Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Contents Bulletin Scripting in shell and Perl Network troubleshooting History Humor

Presidential debate as a trap staged by neoliberal media

Did the selection of questions for the fist presidential debase were outsourced to Huma Abedin ?

News Anti Trump Hysteria Recommended Books Recommended Links  Two Party System as Polyarchy Neoliberal Brainwashing -- Journalism in the Service of the Powerful Few Hillary "Warmonger" Clinton Hillary Clinton faux feminism Non-Interventionism
DNC emails leak: switfboating Bernie Sanders and blaming Vladimir Putin Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak Obama: a yet another Neocon Hillary Clinton email scandal: Timeline and summary "Clinton Cash" Scandal: Hillary Clinton links to foreign donors and financial industry  Hillary as a pathological liar  Hillary role in Libya disaster Hillary role in Syria bloodbath Lock her up movement
"Fuck the EU": State Department neocons show EU its real place Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA Hillary Clinton and Obama created ISIS New American Militarism  Media-Military-Industrial Complex Neoliberalism as Trotskyism for the rich Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism Pope Francis on danger of neoliberalism Protestant church on danger of neoliberalism
The Iron Law of Oligarchy Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite  Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Myth about intelligent voter  American Exceptionalism Libertarian Philosophy Nation under attack meme Pluralism as a myth Bernie Sanders betrayal of his supporters
The Deep State Corporatist Corruption Predator state Neocons Myth about intelligent voter Resurgence of neo-fascism as reaction on neoliberalism Corporatism National Security State  
Libertarian Philosophy The Iron Law of Oligarchy Principal-agent problem Neoliberalism US Presidential Elections of 2012   Skeptic Quotations Humor Etc

The most interesting part of the debate is that Hillary did not look sick. Was she on amphetamines, or some other high performance stimulant is unknown. There were little that suggested that she has a serious neurological disorder during this debate. 

She also played "I am a woman" card to the full extent preventing more visions attack from Trump who wants to behave as a gentlemen. With her history she can be buried  alive anytime during the  debate (for example after question about Obama birth certificate Trump could simple  said that it was easier the  uncovering Hillary deleted emails). But he choose  not to. And he answered question directly without typical for politicians (especially Hillary) deflections.

Hillary is an establishment candidate that propose to American people "kick the can down the road" strategy. And as such she is supported by full firepower of neoliberal media empires. With the same as Obama idea of "bait and switch" of voters after the elections. That means that the best chance for Hillary (with her mounting health issues)  to win election is to avoid discussions of any real issues, that the county face. And first of all the problem of disapproving decently paying and full time jobs, with part time and McJobs replacing them really quick. Her main fear is that Trump would adopt the slogan: "Jobs, Jobs Jobs",  sinking her candidacy. She wants to convert the election on referendum on Trump personality and hide in the shadow.

Also Hillary training a lawyer helped in this situation immensely. He was comfortable with the camera.   Trump has problems with microphone and that complicated his situation and distracted from answering question in the most sharp way (not that he wanted to do this). No it was not match of equals. Trump’s "let' do not overprepare" off-the-cuff approach to Monday’s first presidential debate did not paid him well. He slipped into all traps Hillary team prepared for him. But paradoxically he emerged as more humanly sympathetic person then Hillary.  Instead of well-rehearsed, carefully articulated policies laden with subtle jabs at his opponent, he opted to communicate in a an "on-stage improvisation" fashion. and he answered all questions directly, not trying to avoid them like Hillary does.

Add to this the the  selection of question was probably outsourced to Huma Abedin and you got the real picture :-)

The key question: Hillary paranoid jingoism and complete absence of restraint in military adventures as a direct threat to the US population well being was not even touched. But this is the most important question facing the nation. As one Guardian commenter noted:

Gman13 2016-09-29

Donny is the best chance for the lasting world peace and stability because he is more likely to work with Russians on key geopolitical issues.

Hillary is the best chance for ww3 and nuclear anihilation of the mainland American cities because she is russophobic, demonizer of Russia, hell bent on messing with them and unexplicably encouraged to do so by supposedly "normal" people in mainstream media.

