. Think about who gets scammed by get-rich-quick schemes and infomercial shit. Think about who gets scammed by affinity fraud. Think about how the GOP's direct mail operations are closely tied to fundraising scams aimed particularly at the elderly.

Then think what happens when you have a candidate who is a scam artist.

You know I joked about this above but it seems to me that the Clinton campaign could do much with stoking fear of a market crash if Trump is elected.

This is why Hillary's in Charlotte tomorrow, and why it's going to get as many visits as many places in Ohio and Florida.
posted by holgate at 10:27 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Gawd, the BBC just reported the whole 'Clinton missing open goals... string of scandals... candidates tied..." narrative practically without variation. It did add a 'why do so many women not get excited by Clinton?' extra, though, which was answered by an interview with a female voter that 'women are much harder on women than they are on men'.

Gah.
posted by Devonian at 10:31 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Clinton leads Trump 58-35 among women so I dispute that framing.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:32 AM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


Women are QUIET about liking Clinton. Because people like to hate on us for it.
posted by agregoli at 10:33 AM on September 7, 2016 [89 favorites]


Local flavor: Trump rental properties in Norfolk were part of 1970s federal discrimination suit

[Trump was just in town yesterday, btw]
posted by indubitable at 10:36 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Santillis's rant was the mythological initiation event but it had little to do with the actual politics of the Tea Party as a populist movement, and more resembled the establishment cooptation of that populist rage.

Further, the Santilli rant was pure astroturf shilling. The groundwork had already been laid for introduction and popularization of a "Tea Party" months ahead of Obama's election by Koch-funded organizations like FreedomWorks and Americans For Prosperity. They didn't just harness the white conservative outrage, they helped manufacture it.
posted by Strange Interlude at 10:38 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Some of us think it started because there was a black guy in charge all of a sudden.

Crispus Attucks was a victim of the Boston Massacre. The Tea Party came three years later.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:38 AM on September 7, 2016


Women are QUIET about liking Clinton. Because people like to hate on us for it.

THIS and it's a daily struggle, weighing how vocally I want to support HRC vs. how it might undermine the effectiveness of my already-vocal campaigning for Roy Cooper (running for governor against nightmare man Pat McCrory), Deborah Ross, and other candidates who matter mostly to my state.

I kind of figure Hillary will do fine without my bumper sticker, but Roy Cooper could use the visibility and I don't want to alienate any of the more sensitive rural Trump voters around me. I guess I also don't want any of my hubcaps stolen, or to be pulled over for no reason (some things that happened when I had a John Kerry bumper sticker in rural NC). All of that said, I am super fucking amped to vote for Hillary and many of the people around me will never know it.
posted by witchen at 10:38 AM on September 7, 2016 [19 favorites]


Breaking: DJT announces that, if elected, he will force Apple to put back the headphone jack, and Tim Cook will personally pay for it. [fake?]
posted by The Bellman at 10:39 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Charges planned against Green Party candidate Jill Stein
(The charges are trespassing and vandalism; Stein spray-painted "I approve this message" on a bulldozer at a Dakota Access Pipeline protest.)

Whoops: Independent candidate appears to have accidentally picked a running mate
(Evan McMullin campaign used name "Nathan Johnson" as a placeholder name until they could decide on a running mate for him, and the deadline to have it changed has passed in eight of those nine states: LA, IA, MN, AR, ID, UT, VA, and SC. He has two days left to change it in Colorado. Apparently they didn't even have a specific Nathan Johnson in mind, if I'm reading it correctly.)
posted by Spathe Cadet at 10:39 AM on September 7, 2016 [31 favorites]


Stein spray-painted "I approve this message" on a bulldozer at a Dakota Access Pipeline protest.

"Run Jill-ian!"
posted by Strange Interlude at 10:41 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


I can fault Stein for a lot of things, but participating in the Dakota protest is not one of them.
posted by anastasiav at 10:42 AM on September 7, 2016 [46 favorites]


Merchandise update: The bumper stickers I ordered on August 9th (and complained about here) arrived today.
posted by DanSachs at 10:43 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I can fault Stein for a lot of things, but participating in the Dakota protest is not one of them.


I agree, but spraypainting something that wasn't about her would've been maybe better?
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:46 AM on September 7, 2016 [41 favorites]


I can't fault Stein for participating in the protest, but spray-painting a bulldozer further indicates that she's not a serious Presidential candidate and has no intention of acting like one.
posted by zachlipton at 10:48 AM on September 7, 2016 [36 favorites]


What with Jason Chaffetz announcing more frivolous investigations today, I contacted the House Oversight and Reform Committee by phone (202-225-5074) since there was not a good email contact form.

Here is the rather simple script I used as a cue sheet during the call:
I am contacting to address you in order to address the House Oversight Committee. Recently Chairman Chaffetz has suggested that you will open yet another investigation into Secretary Hillary Clinton's emails. The House Republican caucus has already conducted numerous investigations into the Secretary's response to the tragedy of Benghazi and her email server. However, none of these investigations have led to charges, much less convictions. Thus, I see this as a huge waste of our citizens' money and legislative resources.

Instead of investigating Secretary Clinton, I suggest you investigate the Republican candidate, Donald J. Trump on charges of attempted bribery of public officials.

On August 6th, 2015 during the first Republican primary debate, Trump admitted to making charitable contributions to politicians in the hope that donations could be exchange for favors. This is actual pay-to-play.

It has also come to light that Trump made campaign contributions to Greg Abbot and Pam Bondi. Shortly after Trump's organizations made the payments, in each case, Abbot and Bondi dropped investigations into the likely fraudulent "Trump University". Trump also hosted a fund raiser for AG Bondi after she had dropped her investigation.

In conclusion, the combination of Trump's admission of making payments with the intent of influencing politicians and the dropping of investigations into one of his enterprises by two attorneys general suggest that a hot fire of bribery exists in the Trump camp. I must, therefore, demand an investigation into the political spending habits of the Republican Presidential nominee. It is in the public interest for Congress to oversee an investigation into these very serious accusations leveled at Donald J. Trump.
The blockquoted text is hereby released into the public domain for the public good. Please feel free to use or modify this piece to serve your needs.

As a note, I called Rep. Chaffetz's office, and a very nice young man directed me to the Oversight Committee, even though I'm not from UT. The woman who took my call for Oversight Committee was also very polite and attentive. I have generally had very positive interactions with the congressional staffers of both parties.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 10:50 AM on September 7, 2016 [69 favorites]


See if I were McMullin's staff I would have used "H. Ash Brown" as my fictional placeholder running mate.

/McMuffin
posted by spitbull at 10:53 AM on September 7, 2016 [29 favorites]


Apparently they didn't even have a specific Nathan Johnson in mind

Maybe this guy from this year's RNC?
posted by Strange Interlude at 10:54 AM on September 7, 2016


I wish he'd picked Navin Johnson. That would have ruled so hard.
posted by palomar at 10:55 AM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


spray-painting a bulldozer further indicates that she's not a serious Presidential candidate and has no intention of acting like one.

well NOW she doesn't stand a chance
posted by Greg Nog at 10:56 AM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


(Jill Stein video. It's like she's never even vandalized anything before.)
posted by Spathe Cadet at 10:56 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


See if I were McMullin's staff I would have used "H. Ash Brown" as my fictional placeholder running mate.

If elected, he will not serve, after 10:30 AM.
posted by Strange Interlude at 10:57 AM on September 7, 2016 [62 favorites]


Stein doesn't have to be a "serious" candidate to draw a critical 1-2% of Bernie Bros in Ohio or Florida.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:00 AM on September 7, 2016


Apparently they didn't even have a specific Nathan Johnson in mind, if I'm reading it correctly.

This has sit-com written all over it
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:10 AM on September 7, 2016 [30 favorites]


Nathan Fielder please legally change your last name and get in there ASAP.
posted by Tevin at 11:12 AM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Or Nathan Lane.

Hey, the new Trump Network might want some non-newstalk programming.
posted by wenestvedt at 11:14 AM on September 7, 2016


MCMULLINFACE MCMULLINFACE MCMULLINFACE

NATHAN JOHNSPLOOOOSION
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:15 AM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


The one or two percent Stein draws never would have voted Hillary anyway. Stein is purely targeting the lunatic demographic. She seems boundlessly devoted to proving she has no credibility. As abhorrent as she is, if anything she's done Hillary a real favor by making the Green Party represent unadulterated craziness in an election year where many Democrats resent and distrust the party's candidate. A less idiotic candidate probably could have siphoned off many more of Bernie's supporters.
posted by vathek at 11:15 AM on September 7, 2016 [22 favorites]


Spraypainting that bulldozer looks to me like painting "Fury" on your tank, violent nose art on your airplane, or writing a message on a bomb. Kind of the opposite of what she intended.
posted by achrise at 11:19 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


This has sit-com written all over it

I was thinking shitty Adam Sandler movie with Rob Schneider as the chief of staff.
posted by cmfletcher at 11:21 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I was considering placing a bet on Clinton winning. It has occurred to me that merely holding US dollars means that the bet is already on.

At this point, I inform any Trump supporter that I have $100 right here says Trump Loses.

