-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Serious US Election Thread (read post #2014)
- Thread starter Bughouse
- Start date
- Status
Trump was actually still winning white women by like 4 points or something before this. After this, he's probably in a tie at best.
The lead among women overall for democrats is so large because the lead among white women for republicans is usually modest and the lead among minority women for democrats is enormous.
The lead among women overall for democrats is so large because the lead among white women for republicans is usually modest and the lead among minority women for democrats is enormous.
I don't think it'll really amount to much tbh it was like over 10 years ago and has like nothing to do with his validity as a candidate it's more of just a personal thing
Like yeah it'll likely lose DJ a few voters but I doubt it'll be that significant
Like yeah it'll likely lose DJ a few voters but I doubt it'll be that significant
you're right, it doesnt matter. LUL. trump in the house forever. fuck her right in the pussy. lol.
For what it's worth, Donald Trump is doing worse among all demographics compared to Mitt Romney, barring white working-class men. Even a small change can have a pretty big effect on the election results; for example, if Donald Trump gets a tie among white women while keeping turnout & all other groups constant compared to the 2012 results, North Carolina goes to Clinton; and that's not a very large change considering Mitt Romney won white women with like 55% and considering that Trump was already doing worse among white women than Romney did.
Plus, Trump having a worse performance in almost every demographic compared to Mitt Romney could explain why Arizona is starting to look more and more like a toss-up. Trump is still more likely to win Arizona, but fivethirtyeight Polls-only has it at almost 50/50 and Polls-plus has Clinton more likely to win Arizona than Focus Blast is to miss.
yo Ununhexium is ur life really gonna be that bad under hillary clinton that u gotta support a guy who brags about his ability to sexually assault women whenever he'd like? saying it's a personal thing is very generous of you: you're willing to overlook endorsing sexual assault to support a policy platform thats not even stealthy racism. that is frightening
Well that will sink Trump. All that needs to happen is Clinton not having anything revealed to be terrible about her.
oops
#Nobody2016
oops
#Nobody2016
No I didn't sort through the 2000 plus emails. There is plenty in there for journalists to sift through. But I guess a soundbite of Trump doing something Trump, that is completely stupid and unelectable, is more pleasing to people (especially those who sold their sole's for Hillary) than to admit that she is an absolute criminal who shouldn't be allowed to run. I wish that Trump had something illegal drop on him in March or April so he could have been removed and a decent candidate could run against Hillary. It would make all the soundbites people keep drumming up to distract people from Hillary's corruption and criminality way less relevant.
He clearly didn't read the emails either, or he did and just doesn't care. Either way both mainstream candidates suck. Literally the worst two people in america are running. Either we are on a giant elaborated show of Jackass or by the end of October, Ashton Kutcher is going to pop out of nowhere and say we all got punk'd and give us two people to choose from who don't suck ass
I haven't read all 2500, but I've skimmed through a bunch of them, including all the ones referenced by conservative outlets like Breitbart (figuring that they'd cherrypick the worst examples). And the answer is.... nothing surprising?
Thus far the worst of it is:
Clinton openly admitting that she is pro-trade. Shocker! (If you ever thought Clinton was anything BUT pro-trade, you haven't actually paid attention to any of her positions. Even when she backtracked on TPP she didn't say it was because she was anti-trade, but rather that she had come to see specific problems with TPP in particular.)
Clinton confessing that she's a bit out of touch with the middle class. Oh no! Wait, here's the full quote in context, where she's actually talking about how the economic reality of today is very different from what it was when she was growing up:
Oh wait, the BIG ONE that everyone seems to make a big deal about - Clinton saying that you should have a public position and a private position! Oh god it's our worst fears confirmed! This has all been an act! Clinton has been lying this whole time! Or maybe, you know, she is just referencing a commonly acknowledged issue with modern politics. No way to tell! Certainly no way to, say, read the whole quote in context:
Thus far the worst of it is:
Clinton openly admitting that she is pro-trade. Shocker! (If you ever thought Clinton was anything BUT pro-trade, you haven't actually paid attention to any of her positions. Even when she backtracked on TPP she didn't say it was because she was anti-trade, but rather that she had come to see specific problems with TPP in particular.)
