The Many Faces of US Politics...

[J70]

Pence's "win" in the veep debate didn't seem to do him much good. Hillary's odds of winning are now up to 78.3%. I could see it reaching the nearly 90% that she had after the convention.

I have a prediction...Hillary will win easily enough, but will have to resign before her first term is over due to scandal

Don't tell me ... Benghazi?

No.....Clinton Foundation.

There was serious pay for play going on and the smoking gun is contained somewhere in the 30,000 deleted emails.

Benghazi was just the tool the Republicans used to suponea her emails (IMHO)

What favours were granted?

Do you have a problem with Citizens United?

All will be revealed in due course

I have a problem with any public official who accepts bribes or who personally benefits from peddling influence or favor

So do you object to Citizens United or not?

Is unlimited funding of political campaigns by corporations and wealthy individuals a good thing?

What's the difference between the Clinton Foundation accepting donations and the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson bankrolling campaigns?

The Kochs ain't doing it for the good of their health!

J70....youre way behind the time. Citizens United has benefited Democrats way more than Republicans


Dont take my word for it.....what about Mother Jones....you most likely couldnt find a more left leaning blog if you tried


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/01/how-dems-learned-love-super-pacs-citizens-united

Yet, its the GOP who are almost all opposed to ending it. And the Dems would be idiots not to play by the rules that the GOP are. It would be like a soccer team going by pre-60s rules when subs weren't allowed while their opponents make full use of a seven man bench and three permitted substitutions.

Regardless, my point is that so many of these people who are crying crocodile tears about the Clinton Foundation are also the same people who believe that corporations and individuals should be free to donate as much as they want to superpacs. Yet, how the hell can a million dollar donation from anyone be classified as anything except pay for play? You think Hillary Clinton or Paul Ryan or whomever is not going to set aside some time for major donors and pick up the phone when they ring? That they're not going to hear them out on whatever their pet issue is and perhaps even have their vote slanted? Its pure hypocrisy.

[Eamonnca1]

I am telling you when this tr**p gets elected she will set the USA back thirty years politically, morally and financially.

That's what you people said about Obama.

[screenexile]

For some bizzare reason many people I speak to in Ireland think Hillary is the reincarnation of Mother Teresa and nothing could be further from the truth

Have you figured out why?

No, but if I were to guess I'd say it's because they get their news from very left of center sources.

I'd say some are also falling for the old "Republican bad/Democrat good" nonsense

Nonsense!! Sure even died in the wool Republican media across America are endorsing her!

What are you on and can I have some?

The only conservative media in the states that is consistent is fox, you lot have the rest in your pocket!

The sheep in Ireland are a joy to behold, they love killing, ignore her many foibles and attack trump without giving thought to balance and objectivity, a bit like those on here who watch the Avery series and knew more than I did even though I lived down the road from the f**kers.

I am telling you when this tr**p gets elected she will set the USA back thirty years politically, morally and financially.

Congratulations laws,the slavery party is back for a third term, Jesus wept!

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/clinton-trump-newspaper-endorsements
Newspaper Endorsements 2016 :

Newspaper                           2012 Endorsement      2016 Endorsement
New York Times                     Obama                    Clinton
Los Angeles Times             Obama                    Clinton
New York Daily News             Romney                    Clinton
Washington Post                     Obama                    Clinton
Chicago Tribune                     Obama                    Johnson
Houston Chronicle             Romney                    Clinton
Arizona Republic   Romney                                    Clinton
Dallas Morning News             Romney                    Clinton
San Francisco Chronicle             Obama                    Clinton
San Diego Union-Tribune     Romney                    Clinton
Sacramento Bee                     Obama                    Clinton
Baltimore Sun                     Obama                    Clinton
South Florida Sun-Sentinel      Romney                    Clinton
Cincinnati Enquirer            Romney                    Clinton
Detroit News                    Romney                    Johnson
Richmond Times-Dispatch    Romney                    Johnson
Akron Beacon Journal            Obama                    Clinton
Chicago Sun-Times            None                            Clinton
Charlotte Observer            Obama                    Clinton
Tampa Bay Times           Obama                    Clinton