And none of them seem to step up and put their $100 on the line.
posted by mikelieman at 11:22 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


there's nothing in the rule book that SAYS a dog can't be nathan johnson
posted by Greg Nog at 11:23 AM on September 7, 2016 [25 favorites]


[VEEP writer] Screams and throws away another script draft.
posted by chris24 at 11:23 AM on September 7, 2016 [26 favorites]


Those Bros were never going to be Clinton votes though. Anything HRC could do to speak to them directly would hurt her with moderates she really needs much more badly.

I am really heated up about Standing Rock at the moment and have to say Jill Stein gained in my book (albeit she starts from almost no respect) for going there. I half wish Hillary would at least address the matter, but can see the realpolitik in treading carefully and forgive it. This is what I meant above about moral compromise and self-interest in most politicians. Thing is, her self interest has now become urgently our collective interest as a society. If not addressing Standing Rock helps her win then that's the savvy politician I'm supporting.

I can't name a single exception to this rule on the current national political scene. You do not win and hold major federal office (or really any office with real power anywhere) without moral compromises. The job attracts and rewards people capable of acting on a principle of self-preservation but professing a principle of serving collective interests.

Bernie ran as That Guy -- incorruptible and assertive. And most of us weren't convinced. And he lost as That Guy too.

Obama ran as that guy too. The kind of people who voted for him and now support Trump (a not inconsequential part of Hillary's problem) are "disappointed" he didn't turn out to be a hero quarterback, but rather a dogged running back against a much bigger defense. Some people want politicians to be saviors and heroes and pure of heart. They are perpetually disappointed by nature and usually don't know what to do when their candidates win and actually have to get down in the mud of governance.

I am 100% in for Hillary. I've given money. I'm terrified of what Trump represents. But I don't need her to be a hero and I don't think ses running as one, which is making those of us who gasped at the brilliance of Obama's campaign machine are nervously looking at this one and wondering where the energy is.

She's running as a competent technocrat who knows how to do interest politics from a progressively centrist basic stance. It contrasts perfectly with Trump's offer of "only I can solve your problems."

But some large number of people only recognize the hero narrative as a rationale for supporting a candidate. They need to be lied to and pandered to. And then they will be disappointed and churlish when reality comes for the payment. It's happened with Pres. Obama for sure.

So the upside is that of Hillary wins and is able to even modestly advance on a few major fronts she will exceed expectations rather than disappointing them.

But I think a good number of people of all educational levels like being told some one poltical candidate will solve all our problems on "Day One."
posted by spitbull at 11:24 AM on September 7, 2016 [17 favorites]


From the Elections Have Consequences Files:

Vox: For the first time ever, America’s uninsured rate has fallen below 9 percent:
States that opted to expand Medicaid coverage to include lower-income individuals have managed to cut their uninsured rate from 18.4 percent in 2013 to 9.2 percent in the first three months of 2016.

But for the 19 states that have opted not to expand Medicaid, the decrease in the uninsured rate has not been as substantial, falling from 22.7 percent in 2013 to 16.7 percent in 2016.
Appropriately snarky commentary from Scott Lemieux at LGM:
I hope you will not unfairly demonize kindly, moderate Republicans like John McCain and Mitt Romney and Sam Alito merely because their actions would have caused the number of uninsured to head back towards 20% — what’s tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths and untold unnecessary bankruptcies between friends, really?
posted by palindromic at 11:27 AM on September 7, 2016 [36 favorites]


I know this is just one set of polls from a single pollster (Emerson College) and could easily be an outlier but it's disconcerting to think that the race could possibly be this close in New Jersey (Clinton +4) and Rhode Island (Clinton +3). Her lead should be in the double-digits.
posted by guiseroom at 11:31 AM on September 7, 2016


So is McMuffin even allowed to find a Nathan Johnson to be his running mate? If he is, it weirdly implies that the names on the ballot don't refer to specific people. If Trump gets bored, could he recruit another Mike Pence, for instance? Is there a law that guarantees that when you vote "Hillary Clinton" it refers to a particular Hillary Clinton?

On the plus side, Nathan Johnsons have a deep bench.
posted by vathek at 11:32 AM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Is america ready for its first #muscledaddy vice-president
posted by Greg Nog at 11:35 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


So is McMuffin even allowed to find a Nathan Johnson to be his running mate?

I think it's first come first serve. If my name was Nate Johnson, I'd be running to CNN to assert my rights.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:36 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


TPM - Get Real, People

For the Trump isn't the warmonger Clinton is crowd:

"He's proposing getting all the toys and kicking all the ass that the hardest core warmongers want. He's just taking 'democracy' off the list of reasons for doing it and promising everything will go great. That's not policy. That's bullshit. Aggressive foreign policy, for aspirational motives or dark ones involves foreign entanglements, involves things going wrong. Why this isn't obvious to more people I do not know."
posted by chris24 at 11:39 AM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


But I don't need her to be a hero and I don't think ses running as one, which is making those of us who gasped at the brilliance of Obama's campaign machine are nervously looking at this one and wondering where the energy is.

As a woman I feel like she is definitely running as a hero for women's rights.
posted by zutalors! at 11:41 AM on September 7, 2016 [27 favorites]


On the plus side, Nathan Johnsons have a deep bench.

Nathans Johnson.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:41 AM on September 7, 2016 [40 favorites]


Nathan Johnsi
posted by drezdn at 11:48 AM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Nathan's Johnson - Running Mate.

Make it so.
posted by spinifex23 at 11:49 AM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


> If Trump gets bored, could he recruit another Mike Pence, for instance?

Well, now that you raise the possibility, I'll be disappointed if Trump doesn't replace Mike Pence with a different Mike Pence. And it's not like it'd be out of character, given how many other people he's shuffled through his campaign already, and the reports that he wasn't thrilled about Pence to begin with.

(The dream scenario, obviously, would be for Trump to find a Steven Michael "Mike" Pence.)
posted by Spathe Cadet at 11:51 AM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


Huh, zutalors, I see a lot of projection of that narrative on to her, and she's certainly appealed to it a few times (in the convention especially, with references to Beijing and intergenerational mother/daughter framing). But I haven't heard her thematize women's rights as a major premise of her candidacy.

Her election itself will be a gigantic symbolic victory for women and thus for all of us, and a major inflection point in the history of American feminism. I feel the stirring appeal of that as a male feminist certainly. But I suspect that narrative will only really get the attention it deserves once she wins (ok, ok ... if). I expect it will be a viscerally powerful moment, equivalent to the Obamas in Grant Park but maybe even more iconic, to see her victory speech. But I think a relatively modest number of her voters (albeit a larger number of her hardcore volunteers and supporters) are actually compelled by that prospect enough to prioritize it as a campaign theme.

That could also be a mistake. It's a missed chance to speak to younger voters I think, even though I know many younger feminists (as a college prof) who roll their eyes at her grasp of their concerns about gender and sexuality in particular.

I'm not saying she won't be a hero for the feminist struggle. I don't think she's advancing her candidacy on that argument in her current campaign strategy.

She may not need to. I think it's right that there is a quiet women's vote for Clinton (and against the misogynist, abusive Trump) even in the fabled white working class electorate. That's my side bet for why she wins by more than polls show the day before the election.
posted by spitbull at 11:52 AM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


I know this is just one set of polls from a single pollster (Emerson College)

Landlines only, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Their earlier polls have had similar leans. 538 says B-grade, R+1.3.
posted by holgate at 11:54 AM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I just read Donald's policy talk from, what, yesterday, the Iran/Iraq war.
Set him up/ fighting/ they use the gas/ wait/ another bottle of beer on the wall...yeah.

So, Mr Trump, tell us who emerged victorious in the war of the roses.
"I'll take place settings and plate for 1000£, Alex. Kay, there was two kings, one french, rose lover, I think, they fought, built fortifications, did the jousting thing, very brave. And then ah, the king won"
posted by clavdivs at 12:11 PM on September 7, 2016


Folks, I think I might have just discovered the ingenious loophole the Never Trumpers have been looking for. If the Cheeto ekes it out, a whole crew of Donalds Trump can show up to the inauguration demanding to take the oath of office. It'll be pandemonium. No one will be able to tell which one is entitled to be president, because the case of the McMuffin man shows we elect names and not people. The Trumps can then duke it out in court for the entire term, none of them able to exercise the powers of the office due to the uncertainty about who the American people voted for. Or perhaps the country could be ruled by a committee of Donalds Trump. Surely the rest of them can't be as bad. #neverspecifictrump
posted by vathek at 12:14 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Why this isn't obvious to more people I do not know.

I find myself saying that a lot lately.
posted by diogenes at 12:16 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Apparently they didn't even have a specific Nathan Johnson in mind, if I'm reading it correctly.

This has sit-com written all over it


It actually had 1979 Steve Martin movie written all over it, but the name was messed up by audio disruptions and echoes. It is a common error, substituting "Nathan" for "Navin."
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:20 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


there's nothing in the rule book that SAYS a dog can't be nathan johnson

Yes but a dog can't be president until it turns 35 and good luck with that. You'd need to find out if dog years are constitutional.
posted by Talez at 12:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


There's nothing in the rule book that SAYS dog years aren't constitutional.
posted by vathek at 12:29 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


You'd need to find out if dog years are constitutional.