Clinton confessing that she's a bit out of touch with the middle class. Oh no! Wait, here's the full quote in context, where she's actually talking about how the economic reality of today is very different from what it was when she was growing up:
Yeah, not quite as bad as Breitbart and their ilk are making it.
Oh wait, the BIG ONE that everyone seems to make a big deal about - Clinton saying that you should have a public position and a private position! Oh god it's our worst fears confirmed! This has all been an act! Clinton has been lying this whole time! Or maybe, you know, she is just referencing a commonly acknowledged issue with modern politics. No way to tell! Certainly no way to, say, read the whole quote in context:
Goddamnit I don't even really like Hillary Clinton, but she is no worse than most major Democratic Party candidates we've had over the past twenty years, and she is miles ahead of even the "best" Republican candidate that was in the field this cycle. To even try to compare this crap to Trump is such a massive case of false equivalency, and to utter cutesy little feel-good statements like "oh I hate them both" or "I'm voting my conscience" is to completely ignore the actual political realities in play here.
Last edited:
i don't agree with clinton (really just the democratic party as a whole) on lots of policy issues, but i never really held a major fear that she's this corrupt, two faced, evil politician that'll do anything she can to win. it seemed more like an overblown fear driven by the alt right that eventually became a mainstream republican opinion. anyways, between the last debate and these leaks that were supposedly such a major deal in the post above, she looks much more sensible and much less corrupt than i previously thought. we all say things we wouldn't publicly say behind closed doors, but when you compare what she says behind closed doors to what trump recently said... the difference between the two is absolutely hilarious.
I doubt many Trump supporters will care because let's be real, if you're voting for Donald Trump then you probably either don't have much respect for women or are so entrenched in partisan politics that if Jesus Christ incarnate descended from the heavens and told you to vote Democrat you still wouldn't do it. More importantly however not only will these comments drive many undecided liberals to actually hold their nose and vote for her but the comments come right at a time when in the course of a normal political cycle the news headlines would be about how Clinton lied to her base on free trade and Wall Street.
Even better for Clinton is that this comes right before the debate, which gives her a perfect defensive pivot at any point in time if things start looking tough. Trump wants to mention Bill's women problems? Ask 'are those the same women you want to grab right in the pussy Donald?' I think the full extent of the drive towards Clinton among undecided voters as a result of this is probably yet to come.
In other words yes Podesta's e-mails are bad (and there are supposedly more coming according to Wikileaks courtesy of a George Soros hack), but Trump's comments will hurt him infinitely worse. He's created an ironclad ceiling for his support that it's hard to imagine any amount of disenchantment among the liberal base that could cause places like Colorado or Pennsylvania to be in any real doubt (and will probably ensure she runs up the score in places like Florida and North Carolina to boot).
I hope that these comments will ensure Johnson gets the 5% national vote necessary to get the Libertarian Party on the ballot + federal funding in future election years, because I'm kind of tired of every debate having two partisan sides with no real discussion. I've got no particular basis for thinking this will happen, however.
Even better for Clinton is that this comes right before the debate, which gives her a perfect defensive pivot at any point in time if things start looking tough. Trump wants to mention Bill's women problems? Ask 'are those the same women you want to grab right in the pussy Donald?' I think the full extent of the drive towards Clinton among undecided voters as a result of this is probably yet to come.
In other words yes Podesta's e-mails are bad (and there are supposedly more coming according to Wikileaks courtesy of a George Soros hack), but Trump's comments will hurt him infinitely worse. He's created an ironclad ceiling for his support that it's hard to imagine any amount of disenchantment among the liberal base that could cause places like Colorado or Pennsylvania to be in any real doubt (and will probably ensure she runs up the score in places like Florida and North Carolina to boot).