Some papers with a history of endorsing Republicans have not only changed sides in this election, but have rebuked Trump with unusually strong language. Here is a sampling of what these conservative-leaning editorial boards have written about Trump:

The Cincinnati Enquirer, which had not endorsed a Democrat for president in nearly a century: "Trump is a clear and present danger to our country...Do we really want someone in charge of our military and nuclear codes who has an impulse control problem? The fact that so many top military and national security officials are not supporting Trump speaks volumes."

The Arizona Republic, which had never endorsed a Democrat for president since its founding in 1890: "Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads. That's beneath our national dignity. When the president of the United States speaks, the world expects substance. Not a blistering tweet."

The Dallas Morning News, which had not endorsed a Democrat for president in more than 75 years: "He plays on fear—exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny—to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control."

The San Diego Union-Tribune, which had not endorsed a Democrat for president in its 148-year history: "Terrible leaders can knock nations off course. Venezuela is falling apart because of the obstinance and delusions of Hugo Chávez and his successor. Argentina is finally coming out of the chaos created by Cristina Kirchner and several of her predecessors. Trump could be our Chávez, our Kirchner. We cannot take that risk."

USA Today, which had never endorsed a presidential candidate (and still stopped short of an actual endorsement of Clinton): "[R]esist the siren song of a dangerous demagogue. By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump."

I enjoyed your comment about Fox News being consistent and the rest bought. Ailes is now heavily involved in Trump's campaign and can anybody deny Hannity is in Trump's pocket? The next time Trump is on his show I think he might just pull his togs down and ride him to show conservatives how much they should vote for Trump!!

[AZOffaly]

The Arizona Republic is endorsing Clinton? Holy Shit.

[seafoid]

I am telling you when this tr**p gets elected she will set the USA back thirty years politically, morally and financially.

That's what you people said about Obama.

financially he has

[LeoMc]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/clinton-trump-newspaper-endorsements
Newspaper Endorsements 2016 :

Newspaper                           2012 Endorsement      2016 Endorsement
New York Times                     Obama                    Clinton
Los Angeles Times             Obama                    Clinton
New York Daily News             Romney                    Clinton
Washington Post                     Obama                    Clinton
Chicago Tribune                     Obama                    Johnson
Houston Chronicle             Romney                    Clinton
Arizona Republic   Romney                                    Clinton
Dallas Morning News             Romney                    Clinton
San Francisco Chronicle             Obama                    Clinton
San Diego Union-Tribune     Romney                    Clinton
Sacramento Bee                     Obama                    Clinton
Baltimore Sun                     Obama                    Clinton
South Florida Sun-Sentinel      Romney                    Clinton
Cincinnati Enquirer            Romney                    Clinton
Detroit News                    Romney                    Johnson
Richmond Times-Dispatch    Romney                    Johnson
Akron Beacon Journal            Obama                    Clinton
Chicago Sun-Times            None                            Clinton
Charlotte Observer            Obama                    Clinton
Tampa Bay Times           Obama                    Clinton

Some papers with a history of endorsing Republicans have not only changed sides in this election, but have rebuked Trump with unusually strong language. Here is a sampling of what these conservative-leaning editorial boards have written about Trump:

The Cincinnati Enquirer, which had not endorsed a Democrat for president in nearly a century: "Trump is a clear and present danger to our country...Do we really want someone in charge of our military and nuclear codes who has an impulse control problem? The fact that so many top military and national security officials are not supporting Trump speaks volumes."

The Arizona Republic, which had never endorsed a Democrat for president since its founding in 1890: "Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads. That's beneath our national dignity. When the president of the United States speaks, the world expects substance. Not a blistering tweet."

The Dallas Morning News, which had not endorsed a Democrat for president in more than 75 years: "He plays on fear—exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny—to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control."