Good luck doing that with an eight-member court.
posted by paper chromatographologist at 12:30 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Folks, I think I might have just discovered the ingenious loophole the Never Trumpers have been looking for. If the Cheeto ekes it out, a whole crew of Donalds Trump can show up to the inauguration demanding to take the oath of office.

"I am Trumpacus!"

"No, *I* am Trumpacus!"...
posted by Strange Interlude at 12:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


There's nothing in the rule book that SAYS dog years aren't constitutional.

Does it have a long form birth certificate? What if its father was a Rhodesian Ridgeback? Is it still a naturally born US dog?
posted by Talez at 12:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Some people want politicians to be saviors and heroes and pure of heart. They are perpetually disappointed by nature and usually don't know what to do when their candidates win and actually have to get down in the mud of governance.

Absolutely. And never mind how people feel after someone is elected. They are disappointed from the start. Look at the widespread disaffection for responsible, forward-thinking candidates qua candidates in the first place. Look at the disturbing trend of backing "dismantlists" and unabashed saboteurs.

This nation feeds at media and educational troughs full of fairy tales and myths. We latch onto the narrative of the hero so easily, fail to distinguish between savior and leader, and consequently never even begin to grasp the massive, underlying, persistent, long-term movements that produce the landscapes within which these icons even make sense. And in conflating hero with leader, we also fail to make the connection that accepting someone's leadership implies assuming some personal responsibility to act as well, and to do so in concert with others. To add one's own energy to the movement.

those of us who gasped at the brilliance of Obama's campaign machine are nervously looking at this one and wondering where the energy is

In 2008 I was flat-out agitated that Obama wasn't going for the jugular. But thanks to a fantastic ground game, no drama Obama won handily.

I'm not worried about a fumble at the campaign level this time around. If Clinton's trudge up the Hill doesn't result in victory, it's because we are collectively just too addled as a nation to make a sensible decision.
posted by perspicio at 12:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


My local paper published this today: "The travails of a Black Lives Matter sign," by Nettie Harrington Pangallo. She lives in Shutesbury, Mass., and had her Black Lives Matter sign defaced by a neighbor:
I greeted my neighbor, and asked him what he was doing. “Making adjustments” he said with a chuckle. “That’s my property,” I said while smiling, “and it’s not for you to adjust.”

He continued to tape his sign on mine, and with a condescending tone told me that “all lives matter.” [...]

Five days later, on Aug. 20, my husband heard a truck coming down the road and come to a stop in front of the sign. As he casually looked out the window, he saw a young man picking up the sign and putting it in his truck.

“What are you doing?” my husband asked. The young man explained that he was “just talking about this and was about to show it to a friend.”

My husband told him to put it back, and he did. The truck drove around a bit and then parked – you guessed it – at that same neighbor’s house. My husband took a picture of his license plate and left a note to the driver reading that freedom of speech is one of the things that makes our country great and that stealing in response to a disagreement is not acceptable.
Then the sign was stolen:
When we asked our neighbor if he’d seen anything, he and his wife said that they noticed it was missing and contacted their friend at the police department for us. They followed this with many reassurances that they did not take it and that they were “holding people back” and telling people in the neighborhood not to steal it, but that they were surprised it took until now for the sign to disappear.

“It’s offensive, it incites terrorism, and it’s anti-cop,” they said. They also expressed their frustration that I had vandalized their sign – the one they used to cover mine – by taking it off.

That’s right. I vandalized their vandalism of my property. They said that they assumed we would be upset, but didn’t really care. They ended the conversation by letting us know that if a new sign went up, it would probably be stolen as well.
That mentality—if you try to stop me vandalizing your sign, you're vandalizing me—is so insane I can't believe it would be verbalized if it weren't for the general lowering of standards of discourse produced by this wretched election season.

Anyway, I'm pleased enough the Gazette published the piece that I'll forgive a portion of their maddeningly frequent typos.
posted by languagehat at 12:36 PM on September 7, 2016 [124 favorites]


>You'd need to find out if dog years are constitutional.

Good luck doing that with an eight-member court.


As ever, it all depends on who the members are
. [Context]
posted by cjelli at 12:38 PM on September 7, 2016


Nervous about polls?

Fuggedaboudid. Clinton wins 89% (random drift) / 93% (Bayesian). Think down-ticket.

The second answer is: the House of Representatives. Republicans are highly likely to lose seats. But will they retain their majority? If they do, there is preliminary talk on the right of impeaching President Clinton in advance. Such a remarkable act of polarization would probably slow down legislative progress, to put it mildly.
posted by petebest at 12:40 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


T.D. Strange: It's about a commitment to small government, doncha know.

Liberal government drone rant: "smaller government" generally doesn't mean less government, it means more outsourcing, which means less transparency, and in many cases, less efficiency. See, for a contractor to do a job, they have to have government oversight, reviewing deliverables and materials by a government project manager. Sure, the contracting team can be big, with one government person overseeing the contract, but contracts take time to develop, get passed through legal, sent out for RFP, selected and put into place. That's months, if not years for big projects, all that time and nothing is done. Then reviewing the products and deliverables - what if they're not up to spec? Rejected, requesting new products or deliverables. How often is billing done? Monthly? OK, that's at least a month behind schedule, if it was on schedule in the first place. And then there's the total cost, which is never compared to the cost of simply hiring enough government staff to do the job in-house and do it right, and in the end keep all the experience and skills learned from the job. Yup, a contracting team completes a job and can provide some end-of-project report to pass the gained knowledge along, but they also leave with another project on their collective resume, looking all the more impressive for the next bid.

Don't get me wrong, there are examples of times and places it makes sense to have contractors and consultants working on something, like unusual projects or plans that are developed every few years. But the day-to-day stuff, the ongoing work that is always the job of government in one form or another? Let's keep it to government workers, with capable managers, and a salary that gets sufficiently skilled people in the position. Because managing contracts is dull, time consuming, and full of excesses. But this story doesn't make for exciting news, or get people to the polls to vote for Smarter Government instead of Smaller Government. /rant
posted by filthy light thief at 12:44 PM on September 7, 2016 [36 favorites]


McConnell Confirms Plan For Stopgap Funding Until December. Between this and hinting at Garland hearings, maybe they're planning for a Hilary win. It would help Speaker Ryan a lot to pass a 2017 budget he can then blame on the lame duck Congress, thus punting on a shutdown fight until at least next year.
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:45 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


chris24: "Not only did Trump give Bondi that donation, a few months later he hosted a $3,000-a-person fundraiser for her reelection at his Mar-a-Lago resort. And he gave her what he might call a fantastic deal: While this year he has charged his campaign $140,000 every time it uses the mansion for an event, the Republican Party of Florida paid Mar-a-Lago less than $5,000 for Bondi’s fundraiser."

See, Mar-a-Lago just got that much better. So much better. Totally worth $140,000 per use.

(Really, was the facility used in the same way? Are we comparing apples of the same size, or little apples versus hoooge apples? Because some of that price inflation might be reasonable. Maybe.)
posted by filthy light thief at 12:46 PM on September 7, 2016


Liberal government drone rant: "smaller government" generally doesn't mean less government, it means more outsourcing, which means less transparency, and in many cases, less efficiency.

Don't forget the profits for the contractors. "Smaller government" just means that more taxpayer money goes to politicians' friends.
posted by rp at 12:48 PM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


Mexican cabinet minister who invited Trump is now unemployed

The Mexican president — who had praised many of Trump’s broad policy goals hours earlier — was forced to assure his Twitter followers that they would not be funding Trump’s wall. His electorate was not amused
posted by petebest at 12:48 PM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


Pence breaks with Trump, says Obama born in Hawaii
SAN DIEGO -- Mike Pence on Wednesday declined to say whether Donald Trump should apologize for suggesting Barack Obama was born outside the U.S., but he did say Trump's stance wouldn’t hurt him with minority voters.

“I honestly think that Donald Trump, in his candor and in his vision, is expanding the Republican Party even as we speak,” Pence added, when asked if the comments would limit Trump’s ability to expand the Republican base. “I think it’s very clear that Republicans, Independents and Democrats are responding to this call to make America great again. And I’m very confident that as we continue to make it clear that that vision for America is for every American regardless of race or creed or color, that we’re going to continue to see that only grow. The polls are encouraging.”
Trump's "candor and vision" Gah! Candor is when you tell a woman that she would be so pretty if only she wasn't fat. And visions can be nightmarescapes.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:49 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Absolutely. And never mind how people feel after someone is elected. They are disappointed from the start.

My pure, unabashed and highly personalized anecdata on the impossible-to-please looking-for-a-hero set is that if you drill down far enough you do have a good chance of hitting a seam of laziness. Having impossibly high standards, and knowing from the get-go that they are impossibly high and that no one in the history of ever could really meet them, provides a pretty good cover for not having to expend any physical or emotional energy doing the hard work of democracy. It'd never work anyway, the system is completely corrupt all the way down, both sides are equally bad, there's no possible way to fix any of this to my standards and oh hey just by coincidence that means I never have to door knock, contribute money or write a letter to anyone!
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:52 PM on September 7, 2016 [27 favorites]


see, this here is the problem with thinking you've seen it all.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 12:55 PM on September 7, 2016






Huh, zutalors, I see a lot of projection of that narrative on to her, and she's certainly appealed to it a few times (in the convention especially, with references to Beijing and intergenerational mother/daughter framing). But I haven't heard her thematize women's rights as a major premise of her candidacy.