Instead they try to trap Trump by "birther" questions implicate him in misogyny (using Miss Universe incident  as a bait) and like.

Also Hillary as that candidate  promoting  status quo was in better position to answer  question prepared by status quo peddling media. They were her ideological friends.

What passes for a win these days has come a long way from "You're no Jack Kennedy." (Salon.com)

fluffybunny3 5ptsFeatured
 

What passes for a win these days has come a long way from "You're no Jack Kennedy."

Anyone who is not #WithHer already was given no reason to change that perspective last night. If you considered her untrustworthy, her obfuscation in the debate, her failure to be any more forthcoming than she has in the past, her continued reliance on corporate financing, even while pretending populist goals, none of it made her seem any more honest than her reputation suggests.

But sure, she didn't collapse at the podium, so, big win. Take a victory lap.

I'm just wondering, who might have been persuaded by that display last night? I don't think the debate changed a single mind.

The moderator consistently tried to present Trump in unfavorable way promoting the idea that "we should not to burn down the house to get the kitchen renovated" (which is the same as "kick the can down the road" the position of all US neoliberal media). The problem with such a position is the neoliberal run its course as a social system and now is crumbling much like Brezhnev socialism in the USSR. People want  change and Hillary is anti-change candidate.

Neoliberal media  supporting Hillary who does care one  bit about all  wars for neoliberal expansion in which so many people died and so much wealth was destroyed since 1992.

Miss Universe Trap

This one was pretty vicious one, caught Trump off-guard, and helped to present Trump as a misogynist . Wwhile in reality Hillary has a distinct misogynist tendencies. The recording of her laughing about the defendant’s guilt is truly sickening (HILLARY Clinton Took Me Through Hell Says 12yr. Old RAPE Victim! ). Hillary doesn’t give a damn about sexual abuse  of women.

So the level of her misogynism is  probably higher then Trump's and as Enquirer suggested in 2015 might have  some lesbian flavor (see also Hillary Clinton faux feminism ).

See comments to Google “Hillary Clinton rape” The Corbett Report

turley2u, 12/05/2015 at 8:30 pm

A review of “The Clinton’s War on Women”
http://www.dcdave.com/article5/151203.htm

croutonscarf, 01/17/2016 at 3:16 am

Slander! Hillary Clinton is a wonderful, wonderful woman. What a ‘progressive’ crusader for human rights and equality! Anyone who doesn’t like her is a misogynist. Salon and huffpost told me so. Benghazi is just a buzzword of misogynist, right-wing extremists, it’s not like there was a massive arms transfer to Al-Qaeda forces going on that Hillary was involved in as Secretary of State, and which Chris Stevens and others were trying to block. Hillary is a peace loving woman. Those who claim that she’s basically a neo-con warhawk ( who committed many war crimes as Secretary of State and helped implement State Department policies of funding Al-Qaeda in Iraq / Al-Nusra Front ) are way off the mark.

What a leader in the anti-war movement she is, she and Bill are old hippies right? They just love peace, and are tireless crusaders for social justice. Remember when she was the chief political architect of the U.S. destabilization/ bombing/ invasion of Libya, which killed tens of thousands, and threw the country into chaos which endures to this day? And now she laughs/cackles about it in interviews. But hey, her anti-war voting record speaks for itself… oh wait, she voted in favour of the Iraq War…. Well, she is a strong voice for women… except for all the ones her and Bill personally abuse and murder… and except for when she supports women being murdered in Libya, Iraq and Syria, and takes millions from her pals in the oligarchal leadership of Saudi Arabia, people who personally hold large harems of hundreds of kidnapped women, and run a counrty where women can be stoned to death for the crime of being raped…

But hey, it’s not like she had a bunch of FALN terrorists who murdered dozens of people in bombings pardoned as a personal favour to a political ally… oh wait she did that too. And it’s not like she’s a pathological liar ( who lied enough times during the Benghazi hearings to go to jail for perjury )… okay, perhaps she is, but sometimes she just doesn’t know what the meaning of the word is is, and her parents really did name her after Sir Edmund Hillary, knowing that 6 years after she was born he would climb Mount Everest and become famous. Come on people, stop bashing her! Well, it’s not like she’s the first war criminal to ever run for run for president…. how’s that for a compimentary thing to say about her?