I hope that these comments will ensure Johnson gets the 5% national vote necessary to get the Libertarian Party on the ballot + federal funding in future election years, because I'm kind of tired of every debate having two partisan sides with no real discussion. I've got no particular basis for thinking this will happen, however.
I think this election will be the closest one since the 2000 ones. Only 1 month to go and its been largely a toss up with clinton being in the lead a lot of the time. I am with trump because i agree with his policies more than candiates. Sure he has said some elitist/questionable things but i feel like he is the best bet. A common thing with this election is that a lot of people of my generation dont like either trump or clinton. Theoretically some else could win but the chances of that are very unlikely.
you really should, it contains this beautiful and totally important bit of information. But yeah, I went through all 2060 of them and there is literally nothing interesting in there unless you like a bunch of CTR related emails (theres like a bajillion). Something worth knowing in case you want to wade through these things: a shit ton are just straight up copies of news articles, transcripts from debates / news programs, tweet recaps, and automated messages from various subscriptions. It took like 7 hours but heres pretty much all the things which were interesting or amusing:
- This email on shit HRC surrogates would talk about back in like 2015
- A transcript from a town hall debate from the primaries
- This one looked all CRYPTIC and shit but it wasn't anything big. literally zero content
- If you can read this one contact stockholm, they owe u a nobel prize
- #Obama2012
- This one is kinda on HRCs position on Israel-Iran sorta nothing really big in there like at all
- Copy of a news article from yahoo
- This one seems sp00ky but its about a Clinton Foundation project
- I was hoping this one would be making fun of Stein for being retarded but sadly it's just a magazine asking for a position statement
- Went into this expecting people talking about a date and left sad. We need more love in this world!
- The Clinton Foundation sold nuclear weapons to Canada
- The job hunt is real
- Literally a speech
- I really recommend reading this one in depth tbh
- They totally fucked
- This email actually has some pretty interesting information and it said DO NOT CIRCULATE so naturally I'm circulating it. It's basically a look into the nature of HRCs position on the Iran deal and its implications on US-Israeli foreign relations, etc
- This is literally the most misleading title of all time
- More stuff about Iran
- I too am incredulous
- Avaaz sent me an email about this same thing
- AIPAC / Iran shit worth a read
- Invest in canned food and a nuclear bunker. Shit. Is. Real.
- He dead now
- You could probably spin this to make Podesta appear anti-Israel
- The only thing noteworthy about this is that he needed to clarify that his friend is from the real world
- He made a paypal account!!!!!!
- Could be interesting
- loooool
- This email looked like it could have been interesting and then it wasn't
- Lol what the fuck?
- Slightly relevant
- What in the hell is this dude subscribed to?
- Standard campaign emails
- The GOP probably probably wishes they had Brad Pitt right about now
- Ethnic outreach updates
- Some shit about the Clinton Cash book (just a copy of a WSJ article)
- This ones about Bernie supporters and totally about rigging the primary against him
- This email is someone communicating suggestions about Hillary and her stance on Israel and is a very substantive read
btw: you really should start **looking** in to the sort of things you claim are **terrible news** or some sort of **smoking gun** because it's not a good look when they turn out to be nothing
Last edited:
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/313
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/820
Just thought you should add those to your list of emails. Coordinating with Superpacs is a felony, although the FBI could just defend her on intent. That got her out of worse crimes
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/820
Just thought you should add those to your list of emails. Coordinating with Superpacs is a felony, although the FBI could just defend her on intent. That got her out of worse crimes
actually you missed a few other parts of that email chain and if you took the time to figure out who the people in that chain were you'd find:
- Kristina Schake, deputy communications director for the clinton campaign
- Robby Mook, clinton campaign manager
- Jim Margolis, media strategist
- Nick Merrill, clinton spokesperson
- Mandy Grunwald, clinton communications advisor
- Jennifer Palmieri, director of communications for the clinton campaign
- and at one point they mentioned the email of Eryn Sepp, who works at the Center for American Progress, but she was never a recipient of those emails
those are all people working for the clinton campaign team talking about getting ahead of a news story, how in the fuck did u think that was a felony? did u even read them?