I hear this projection argument a lot, and I'm not sure where it's coming from. Either women are silently for Clinton, or too hard on Clinton, or projecting, or something. Whatever women are seeing, that can't be correct. It must be a misunderstanding or mistake, or we'd all see it.

I heard all of her post-primary speeches and she mentioned women's rights in all of them. I have never heard level of consistency and focus from any other Presidential candidate in my entire life.

Whether that warrants "hero" or whatever doesn't really matter to me, i was specifically responding to the idea that she's a total pragmatist without an inspiring message.

Honestly, hearing that consistent focus on women's rights really got me excited about her campaign.
posted by zutalors! at 1:10 PM on September 7, 2016 [63 favorites]


Right on, zulators! I'm getting extremely tired of being told women aren't seeing what's REALLY the deal with HRC.
posted by agregoli at 1:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [30 favorites]




And yeah, she mentions women's rights as a focus of her campaign quite a bit so...not getting it.
posted by agregoli at 1:13 PM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


I'm *seriously* concerned that Donnie Trump is suffering from the same Early Onset Dementia that killed his father, Fred.


Donald Trump - Obama Birth Certificate - Greatest Scam

posted by mikelieman at 1:16 PM on September 7, 2016


Trump still thinks they put Clinton's old phones in acid

Putting things in acid is very presidential.
posted by jackbishop at 1:21 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


> "Donald Trump accidentally declares himself ineligible for the presidency [real, Washington Post]"

From that article: "One interesting little detail from that deposition: Trump didn't remember Trump University having a blog -- which it did. The blog has been a source of some embarrassing reversals, such as when it said that Hillary Clinton would be 'a great president or vice-president.' In the deposition, Trump said he did remember who wrote the blog posts: Meredith McIver, the woman who was blamed for Melania Trump's plagiarized Republican convention speech."

MEREDITH!
posted by kyrademon at 1:21 PM on September 7, 2016 [75 favorites]


I can't believe one presidential candidate has an actual professional scape goat on staff
posted by schadenfrau at 1:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [38 favorites]


You wonder how Trump will spend more on military without increasing the debt and how he will magically transport two million illegal aliens across the border in the first hours of his presidency? His secret weapon: Samantha Stephens.
STEPHENS! (looking this up, I was disappointed by the ph)
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 1:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


This comment serves as both a Recent Activity bookmark and a waypost for when these threads became un-fun slogs for me.
posted by infinitewindow at 1:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


I can't believe one presidential candidate has an actual professional scape goat on staff

please. they all do. Meredith is a Sin-Eater, which requires accreditation
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:32 PM on September 7, 2016 [22 favorites]


Man, Meredith is getting an incredible resume out of this. From lying to the Feds to writing blog posts, she does it all!
posted by a fiendish thingy at 1:32 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's time they fire Meredith and bring in that talented, charismatic, super good looking, large handed John Barron guy I've been hearing so much about.
posted by cmfletcher at 1:37 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


I can't believe one presidential candidate has an actual professional scape goat on staff

I can't believe that all political operatives don't have professional scapegoats on staff. They seem incredibly handy for embarrassing situations.
posted by Talez at 1:37 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, I think they all will now.

and that's how Meredith went from name to professional title
posted by schadenfrau at 1:43 PM on September 7, 2016 [29 favorites]


They could have schools for it. Put them next to the butlering schools
posted by schadenfrau at 1:43 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


alternate theory: that deposition clearly shows that Trump's memory for names and faces is shit, so maybe every female factotum under his direct command is "Meredith McIver"
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:45 PM on September 7, 2016 [16 favorites]


I can't believe that all political operatives don't have professional scapegoats on staff. They seem incredibly handy for embarrassing situations.

Who needs a scapegoat when you've got Anthony Wiener on your bench?
posted by mikelieman at 1:46 PM on September 7, 2016


Meredith McIver also co-wrote a lot of Trump's "How to Get Rich by Giving Me Your Money" books.

If I were a newsman, I'd seriously think about hiring some underlings to scour those books for some hilarious fuckups, if only to push Donnie to the point of admitting he had nothing to do with the writing of his own books.
posted by Sys Rq at 1:54 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


They could have schools for it. Put them next to the butlering schools

Let's face it. Everyone would just want a Harvey Fierstein voiced Karl.
posted by Talez at 1:55 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


I feel like we need to help make an escape plan for the Merediths on election night
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:00 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


I feel like we need to help make an escape plan for the Merediths on election night
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:00 PM on September 7 [+] [!]


Are there any remaining Spider Steves left
posted by schadenfrau at 2:03 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Merediths will all die defending Trump while he escapes in a shiny golden jet pod, cackling "we will meet again, MRS. CLINTON!"
posted by spitbull at 2:07 PM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


The one or two percent Stein draws never would have voted Hillary anyway.
Maybe, but there's definitely something strange going on with Secretary Clinton's support. She's polling at 46.9% nationally per 538, which is a few points lower than you'd expect from the candidate leading the race.
posted by chrchr at 2:08 PM on September 7, 2016


T.D. Strange: McConnell Confirms Plan For Stopgap Funding Until December. Between this and hinting at Garland hearings, maybe they're planning for a Hilary win.

I'd say stopgap funding indicates a maybe, because an obstructionist GOP House is one the Dems can (rightfully) blame for government shutdowns in November. But Garland hearings would be a very strong indicator that they see Hillary as the next POTUS, otherwise why stall this long if they can get someone more conservative with Trump?
posted by filthy light thief at 2:08 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Confirming Garland could potentially help some endangered republican senators keep their seats. It would be a smart long term move before the election. Don't expect them to do it.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


You wonder how Trump will spend more on military without increasing the debt and how he will magically transport two million illegal aliens across the border in the first hours of his presidency? His secret weapon: Samantha Stephens.

Oh please. Endora would gut him like a fish before he finished the oath. Then they'd have to replace him with Dick Sargent.
posted by PlusDistance at 2:12 PM on September 7, 2016 [17 favorites]


I came to realize that there is a whole sector of society in which the privilege of whiteness and maleness didn’t really trickle down.


I know there's a lot of road under the tires, but this one is just flat out not true. I've argued with lots of poor white dudes about this.

The one that always works is... How many times have you been to jail? Why aren't you in jail right now?

Almost every dumb teenage white boy with no money and nothing better to do has smoked weed, vandalized shit, done stupid shit like fucking around in playgrounds at night during "curfew", drank in public, shoplifted, gotten in fights, etc. almost none of them did more than spend a few nights in jail even if they were caught with a big sack of weed.

Now go talk to a group of brown kids about how many of their friends went to jail. Or whether they have a record that's more than like, misdeameanor levels of drug/alcoholic possession or shoplifting or like a plea'd out assault charge they served no time on.

There's your white privilege. You don't need money or power. It's the cop telling you to pour out that beer son or letting you leave the bonfire/park/etc instead of cuffing you or giving you an MIP.

All my poor-to-precariously-middle-class white friends did SO MUCH of that shit and walked. And I only heard wilder stuff from small towns. This is just not true in nonwhite communities, especially in cities or small towns where the cops fuck with minorities consistently.
posted by emptythought at 2:13 PM on September 7, 2016 [156 favorites]


Now Jeannie, on the other hand, has experience working with the US military.
posted by PlusDistance at 2:14 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Charles Pierce: It's Time for Hillary Clinton to Play Offense on Obamacare:
Now, though, with this remarkable statistic in her arsenal, it's time for HRC to bring the stepping-stone argument to the fore with a vengeance. It is not disrespectful or disloyal to the current president to campaign on improving a law that already has made the lives of millions of people a little easier, not when the opposition's entire healthcare alternative is to blow up the law and immiserate those same people all over again.

To her credit, she has made this argument consistently throughout the campaign, in the face of the ACA's continuing demonization by her political opponents, and the sabotage of the ACA occurring out in the states, and the endless finagling of the insurance industry. Looking at the fact that less than 10 percent of the population of this country is lacking health insurance is to look at an undeniable triumph, but not the only one, and certainly not the last one.
posted by palindromic at 2:17 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


morganw: Donald Trump accidentally declares himself ineligible for the presidency [real, Washington Post]
"Hillary and her top aides told the FBI and others related in the lawsuits that they couldn’t recall or remember -- can't remember anything!" Trump said. "By the way, if she really can't remember, she can't be president! She doesn't remember anything! She doesn't even remember whether or not she was instructed on how to use emails. 'Were you instructed on how to use?' 'I can't remember.'"

Why's that tricky? Because asserting that Clinton can't be president if she doesn't remember details in an interview would mean that Trump, too, is ineligible for the nation's highest office. Big league.

As part of The Post's research for our biography of the Republican nominee, we compiled hundreds of documents from Trump's past. Among those were a number of depositions from a tiny portion of the thousands of lawsuits to which Trump has been a party over the years. And in those depositions? Constant assertions by Trump that he couldn't recall or didn't know the answers to questions offered him.
Sys Rq: If I were a newsman, I'd seriously think about hiring some underlings to scour those books for some hilarious fuckups, if only to push Donnie to the point of admitting he had nothing to do with the writing of his own books.