The San Diego Union-Tribune, which had not endorsed a Democrat for president in its 148-year history: "Terrible leaders can knock nations off course. Venezuela is falling apart because of the obstinance and delusions of Hugo Chávez and his successor. Argentina is finally coming out of the chaos created by Cristina Kirchner and several of her predecessors. Trump could be our Chávez, our Kirchner. We cannot take that risk."

USA Today, which had never endorsed a presidential candidate (and still stopped short of an actual endorsement of Clinton): "[R]esist the siren song of a dangerous demagogue. By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump."

I enjoyed your comment about Fox News being consistent and the rest bought. Ailes is now heavily involved in Trump's campaign and can anybody deny Hannity is in Trump's pocket? The next time Trump is on his show I think he might just pull his togs down and ride him to show conservatives how much they should vote for Trump!!

Interesting to see Johnson getting so many endorsements. Would the Chicago Tribune be Republican leaning? I am assuming they only endorsed Obama as the local boy.

[gallsman]

The only conservative media in the states that is consistent is fox, you lot have the rest in your pocket!

The sheep in Ireland are a joy to behold, they love killing, ignore her many foibles and attack trump without giving thought to balance and objectivity, a bit like those on here who watch the Avery series and knew more than I did even though I lived down the road from the f**kers.

I am telling you when this tr**p gets elected she will set the USA back thirty years politically, morally and financially.

Two of Fox's biggest stars are at each other's throats over Trump. Consistency?

You launched into a rant about Avery without watching the show then subsequently watched (or at least claimed to have watch) and came back with your mind changed about Dassey

Morals? You? Really?

[muppet]

Dear God....

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37568235

Trump courts the terminally ill vote...

5 October 2016 Last updated at 21:15 BST
Speaking at a rally in Nevada, Donald Trump has urged the terminally ill to vote for him.
"I don't care how sick you are," the Republican nominee said.
"I don't care if you just came back from the doctor and he gave you the worst possible prognosis, meaning it's over. Doesn't matter. Hang out till November 8. Get out and vote."

[stew]

For some bizzare reason many people I speak to in Ireland think Hillary is the reincarnation of Mother Teresa and nothing could be further from the truth

Have you figured out why?

No, but if I were to guess I'd say it's because they get their news from very left of center sources.

I'd say some are also falling for the old "Republican bad/Democrat good" nonsense

Nonsense!! Sure even died in the wool Republican media across America are endorsing her!

What are you on and can I have some?

The only conservative media in the states that is consistent is fox, you lot have the rest in your pocket!

The sheep in Ireland are a joy to behold, they love killing, ignore her many foibles and attack trump without giving thought to balance and objectivity, a bit like those on here who watch the Avery series and knew more than I did even though I lived down the road from the f**kers.

I am telling you when this tr**p gets elected she will set the USA back thirty years politically, morally and financially.

Congratulations laws,the slavery party is back for a third term, Jesus wept!

did you not change your mind on the dasey kid? despite living down the road......

Nope, I think he deserved another trial and I think he either aided and abetted or knew what his uncle did but said nothing out of fear.

I also think a case could be made that he is mentally unfit to stand trial, the problem is that until the whole thing blows up to the point were the cops, some of them get held accountable for their actions the world will never know the whole truth.

I do feel sorry to a degree for Dassey, he, like the majority of that family lived in fear of the principal involved.

The tv documentary was very is sided, it had to be I suppose to make these two money, the result has been millions of people believing an injustice was done and that these two were innocent, I do not but that but I am appalled at the way the cops conducted themselves, in that regard alone there is enough collusion between cops for a retrial for Dassey, the uncle is as guilty as all get out, an evil twisted bastard who the cops helped shape when they stitched him,up for a crime he did not commit!

[muppet]

For some bizzare reason many people I speak to in Ireland think Hillary is the reincarnation of Mother Teresa and nothing could be further from the truth

Have you figured out why?

No, but if I were to guess I'd say it's because they get their news from very left of center sources.