- Kristina Schake, deputy communications director for the clinton campaign
- Robby Mook, clinton campaign manager
- Jim Margolis, media strategist
- Nick Merrill, clinton spokesperson
- Mandy Grunwald, clinton communications advisor
- Jennifer Palmieri, director of communications for the clinton campaign
- and at one point they mentioned the email of Eryn Sepp, who works at the Center for American Progress, but she was never a recipient of those emails
those are all people working for the clinton campaign team talking about getting ahead of a news story, how in the fuck did u think that was a felony? did u even read them?
Also lmao if you already didn't think that superpacs could coordinate with candidates you're an idiot. There are a zillion loopholes to our bullshit campaign finance law.
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/3pwzi...r-pac---not-coordinating-with-stephen-colbert
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/3pwzi...r-pac---not-coordinating-with-stephen-colbert
Presumably he's referring to the throw-away line "Shouldn't we... get Brock to attack the book" buried in one of those email replies. The assumption is that it refers to David Brock of the Correct The Record SuperPAC, which has long been charged by conservative attack dogs with coordinating with Hillary Clinton's campaign beyond what is permitted.
The problem, of course, is that what is permitted by the FEC is a really big gray fuzzy area. It's easy to say that SuperPACs aren't allowed to coordinate with candidates or their active campaigns, but there are a huge number of exemptions and "safe harbors" built into the FEC code that makes it very unclear what specifically involves coordination. Such exemptions include things like certain online communications, coordinated endorsements and solicitations of other candidates, responses to legislative inquiries, etc. Even in the case where coordinated communications that ARE verboten occur, it's not necessarily a legal penalty at all as long as such communications are then reported to the FEC. It's a big clunky code that tends to err on the side of not restricting money in politics except in extreme circumstances.
Nor is Clinton the only person to play off these gray areas this election cycle. Donald Trump allegedly had key staff members and advisers paid through various SuperPACs rather than through his own campaign. Hell, it looks like the majority of Jeb Bush's campaign was run through SuperPACs.
For the record I don't support our current campaign finance laws, and I do think they need a drastic overhaul. But the email referencing Brock certainly isn't some smoking gun that's going to sink the Hillary campaign. I also find it odd how gleeful most Trump supporters are at his circumvention of IRS regulations to avoid paying Federal taxes because it "isn't illegal," but yet how quick they are to vilify Hillary Clinton for taking advantage of loopholes in campaign finance law.
It's not the scandal to end all scandals for her, its just another example of her being above the law. A lot of politicians get away with pulling that off, some get extreme scrutiny on it while others (like in this case) gets a free pass because they are above everything. The big thing that should have taken her down was the emails and the clinton foundation but thanks to the corruption of the FBI and the director wanting a job in the future instead of doing his job and Bill secretly meeting with Loretta Lynch, all of that just went away like it wasn't a serious crime. But if someone else did it who isn't named Clinton, then they would get punished to the fullest extent of the law.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927
That should have been another damning email. She admits to having two different stances on the issues, talks straight up cronyism with banks, and admitted to the security problems that the state department had with attacks every hour yet she still had the private email server that could be hacked. Worse yet, she deleted 30,000 emails so that any chance of figuring out what happened was gone. She is by far the most corrupt candidate to run for office and so many people have sold their soul to the devil.
And worse yet, the republicans put up Trump against her. The guy is a walking soundbite machine that will give out like five more October surprises to help the media turn attention away from every corrupt thing Clinton has done with insanely stupid shit Trump has said. I keep trying to figure out why we are in a position of absolute shit for choices but then I see the defense of every corrupt thing she has done and I get it. People have sold their soul's to the devil on the left to give the anointed her presidency and in response, people on the right sold their soul's to a hype machine with no soul thinking it could combat them
TheValkyries
proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
Alternatively your criticisms are not even good criticisms considering many on the left think Hillary is foul but it's not over corruption scandals that don't exist.
- Status