Yeah, you don't have to dig into his books to find out how he had nothing to do with his own brands and business ventures, at least when there's legal questions before him.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:17 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


@MittRomney

I hope voters get to see former GOP Governors Gary Johnson and Bill Weld on the debate stages this fall.
[REAL!]

Not quite an endorsement (yet) but maybe a test balloon?
posted by stolyarova at 2:25 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


chrchr: there's definitely something strange going on with Secretary Clinton's support. She's polling at 46.9% nationally per 538, which is a few points lower than you'd expect from the candidate leading the race.

Perhaps because popular vote can be so far off of electoral votes? In the current 538 polls-plus forecast, Hillary has 296.4 electoral votes with 47.1% of the pop. vote. Donald has 241.3 electoral votes, with 44.3% of the pop. vote. It's no landslide, but it's a win. And for comparison, PEC has Clinton 346, Trump 192 EV.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:28 PM on September 7, 2016


Charles Pierce: It's Time for Hillary Clinton to Play Offense on Obamacare:

[itsatrap.jpg]

There's too many edge case anecdotes that any wilfully intellectually dishonest person can gish gallop on. The only people who Obamacare have helped are undeserving poor people, it's going to start slamming state budgets next year (disaster in the making we tried to stop!), and they lied about keeping your (unbelievable shitty it was deemed too bad a deal to keep selling) plan.

Obamacare is radioactive to anyone but people who can understand a semblance of nuance and have a shred of empathy (i.e. liberals).
posted by Talez at 2:33 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


prize bull octorok: alternate theory: that deposition clearly shows that Trump's memory for names and faces is shit, so maybe every female factotum under his direct command is "Meredith McIver"

Modified alternate theory: Donald doesn't really see women as individual people, so he just names all women Meredith McIver because that was the girl who pushed him down when he was 10. But similarly, he has a soft spot for Steves, as seen with his Economic Steve Team.

So maybe it's more like Dubya's long list of nicknames (Wikipedia list!!), except it's a lot of Merediths and Steves. Like Egg McMuffin's Nathan Johnson.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:33 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


In other news, Josh Marshall destroys the notion that Trump might be non-interventionist or less "warhawky" than Hillary. Demolishes it.
posted by msalt at 2:36 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


> Charges planned against Green Party candidate Jill Stein

But of course no charges against the pipeline planners who destroyed newly discovered burial sites before they could be studied, or the thugs who loosed attack dogs on the protesters. Business as usual.

There's a lot more on the protests against the Dakota Access pipeline in this thread, btw: They say it's the biggest gathering of Native Americans in 100 years.
posted by homunculus at 2:37 PM on September 7, 2016 [19 favorites]


> I can't fault Stein for participating in the protest, but spray-painting a bulldozer further indicates that she's not a serious Presidential candidate and has no intention of acting like one.

True. In previous elections Stein seemed to go out of her way to get arrested. It's part of her campaign strategy. I hope she doesn't do more harm than good with this stunt, because what's happening at Standing Rock is seriously fucked up.

OTOH, so far all that the serious Presidential candidate has contributed is silence. It's past time Clinton said something.

A Test of U.S. Climate Leadership Will Be How We Treat the Standing Rock Sioux: Can we trust Clinton-Kaine promises of an energy future “where no one is left out or left behind”?

As Dakota Access Pipeline Fight Grows, Where Are Obama and Clinton?

Hillary Clinton must stand with Native Americans
posted by homunculus at 2:37 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Now Jeannie, on the other hand, has experience working with the US military.

Doctor Bombay totally seems like someone Donnie Trump would have on *his* bench, tho..
posted by mikelieman at 2:39 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm no Clinton fan, but if she got involved in a protest, I imagine it'd be far more substantial than spray painting a bulldozer with jokes about her presidential run. It's not about what protest Stein was at, it's about the gimmicky flashy BS and making it about her. It may work with the Bernie Bro holdouts, but it's a shit tactic otherwise.
posted by corb at 2:50 PM on September 7, 2016 [30 favorites]


Donald Trump accidentally declares himself ineligible for the presidency [real, Washington Post]

The PDF has a transcript of The Donald under oath responding to list of people: does he recall them and did they have any involvement with Trump University? We join the transcript already in progress, at page 11 of 129.
Q: James Webb?

A: I don't remember the names -- don't remember the name.

Q: Kerry Martin?

A: Some of the names, by the way, sound familiar, but too many years to know.

Q: Paul Lucas?

A: Same answer.

Q: Kerry Lucas?

A: Same answer.

Q: Mike Peterson?

A: Same answer.

Q: Troy Peterson?

A: Same answer.

Q: Chris Gillem?

A: Same answer.

Q: Steve Gilpin?

A: Same answer.

Q: Scott Miller?

A: Same answer.

Q: Steve Miller?

A: Are you going to do this all day?


Q: Same answer?

A: Same answer.
Come on, Mr. Trump, you must recall him: he taught the "Take The Money and Run" curriculum.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 2:52 PM on September 7, 2016 [30 favorites]


You'd think he'd perk up when the Steves were mentioned.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 2:54 PM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


Jared Yates Sexton ‏@JYSexton
CNN graphic says SECRET PLAN FOR ISIS while Trump video plays. They have notes on his speech, which has no secret plan. This is the problem.
Jared Yates Sexton being one of the few sane people left writing about this campaign.
posted by Talez at 3:05 PM on September 7, 2016 [10 favorites]


Hillary at Standing Rock. Yes. I would love to see her kick some @$% there. For me, not the Undecideds.
posted by petebest at 3:07 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm attending a non-political community town hall event tonight. I will not be able to watch the forum until tomorrow and I will not be able to sneak a peek at MeFi during the meeting. I haz many sadz about this. I am counting on all of you to provide thorough and clear synthesis and knife-edged snark for me to peruse in bed tonight so that I am ready for tomorrow's thread.

Continue with your analysis and TIA.
posted by Sophie1 at 3:10 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Lindsey Graham on CNN literally saying Obama/Clinton fucked up by not engaging in imperialism after the Libyans deposed Gaddafi.

Jesus Christ please make it stop.
posted by Talez at 3:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


> TPM: Trump Dings Clinton For Not Having ‘A Presidential Look’

Here's the Thing About Donald Trump's 'Presidential Look'
posted by homunculus at 3:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Q: Steve Miller?

A: *clap clap clap clap* He headed down to Ol' El Paso. [fake]

It's an old bit of news but I don't think it was covered here, but The Atlantic reported that the Trump University sales pitch leaned heavily on the song "For the Love of Money" by The O'Jays. In their words:
As soon as attendees entered the registration area, the song “For the Love of Money” by the O’Jays greeted them. The tune had been used as the theme to Trump’s reality television shows “The Apprentice” and “The Celebrity Apprentice,” presumably because of the song’s incessant chant of “Money, money, money, money...money!” But if seminar attendees had listened more closely to the song’s lyrics, they’d have realized that the tune is actually an indictment of Trump-esque money glorification:

For the love of money
People will steal from their mother
For the love of money
People will rob their own brother
For the love of money
People can't even walk the street
Because they never know
Who in the world they're gonna beat
For that lean, mean, mean green
Almighty dollar, money
posted by peeedro at 3:14 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Well you know Lindsay is a military expert because he was a lawyer for the Air Force in Europe. Guy like that, God knows the battles he has seen. If he says we coulda taken them Libyan rebels out back and kicked their asses you'd better believe him.
posted by spitbull at 3:22 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


TIL that Warren G. Harding's middle name was "Gamaliel."
posted by spitbull at 3:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


One argument I've been making lately to people leaning Trump is..."Ok, so Trump is going to deal with illegal immigration by spending $60 billion to deport them. I thought the whole problem was we want the government to spend LESS of our tax money on illegal immigrants? Instead you want to take money away from citizens and use it on immigrants?

I have yet to find anyone who can make any real response to that.
posted by threeturtles at 3:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [22 favorites]


this kid in my class who is in part i think trying to fuck with me said he was voting for Gary Johnson. I asked him why, expecting the kid to say something about weed, but instead there was this weird one-world gov't stuff he started talking about. I must have looked like I felt (i.e. WTF) and he sort of trailed off. But I wonder what nonsense that was about.
posted by angrycat at 3:29 PM on September 7, 2016


he was like, "all the governments...will come together as one" and i guess I'm a bad teacher because I was like bwhahaha
posted by angrycat at 3:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


That's weird because if anyone is a cosmopolitan, Gary Johnson is. Was he pro-Federation?
posted by stolyarova at 3:32 PM on September 7, 2016


(Star Trek Federation, I mean, not Federalist vs Anti-Federalist)
posted by stolyarova at 3:32 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


(Star Trek Federation, I mean, not Federalist vs Anti-Federalist)

We will look back on this as the comment that launched a thousand Hamilton/DS9 mashups.
(Why not TOS? Because DS9 has a tailor who is also a spy).
posted by knuckle tattoos at 3:44 PM on September 7, 2016 [33 favorites]


he was like, "all the governments...will come together as one" and i guess I'm a bad teacher because I was like bwhahaha

Well, maybe he'll learn not to say silly things to people.
posted by rifflesby at 3:54 PM on September 7, 2016


Toronto Star: 11 reasons Hillary Clinton isn’t crushing Donald Trump
10) Desensitization to attacks: Clinton’s main argument — echoed by much of the media — is that Trump is an unprecedentedly unfit candidate, erratic and extreme. But trust in media gatekeepers has eroded, and this kind of rhetoric can sound the same old song to people bombarded with attack ads for years. “Negative campaigns have acclimated many voters to charges of extremism,” Varoga said, “so that when a truly dangerous candidate is slouching toward the White House, the warnings can seem like just another wild accusation in the middle of an ‘anything goes’ campaign.”
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:03 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Here, learn some more fun facts about Warren G. Harding:
Harding was born November 2, 1865, in Blooming Grove, Ohio. Nicknamed "Winnie" as a small child, Harding was the eldest of eight children born to George Tryon Harding, Sr. (1843–1928; usually known as Tryon) and Phoebe Elizabeth (Dickerson) Harding (1843–1910).
Warren Gamaliel "Winnie" Harding, son of Doctor George Tryon Harding, brother of Doctor George George Tryon Harding. (Further googling suggests there was also a Doctor Tryon Harding III, and perhaps beyond.)