I'd say some are also falling for the old "Republican bad/Democrat good" nonsense

Nonsense!! Sure even died in the wool Republican media across America are endorsing her!

What are you on and can I have some?

The only conservative media in the states that is consistent is fox, you lot have the rest in your pocket!

The sheep in Ireland are a joy to behold, they love killing, ignore her many foibles and attack trump without giving thought to balance and objectivity, a bit like those on here who watch the Avery series and knew more than I did even though I lived down the road from the f**kers.

I am telling you when this tr**p gets elected she will set the USA back thirty years politically, morally and financially.

Congratulations laws,the slavery party is back for a third term, Jesus wept!

did you not change your mind on the dasey kid? despite living down the road......

Nope, I think he deserved another trial and I think he either aided and abetted or knew what his uncle did but said nothing out of fear.

I also think a case could be made that he is mentally unfit to stand trial, the problem is that until the whole thing blows up to the point were the cops, some of them get held accountable for their actions the world will never know the whole truth.

I do feel sorry to a degree for Dassey, he, like the majority of that family lived in fear of the principal involved.

The tv documentary was very is sided, it had to be I suppose to make these two money, the result has been millions of people believing an injustice was done and that these two were innocent, I do not but that but I am appalled at the way the cops conducted themselves, in that regard alone there is enough collusion between cops for a retrial for Dassey, the uncle is as guilty as all get out, an evil twisted b**tard who the cops helped shape when they stitched him,up for a crime he did not commit!

Stew, there was no suggestion of this, in any regard, by anyone.

The only people Dassey helped (and thus could be argued was intimidated by) were the cops, who drew the 'confession' from him. Ignore the production if you want, but it was cringeworthy watching the tapes of the interviews, where they put every answer into his mouth and called it a confession.

The tapes were (rightly) thrown out of the Avery trial and yet were the only basis for Dassey's conviction, even though there was no other evidence and no single witness, even Avery.

I am not certain about Avery, but I was and still am 110% certain that Dassey's conviction was a complete and very deliberate injustice. What motived the cops and prosecutor to do that to him? After watching that I wouldn't trust those cops, nor that County's justice department, with directing traffic.

If this was Birmingham 6 or Guildford 4 material, you would be up in arms Stew.

[stew]

Fox News is right and everything else is wrong.

Everyone in Ireland is wrong.

Who else?

Your words no one else's!

[muppet]

Fox News is right and everything else is wrong.

Everyone in Ireland is wrong.

Who else?

Your words no one else's!

Your words, no one else's:

The only conservative media in the states that is consistent is fox, you lot have the rest in your pocket!

[whitey]

Pence's "win" in the veep debate didn't seem to do him much good. Hillary's odds of winning are now up to 78.3%. I could see it reaching the nearly 90% that she had after the convention.

I have a prediction...Hillary will win easily enough, but will have to resign before her first term is over due to scandal

Don't tell me ... Benghazi?

No.....Clinton Foundation.

There was serious pay for play going on and the smoking gun is contained somewhere in the 30,000 deleted emails.

Benghazi was just the tool the Republicans used to suponea her emails (IMHO)

What favours were granted?

Do you have a problem with Citizens United?

All will be revealed in due course

I have a problem with any public official who accepts bribes or who personally benefits from peddling influence or favor

So do you object to Citizens United or not?

Is unlimited funding of political campaigns by corporations and wealthy individuals a good thing?

What's the difference between the Clinton Foundation accepting donations and the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson bankrolling campaigns?

The Kochs ain't doing it for the good of their health!

J70....youre way behind the time. Citizens United has benefited Democrats way more than Republicans


Dont take my word for it.....what about Mother Jones....you most likely couldnt find a more left leaning blog if you tried


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/01/how-dems-learned-love-super-pacs-citizens-united

Yet, its the GOP who are almost all opposed to ending it. And the Dems would be idiots not to play by the rules that the GOP are. It would be like a soccer team going by pre-60s rules when subs weren't allowed while their opponents make full use of a seven man bench and three permitted substitutions.

Regardless, my point is that so many of these people who are crying crocodile tears about the Clinton Foundation are also the same people who believe that corporations and individuals should be free to donate as much as they want to superpacs. Yet, how the hell can a million dollar donation from anyone be classified as anything except pay for play? You think Hillary Clinton or Paul Ryan or whomever is not going to set aside some time for major donors and pick up the phone when they ring? That they're not going to hear them out on whatever their pet issue is and perhaps even have their vote slanted? Its pure hypocrisy.

Jaysus you have yourself tied up in knots.  At this point I haven't a clue what you're on about

Citizens United (contrary to your implicit suggestion that it only benefits Republicans) benefits Democrats more than Republicans. ... Per Mother Jones-lol

Well the Clinton Foundation has been hacked ....so I'm not going to go into what the dogs on the street know.....let's wait for the actual information to be released and see if your false equivalency still holds water

[muppet]

Whitey, if your dreams come true and Clinton is sabotaged, you will really enjoy President Trump.

I hope you are keeping an eye on the Tories, who are using very dangerous language about foreigners these days. Remember these are foreigners who are legally in the UK. And they want them out.

[J70]

Pence's "win" in the veep debate didn't seem to do him much good. Hillary's odds of winning are now up to 78.3%. I could see it reaching the nearly 90% that she had after the convention.

I have a prediction...Hillary will win easily enough, but will have to resign before her first term is over due to scandal

Don't tell me ... Benghazi?

No.....Clinton Foundation.

There was serious pay for play going on and the smoking gun is contained somewhere in the 30,000 deleted emails.

Benghazi was just the tool the Republicans used to suponea her emails (IMHO)

What favours were granted?

Do you have a problem with Citizens United?

All will be revealed in due course

I have a problem with any public official who accepts bribes or who personally benefits from peddling influence or favor

So do you object to Citizens United or not?

Is unlimited funding of political campaigns by corporations and wealthy individuals a good thing?

What's the difference between the Clinton Foundation accepting donations and the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson bankrolling campaigns?

The Kochs ain't doing it for the good of their health!

J70....youre way behind the time. Citizens United has benefited Democrats way more than Republicans


Dont take my word for it.....what about Mother Jones....you most likely couldnt find a more left leaning blog if you tried


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/01/how-dems-learned-love-super-pacs-citizens-united

Yet, its the GOP who are almost all opposed to ending it. And the Dems would be idiots not to play by the rules that the GOP are. It would be like a soccer team going by pre-60s rules when subs weren't allowed while their opponents make full use of a seven man bench and three permitted substitutions.

Regardless, my point is that so many of these people who are crying crocodile tears about the Clinton Foundation are also the same people who believe that corporations and individuals should be free to donate as much as they want to superpacs. Yet, how the hell can a million dollar donation from anyone be classified as anything except pay for play? You think Hillary Clinton or Paul Ryan or whomever is not going to set aside some time for major donors and pick up the phone when they ring? That they're not going to hear them out on whatever their pet issue is and perhaps even have their vote slanted? Its pure hypocrisy.

Jaysus you have yourself tied up in knots.  At this point I haven't a clue what you're on about

Citizens United (contrary to your implicit suggestion that it only benefits Republicans) benefits Democrats more than Republicans. ... Per Mother Jones-lol

Well the Clinton Foundation has been hacked ....so I'm not going to go into what the dogs on the street know.....let's wait for the actual information to be released and see if your false equivalency still holds water

I never even hinted that it only benefits Republicans (I acknowledged that Dems would be idiots NOT to avail of it). I said that it's Republicans who are overwhelmingly in favour of it. Hillary is on record as pledging to appoint a Supreme Court justice who will repeal it.

Again, my point is, why would someone get their knickers in a twist over a Clinton Foundation donor being given access to Clinton or some lackey, and not feel the same about billionaires or corporations buying access and influence through PAC donations and retreats and so on.

So please explain how the equivalency is false?