Interestingly, though Winnie had no (legitimate) children of his own, he did have a nephew named Winnie the 2 (well, Warren G. Harding II, anyhow), one of Tryon II's kids.
posted by Sys Rq at 4:05 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


#12 she is
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:05 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


so that when a truly dangerous candidate is slouching toward the White House, the warnings can seem like just another wild accusation in the middle of an ‘anything goes’ campaign.”

Argh except you don't need to trust any media gatekeepers when the candidate himself says things that are literally crazy all the time and in multiple venues! Mistrust WaPo all you want, just head on over to twitter.com/realdonaldtrump and spend like 3 minutes taking a look for yourself!
posted by soren_lorensen at 4:06 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Warren Gamaliel Harding, First of his Name, Son of Tryon of the Blooming Grove, Brother of George II Tryon II, Leader of the Land of the Shining Sea!
posted by stolyarova at 4:07 PM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


Thank you for signing up for Warren G. Harding facts! You will now receive daily texts with facts about Warren G. Harding!
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:08 PM on September 7, 2016 [42 favorites]


Peter Daou
‏@peterdaou

Really, @nytimes, really? "Joyless, unappealing slog." Another male reporter sneers at #Hillary's supporters.


Ross Douthat! Christ, what an asshole.
posted by Sophie1 at 4:10 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Huffington Post has a very interesting long read on Ivanka-- her childhood and the influence she seems to have over her father. I highly recommend it. Is Ivanka for Real?
Earlier this summer, a friend of Jared and Ivanka's made an interesting point about the dates of some of Donald’s worst tweets of the campaign. Notice how they came while the couple was off the grid observing the Sabbath or another Jewish holiday, he told me.

On the day of the Orlando nightclub massacre, while Ivanka would be celebrating Shavuot, the anniversary of the day Jews received the Torah from God, her father badly undermined his argument that he would be a responsible leader during a crisis by tweeting, “Appreciate the congrats for being right on Islamic terrorism.” A few weeks later, on the morning of Saturday, July 2, he tweeted the now-famous six-pointed star atop an image that also included Hilary Clinton, a pile of cash and the words “most corrupt candidate ever.” Several Sabbaths after that, Trump retweeted another meme (tangentially related to a character named Pepe the Frog) that tickled the white supremacists who support his campaign. And a few more Sabbaths after that, he used the horrific gun death of Dwyane Wade’s cousin to boast that black Americans will “VOTE TRUMP!”
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


They were just about to take off when Ivanka spotted a distressed Marla rushing toward the plane. Ivanka tapped Donald to alert him to the figure on the tarmac below. Maybe, she thought, he could tell the pilot to cut the engines. But Donald merely raised his hands. Pretty soon his wife was just a speck on the ground.

“Come on, Dad,” Ivanka said, once they were airborne. “She’s just five minutes late.”

“No, Ivanka,” he replied. “You have to be on time.”
While there has been no shortage of evidence that Donald Trump is an asshole, once in a while I still read something about him that makes me go Jesus Christ what a fucking asshole.
posted by stolyarova at 4:13 PM on September 7, 2016 [60 favorites]


Wait that's [real]?
posted by spitbull at 4:16 PM on September 7, 2016


While Ivanka has made her own bed and seems no better than she should be, it's hard not to feel a twinge of pity for someone who was raised to be in the daughtering business. She's been a parentified child all her life.
posted by Countess Elena at 4:18 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


More assholeness: Trump’s Alias “John Baron” Threatened An Author Writing A Book On Him In The 1980s
“It was chilling,” Tuccille told BuzzFeed News. “It was chilling because I assumed that John Baron was a higher-up in his organization and that he was threatening me.”

“I think it was so-called John Baron who said I wouldn’t have a pair of socks left to my name if I went ahead with the book,” Tuccille said.

He continued, “I was spooked enough to go home and put all my assets in my wife’s name at the time, praying that she wouldn’t want to divorce me. I figured it was safer in her hands with Trump’s lawyers coming at me.”
Wait that's [real]?

Yes. It's from the HuffPo article about Ivanka.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:19 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


why is it so mysterious that Ivanka is just as big an asshole as the rest of them?
posted by zutalors! at 4:20 PM on September 7, 2016 [15 favorites]


That mentality—if you try to stop me vandalizing your sign, you're vandalizing me—is so insane I can't believe it would be verbalized if it weren't for the general lowering of standards of discourse produced by this wretched election season.

Insane it may be, but it's lurking just under the surface for a lot of white men. I know a little posse of young, conservative/libertarian, tell-it-like-it-is, anti-PC white dudes who post endless memes on Facebook and periodically get into chuckle contests over who can be the edgiest edgelord. They get a good laugh out of baiting people they see as politically correct, daring them to get angry. Sometimes they post memes about Donald Trump from a page called "The God Emperor Trump." I find that page darkly fascinating, because its content skirts the line between ironic jingoism and genuine adulation so fluidly that I don't think its members can tell which one they're actually engaging in.

Anyway, the one thing that these guys cannot fucking abide is when someone anonymously reports one of their posts and Facebook deletes it. They are deeply angered and hurt by this censorship, by the fact that Facebook reserves the right to moderate what they say, and ESPECIALLY by the fact that someone on their friends list can report their bullshit anonymously. They consider it cowardly and childish. "Fuck you, Mark Zuckerberg" has become a refrain, and the #FreeMilo hashtag made the rounds when Twitter permabanned him.

In short, white men are accustomed to forcing the people around them to put up with their shit silently and passively. These particular white men really love it when someone confronts them angrily on the internet, presumably because it's a demonstration of their unflappable power without the stress of a face-to-face altercation. But my God, you should hear them yelp when they encounter limits or consequences to what they say.
posted by Vic Morrow's Personal Vietnam at 4:22 PM on September 7, 2016 [45 favorites]


And Ivanka may also have adopted some of her father’s borderline business practices. The Trump Organization and its offshoots have a long history of paying its contractors late, insufficiently or not at all. Over the last 30 years, according to an analysis done by USA Today, Donald has been involved in around 3,500 lawsuits, many of which concern his tendency not to pay people for the work they’ve done. When asked about this record this June, both Donald and Ivanka “shrugged off the lawsuits and others claims of non-payment,” according to USA Today. The newspaper summed up their response like so: “If a company or worker [Donald] hires isn’t paid fully … it’s because the Trump Organization was unhappy with the work.”

Ivanka seems to have made use of this approach with one of her own brands, Ivanka Trump Fine Jewelry. [snip] According to a lawsuit filed in the New York Supreme Court, a company her brand partnered with, Madison Avenue Diamonds, currently owes a jewelry manufacturer named KGK $2.4 million, plus interest.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:23 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


During the Republican National Convention, NBC’s Savannah Guthrie asked Ivanka about the behavior of certain delegates on the floor—particularly those who were hurling crass language at Hillary Clinton. “Sometimes you hear chants like ‘lock her up’ or ‘guilty,’” Guthrie noted. “Are you comfortable with all that?”
Ivanka smiled widely at Guthrie and replied, “It is certainly exciting. And it is a major production.”


Like? This is disgusting.
posted by zutalors! at 4:27 PM on September 7, 2016 [27 favorites]


The GOP had a great pie chart up on their twitter account. They deleted it but thankfully Steve Koczela grabbed a screen cap.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [25 favorites]


I've been listening to some Keepin' It 1600 episodes today, and they have mentioned numerous times that certain elements of the press are desperately "afraid of being labeled as biased". This bit is nothing new.

What is striking, though, is that when they bring up this fear, it's almost always been about fear of being accused of unfairly labeling Trump's behavior as racist. However, I never seem hear--anywhere--about the press being afraid of being labeled as "sexist" when reporting on Clinton.

I wonder why that is. /s
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 4:34 PM on September 7, 2016 [22 favorites]


Fox News’ War on Women Jeet Heer for New Republic
The fact that these incidents of harassment were so common may have contributed to why no one at Fox came forward or filed a lawsuit until now. Ailes’s attitudes about women permeated the very air of the network, from the exclusive hiring of attractive women to the strictly enforced skirts-and-heels dress code to the “leg cam” that lingers on female panelists’ crossed legs on air. It was hard to complain about something that was so normalized. Other senior executives harassed women, too. “Anyone who claimed there was a hostile work environment was seen as a complainer,” says a former Fox employee who says Ailes harassed her. “Or that they can’t take a joke.”

Sherman’s point about Fox’s hiring practices could be extended not just to how women were displayed on screen, but how they were discussed in general. In “70 awful displays of sexism on Fox News,” a supercut video by watchdog group Media Matters, one can hear such gems as Erick Erickson saying men should be “dominant” over wives, Lou Dobbs bemoaning the fact “women have become the breadwinners in this country and a lot of other concerning and troubling statistics,” Brit Hume lamenting “this sort of feminized atmosphere where we exist today,” and Rush Limbaugh chortling, “I love the women’s movement, especially walking behind it.”
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:37 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump says his genitals will have 30 days to figure out a plan to defeat ISIS

Donald Trump: I Will Build the Most Unnecessary Military in the World
posted by homunculus at 4:40 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Jared Yates Sexton ‏@JYSexton
If Trump mounts the jet in the background of the Commander-In-Chief Forum and rides it like a mechanical bull...is that a pivot?
Only an hour and twenty until we find out.
posted by Talez at 4:42 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


Pointless pre - forum Star Spangled Banner rendition on the Intrepid.

Like seriously that was the most pointless thing I've ever seen.
posted by zutalors! at 4:43 PM on September 7, 2016


The JCPL has inexplicably fallen to moderate today, I think my cortisol receptors are burnt out?

I don't understand the WaPo/SurveyMonkey poll. Is this thing for real? It's all over the place. You can't be up 21 in Alabama and only 2 in Mississippi. That don't make no sense at all. And Clinton +1 in Texas but only +2 in Michigan and Wisconsin? Seems like a Magic Eight Ball kinda poll.
posted by Justinian at 4:44 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Where are you watching that doesn't have idiotic talking heads?
posted by Talez at 4:45 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


SurveyMonkey

SurveyMonkey

Hmm
posted by Yowser at 4:46 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh man, that God Emperor Trump stuff is just intolerable. Some of my veteran friends have taken up with that shit and it is in actually enraging. They say things like "I dedicate this achievement to God Emperor Trump" and act like they're just trying to "troll liberals" but I think aren't actually kidding anymore and they may actually vote.
posted by corb at 4:47 PM on September 7, 2016 [8 favorites]


Where are you watching that doesn't have idiotic talking heads?

MSNBC cut to the anthem.
posted by zutalors! at 4:47 PM on September 7, 2016


Look, regardless of what you feel about the anthem, this is the one place it is totally, 100% appropriate. The forum is taking place on the Intrepid, a ship that helped defeat the Axis, and the audience is entirely military members, veterans, and military families.
posted by corb at 4:49 PM on September 7, 2016 [14 favorites]


You(plural), not you(singular), I want to stress in case that was unclear.
posted by corb at 4:51 PM on September 7, 2016


Will they repeat the anthem in the second segment and will Donald remember to remove his hat?
posted by spitbull at 4:51 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


70 Awful Displays Of Sexism On Fox News (Mentioned above)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 4:51 PM on September 7, 2016


Ivanka smiled widely at Guthrie and replied, “It is certainly exciting. And it is a major production.”

I wonder what it's like to be Chelsea Clinton. Ivanka's her friend, supposedly. Could you be friends with someone who smiled widely and talked about how exciting it is to hear people scream for your mother's head on a stick? Because I'd tear a strip off that "friend" as soon as look at them, were it me...
posted by palomar at 4:51 PM on September 7, 2016 [33 favorites]


Be careful what content you pretend to share.
posted by defenestration at 4:51 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


For people not in the know, 88 is a white supremacist numerical code for "Heil Hitler."

Well, as one of the organizers of the letter was this man, I think we can be 100% sure that is a coincidence.


I'm not sure who the clerk of the chancellery of neo-Nazi dog whistles is in the Trump organization, but it's not like they'd need to be a mathematical genius or get General Shachnow's buy in on having exactly 88 generals sign the letter as some kind of dog whistle masterstroke. All kinds of "Oh, we didn't get your e-mail in time." games could be played.

Is it probably a coincidence? Yeah, probably. Is there is enough "Holy shit, did they really just say that on TV!?!?!" stuff that's gone down the pike already that I'd be willing to bet more than the price of lunch on it? Tell you what, your choice, 5 Guys or Qdoba.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 4:52 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh man, that God Emperor Trump stuff is just intolerable. Some of my veteran friends have taken up with that shit and it is in actually enraging. They say things like "I dedicate this achievement to God Emperor Trump" and act like they're just trying to "troll liberals" but I think aren't actually kidding anymore and they may actually vote.

Trump's entire candidacy from start to finish is trolling liberals. It's like a whole heap of spiteful right wingers got together in a room and said "how can we make liberals shit their fucking pants while we laugh our asses off?".
posted by Talez at 4:53 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


They say things like "I dedicate this achievement to God Emperor Trump" and act like they're just trying to "troll liberals" but I think aren't actually kidding anymore and they may actually vote.

If the rise of the alt-right out of chan culture has showed us anything, it's that people who are ironically pretending to be Nazis are, 9 times out of 10, actually just Nazis. Either they were all along and were to cowardly to do it in earnest or they pretended so hard they forgot they were just pretending, but either way the result is the same: Nazis.
posted by soren_lorensen at 4:54 PM on September 7, 2016 [49 favorites]


I assume there's something wrong with this idea, but it isn't obvious to me, so:

What would be the result if people who felt that the MSM was unfairly biased in Trump's favor a) directly complained about this to the media in question, loudly and often, and/or b) stopped consuming said media and publicly explained why? Has this been tried?
posted by Spathe Cadet at 4:54 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


"What is your goal as moderator?"

Let's not beat around the bush. He needs to call people on bullshit.
posted by Talez at 4:56 PM on September 7, 2016


Has there ever been a "commander in chief forum" before? how did this come about???
posted by OHenryPacey at 4:56 PM on September 7, 2016


Has there ever been a "commander in chief forum" before? how did this come about???

Nope. It was the work of a (new?) veterans group.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 4:59 PM on September 7, 2016




Look, regardless of what you feel about the anthem, this is the one place it is totally, 100% appropriate. The forum is taking place on the Intrepid, a ship that helped defeat the Axis, and the audience is entirely military members, veterans, and military families.


It has nothing to do with how I feel about the anthem. This whole "Commander in Chief forum" is a pretty silly farce. Are we going to have the anthem before every debate? It's silly.

I know what the Intrepid is.
posted by zutalors! at 4:59 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


So how do I get to the direct stream with Matt Lauer instead of all this bullshit?
posted by Talez at 4:59 PM on September 7, 2016


Has there ever been a "commander in chief forum" before?

Seriously. I've been wondering where this came from too. I thought I'd been paying pretty close attention to the last several elections, and I definitely don't remember this.
posted by diogenes at 5:00 PM on September 7, 2016


I mean we also didn't have an "Hour with the Speaker" before either, but Paul Ryan got one. This whole cycle is cable news trying to pick up pieces from Fox.
posted by zutalors! at 5:02 PM on September 7, 2016


good lord those chairs look uncomfortable
posted by OHenryPacey at 5:04 PM on September 7, 2016


Over/under on how long after Lauer's admonition to avoid attacking the other candidate Trump begins attacking Clinton: 41 seconds.
posted by Justinian at 5:04 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


The sponsoring group is the IAVA
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:04 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Are there pillows?
posted by danapiper at 5:04 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


Here's the press release from the group hosting the forum. It seems this is the first such event in a presidential election.
posted by diogenes at 5:05 PM on September 7, 2016


HRC looking composed. My wife just said: PLEASE DON'T COUGH and that is my big worry here too. Fucking breitbart.
posted by dis_integration at 5:05 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Fucking email again
posted by Countess Elena at 5:05 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Straight to emails. Straight to the fucking emails.
posted by Talez at 5:06 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Forum stream fired up. LET'S DO THIS COMRADES.
posted by rp at 5:06 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm telling myself I'm not going to watch the Trump one.
posted by zutalors! at 5:07 PM on September 7, 2016


"The word 'judgement'" is his pivot from military leadership to her fucking email.

Hit job from the start.
posted by spitbull at 5:07 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


i can't believe emails is the #2 question. fucking bullshit. he better put trump over the fire too.
posted by OHenryPacey at 5:07 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1Sk1g52GFs

seems to work
posted by Golem XIV at 5:07 PM on September 7, 2016


I switched over from the Paralympics, which I watched thinking, boy, it sure is great that I don't have to listen to that idiot Matt Lauer
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:07 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Fucking email again

At the risk of reopening the can of worms Keeping it 1600 had a good discussion of this on yesterday's episode.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:08 PM on September 7, 2016


Jesus Christ this is a fucking joke.

HRC has the patience of a saint.
posted by Talez at 5:09 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


i can't believe emails is the #2 question. fucking bullshit. he better put trump over the fire too.

Hahaha it's Matt Lauer.
posted by zutalors! at 5:09 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


So basically, veterans groups have been more and more frustrated over the last fifteen years of war that questions about them have been few in the debates. Paul Reichoff, the ED of IAVA, which is the biggest org for post 9/11 vets, has been doing a lot of work and negotiations behind the scenes, and since both candidates live in the same city IAVA has its headquarters, they managed to make it happen. It's very exciting and a HUGE deal for vets.
posted by corb at 5:09 PM on September 7, 2016 [11 favorites]


And they're going to hammer her on this all night.
posted by Talez at 5:10 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


All I can say is Lauer better go after Trump with both barrels if this is how they're going to handle the email thing.
posted by Justinian at 5:10 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


fuck this. #3, emails. just fuck this.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 5:10 PM on September 7, 2016 [7 favorites]


Questions are chosen or influenced by IAVA members, I believe - we were polled on what we wanted asked.
posted by corb at 5:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's very exciting and a HUGE deal for vets

boy are they squandering this with going on about the emails
posted by zutalors! at 5:11 PM on September 7, 2016 [27 favorites]


The email thing is bullshit but if they go as hard at Trump on his weak points it might be worth it; I don't think he has ever faced a sustained and consistent grilling on his weakspots in a forum where he could not escape and had to take it.
posted by Justinian at 5:12 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now with the hawk shit.
posted by rp at 5:15 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Here's the bashing from the left!
posted by Talez at 5:15 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


I feel like we need to help make an escape plan for the Merediths on election night
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:00 PM on September 7 [+] [!]


*raises hand* I'm going to need some directions to that boat, please.

(And I'm gonna need that boat to be well stocked with booze.)
posted by kythuen at 5:16 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


What? An Iran nuclear deal question? What is this? Shouldn't we talk about, like, Benghazi or something?
posted by Justinian at 5:17 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


They're not going to go hard after Trump. The only benefit here is for Hillary to go on record in front of vets about Iraq and emails so that when Trump tries to hit her on the debates on it she'll have had a bit of practice and precedent speaking to it in front of those who matter the most in terms of decisions about war.
posted by zutalors! at 5:17 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm going to need some directions to that boat, please.

Merediths and Steves first!
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:17 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


where's the vince foster and whitewater questions? fuck this.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 5:18 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Shut him down, Hillary. Give me a fucking break.
posted by rp at 5:19 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


"We don't have time for your detailed answer... but let me follow up by repeating my gotcha question."
posted by zennie at 5:19 PM on September 7, 2016 [9 favorites]


The stacking of the deck here is appalling. Mr. Trump has no record of consequence on which to stand, he's never had to make complex decisions about difficult situations with lives on the line. There's simply no way that the two candidates will receive treatment that's in any way equitable. I'm a little surprised that Secretary Clinton agreed to walk into such a clearly biased forum.
posted by wintermind at 5:19 PM on September 7, 2016 [18 favorites]


Yeah this seems unnecessarily adversarial. I'd have tough questions for her but they wouldn't be any of these bullshit questions.
posted by dis_integration at 5:19 PM on September 7, 2016


Corb, you're the closest to the target audience here I think. How's it going?
posted by Francis at 5:19 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


An undecided voter! They found themselves a unicorn.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 5:20 PM on September 7, 2016 [6 favorites]


If this is direction IAVA or whatever is going, I can't imagine another Democratic candidate wasting their time being subjected to the inquisition. Great way to get veteran's issues to the forefront. This is why Democrats rightly think that the military is a lost demographic. Why would she ever agree to another of these?
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:21 PM on September 7, 2016 [13 favorites]


More descriptions of the action and what y'all are reacting to please some of us are on bedtime duty again
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:21 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


She's showing strong stuff despite the petty bullsht being tossed at her. She's converting regularly now that she's over the email crap for now.
posted by spitbull at 5:21 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm so curious how Trump is going to handle this format. He can't speak coherently for extended periods. Is Lauer going to let him just rant and ramble?
posted by diogenes at 5:22 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


She appears to be knowledgable and well-briefed.
posted by wintermind at 5:22 PM on September 7, 2016


They might go after Trump, actually. It might not seem like it yet, but IAVA leadership is pretty all in for Clinton. And she got thrown a great question just now and is taking it very well. She's had a lot of personal meetings with IAVA before this forum. Relax, she'll do great.
posted by corb at 5:22 PM on September 7, 2016 [15 favorites]


Is Lauer going to let him just rant and ramble?

Probably.
posted by drezdn at 5:23 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Now about military suicides.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:23 PM on September 7, 2016


What petty bullshit besides emails? I'm imagining like Lauer going "Emails, nu?" And waggling his eyebrows for 5 minutes
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:23 PM on September 7, 2016


I'm so curious how Trump is going to handle this format. He can't speak coherently for extended periods. Is Lauer going to let him just rant and ramble?

"Well suicide is bad, we're going to get them therapists, the best therapists and they'll be fine once we get them those therapists".
posted by Talez at 5:23 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


They might go after Trump, actually.

Exactly. This is way harsher than I thought it would be (though this latest question was pretty straight down the middle. Maybe they want to finish with some softballs) but until we see how Trump is treated I'm suspending judgment.

If Trump gets hammered he could fall apart live on TV.
posted by Justinian at 5:24 PM on September 7, 2016 [3 favorites]


Defeat of ISIS is HC's top anti-terrorism goal. Will support Iraq and Syria, but no ground troops.
posted by wintermind at 5:24 PM on September 7, 2016


Now about willingness to deploy troops.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:25 PM on September 7, 2016


To be fair her answer on the suicide question was not a lot better than "we need to do more."
posted by spitbull at 5:26 PM on September 7, 2016


Syria is a Kobayashi Maru. There's no winning move. Only a least bad move. Until people realize that they're not going to be happy about how anyone handles Syria.
posted by Talez at 5:26 PM on September 7, 2016 [14 favorites]


Any hoarseness yet? She got a bottle of water or anything 😅
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:26 PM on September 7, 2016


Jesus fuck, asking whether she cares about attacks in the US.
DELETE UR ACCOUNT
posted by rp at 5:26 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


Now about terror attacks on our soil.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:26 PM on September 7, 2016


Ramadi, Fallujah, Mosul... do you think the vulgar talking yam knows any of those?
posted by jammer at 5:26 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]



If Trump gets hammered he could fall apart live on TV.


Just like a Clinton Blackberry.
posted by zutalors! at 5:27 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Terror attacks on US soil - are they a fact of life, can HC guarantee Americans will be safer after her first term?

Need to be smarter, disrupt online radicalization. Need to pass law banning terrorist watch list members from purchasing firearms. We cannot turn on Muslims.
posted by wintermind at 5:27 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Need to pass law banning terrorist watch list members from purchasing firearms.

ugh disagree so hard.
posted by zutalors! at 5:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


Ramadi, Fallujah, Mosul... do you think the vulgar talking yam knows any of those?

"I will bomb the shit out of those Iranians!"
posted by Talez at 5:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Matt Lauer tried to shame her with the "we tried not to talk about the other guy" stuff. Asshole.
posted by zutalors! at 5:28 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


replaying the email shit on the stream
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 5:28 PM on September 7, 2016


And Scene!
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016 [2 favorites]


Do we know of trump got to watch her part?

If they go easy on him it will be maddening. But remember all he has to do is not lose his shit and they will say he passed the "commander in chief" test.

I'm sure Kellyanne checked the Ativan drip.
posted by spitbull at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


She brought up Trump what, one time? Let's see how Trump does with bringing up Clinton.
posted by Justinian at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016


Halftime hitpieces.
posted by rp at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016


I'm not going to relitigate that, just trying to describe the goings-on.
posted by wintermind at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016


A half hour for "who will be the best Commander in Chief"? Seriously? Fail.
posted by zutalors! at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Pleez, pleez ask Trump a question about cyberwarfare.
posted by puddledork at 5:29 PM on September 7, 2016 [4 favorites]


I see the Trump Family marching in
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:30 PM on September 7, 2016


"Distrust, but verify" wasn't for me, but it was a nice touch.
posted by box at 5:30 PM on September 7, 2016


this stream Is pro Trump but not obnoxious. Currently muting commercials.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:31 PM on September 7, 2016


Clinton's answers were good, detailed, solid. Trump's are going to be crap.

Tomorrow, Trump's going to be bragging about how many more questions he answered than Hillary.
posted by zennie at 5:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


Wouldn't a question about the Khans be appropriate for Trump? Since this is about veterans?
posted by zutalors! at 5:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]


He looks scared.
posted by spitbull at 5:31 PM on September 7, 2016


I was seeing a Trump ad in Vermont. Is that national, or did they just decide to piss away a few ten thousand?
posted by Countess Elena at 5:31 PM on September 7, 2016 [1 favorite]


The crowd appeared to all clap for Hillary but not Trump? Did I see that wrong?
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:31 PM on September 7, 2016


He does look nervous, and older than I noticed.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:32 PM on September 7, 2016


Need to pass law banning terrorist watch list members from purchasing firearms.

man i am about as pro gun control as you can get and really wish the democrats hadn't chosen this for their wedge on the issue. no evidence the terror watch list is useful for any purpose, let alone arbitrarily restricting a constitutional right. just make it harder for EVERYONE to casually purchase firearms already.
posted by murphy slaw at 5:32 PM on September 7, 2016 [15 favorites]


WTF was that music when Trump came out?
posted by guiseroom at 5:32 PM on September 7, 2016


Nope. He's not popular with veterans, much less NYC veterans.
posted by corb at 5:32 PM on September 7, 2016 [5 favorites]