Still the trap used was moderately successful for those low information voters who do no know or care about Ms. Clinton horrible record in this area. And yes,  this is the most important issue facing  the country, that should be discussed at length at Presidential debates ;-)

Kittygrrl 5ptsFeatured
 

Trump on Faux News this AM, "That person was a Miss Universe person, and she was the worst we ever had, the worst, the absolute worst. She was impossible...she was the winner and gained a massive amount of weight. It was a real problem."

Trump talking about Alicia Machado, former winner of Miss Universe, who is 5'7", whom Trump claimed went from 118 lbs to 160 lbs. Then to add insult to injury, he body shamed her in front of the media, and then, surprise, he never paid her what he owed her.

Trumplethinskin cannot let anything go; birtherism, misogyny, his barely disguised lust for one daughter and his total indifference for his other daughter, his hatred for Rosie O'Donnell for laughing at him.

The world laughs at you today, Orange Foolius, You showed your global ignorance, your bullying, sexism, your dearth of shame over birtherism, but mostly your inability to act like a grown up.

Whining about the vicious ads HRC is running, using HIS OWN WORDS as a sexist pig against him. Boo hoo hoo.


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Nov 03, 2016] More Collusion With Donna Brazile Revealed As Hillary Campaign Sought Advice On Prepared Debate Answers Zero Hedge

Nov 03, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

Donna Brazile was noticeably uncomfortable for every second of the following 10-minute interview with Megyn Kelly of Fox News. Kelly pushed hard on the recent Project Veritas undercover videos showing DNC operatives plotting to incite violence at Trump rallies and commit massive voter fraud and over Brazile's leaked email showing that she provided a CNN debate question to Hillary ahead of a March 2016 debate with Bernie. Brazile tried every trick in the book to deflect and pivot but Kelly held her feet to the fire.

[Oct 29, 2016] Stein war with Russia is not an option

Notable quotes:
"... She [Hillary Clinton] has concurrently this Clinton Foundation business, where she is granting special favors, special partnerships, special government contracts, weapons deals, etc., to Clinton Foundation donors. So, there's just a lot here that represents how the economic and political elite are very much represented, I think, by both of these candidates, and underscores why it's really important for us to exercise our power in a democracy . ..."
"... To present a no-fly zone here as a solution is extremely dangerous. A no-fly zone means we are going to war with Russia, because it means we will be shooting down planes in the sky in order to create this no-fly zone, which is where Russia has a commitment to defending the Assad government. So, remember, there was a ceasefire, which was very hard-won, and that ceasefire was destroyed by the action of the Americans bombing, apparently by mistake, although some people say not by mistake, but it was our bombing of the Syrian troops that destroyed that ceasefire . ..."
"... That was our part, the U.S., in allowing the nuclear arms race to re-engage . Mikhail Gorbachev, the former premier of the Soviet Union, said last week that we are now at a more dangerous period regarding nuclear war than we have ever been. So, it's really important for the warmongers in the Democratic and Republican parties to be cooling their jets now and for us to be moving forward towards a weapons embargo and a freeze on the funding of those countries that are continuing to fund terrorist enterprises . ..."
Oct 29, 2016 | failedevolution.blogspot.gr
'There was a ceasefire, which was very hard-won, and that ceasefire was destroyed by the action of the Americans bombing, apparently by mistake, although some people say not by mistake, but it was our bombing of the Syrian troops that destroyed that ceasefire'

via globinfo freexchange

After our call to independent media for a 'counter-debate' with the US third parties , the independent news network Democracy Now! made a first revolutionary step to break the US bipartisan debate monopoly.

Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! explains again the process, in this second presidential debate: " We spend the rest of today's show airing excerpts of the Donald Trump-Hillary Clinton debate and give Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein a chance to respond to the same questions posed to the major-party candidates. Again, Dr. Stein and Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson were excluded from the debate under stringent rules set by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is controlled by the Democratic and Republican parties. We invited both Stein and Johnson to join us on the program; only Stein took us up on the offer. "

In this last part of the second debate, Jill Stein, again, was the only presidential candidate that told the whole truth to the American people without hesitation.

Concerning the Syrian mess and the Russian intervention, Hillary Clinton showed again why she is the most dangerous to be the next US president. She avoided again to admit the huge responsibility of the US intervention and their allies in Libya and the Middle East which created absolute chaos. She blamed again the Russians, although - as Jill Stein stated very correctly - it was the US that destroyed the hard-won ceasefire in Syria. Hillary showed again her absolute devotion to the neocon/neoliberal agenda, therefore, start a war with Russia. She showed again how dangerous she is.

On the contrary, Jill Stein stated very clearly that war with Russia is out of question.

Key points:

She [Hillary Clinton] has concurrently this Clinton Foundation business, where she is granting special favors, special partnerships, special government contracts, weapons deals, etc., to Clinton Foundation donors. So, there's just a lot here that represents how the economic and political elite are very much represented, I think, by both of these candidates, and underscores why it's really important for us to exercise our power in a democracy . We have a right to know who we can vote for, as well as a right to vote.

Syria is a disaster, and it's a very complicated disaster. It is a civil war. It is a proxy war among many nations. It is a pipeline war also between Russia and the Gulf states, who are competing to run their pipelines with fracked gas into Europe across Syria. So, this is a very complicated situation, and there is a hornets' nest, a real circular firing squad of alliances here that's, you know, extremely, extremely complicated.

To present a no-fly zone here as a solution is extremely dangerous. A no-fly zone means we are going to war with Russia, because it means we will be shooting down planes in the sky in order to create this no-fly zone, which is where Russia has a commitment to defending the Assad government. So, remember, there was a ceasefire, which was very hard-won, and that ceasefire was destroyed by the action of the Americans bombing, apparently by mistake, although some people say not by mistake, but it was our bombing of the Syrian troops that destroyed that ceasefire .

We need to redouble our efforts here. And we need to acknowledge that war with Russia is not an option. There are 2,000 nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert. And who was it that dropped out of the nuclear arms control? That was George Bush. That was our part, the U.S., in allowing the nuclear arms race to re-engage . Mikhail Gorbachev, the former premier of the Soviet Union, said last week that we are now at a more dangerous period regarding nuclear war than we have ever been. So, it's really important for the warmongers in the Democratic and Republican parties to be cooling their jets now and for us to be moving forward towards a weapons embargo and a freeze on the funding of those countries that are continuing to fund terrorist enterprises .

[Oct 24, 2016] Donna Brazile accused about leaking a town hall question to the Clinton campaign

Notable quotes:
"... "I did not receive any questions from CNN, let's just be very clear," a shaky Brazile told Kelly. ..."
"... "I never got documents from CNN," she reiterated, adding that "a lot of those emails I would not give them the time of the day. I've seen so many doctored emails. I've seen things that come from me at two in the morning that I don't even send." (RELATED: DNC Chair Now Says Podesta Emails Were 'Doctored') ..."
"... Brazile then offered to share whatever documents she has. "If there is anything that I have I will share," she said. ..."
"... Martin, the TV One host suspected of giving Brazile the question, gave a convoluted answer last week when asked if he coordinated with Brazile. ..."
Oct 24, 2016 | dailycaller.com

Democratic National Committee chairwoman Donna Brazile complained during an interview on Wednesday that she is being "persecuted" by being asked questions about leaking a town hall question to the Clinton campaign.

And during the interview, conducted on Fox News after the presidential debate, Brazile said that her interviewer, Megyn Kelly, was "like a thief" because her questions cited emails that were stolen from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and released by Wikileaks.

Kelly grilled Brazile, who was a CNN and ABC News contributor prior to taking over the DNC in July, about an email revealed by Wikileaks showing her providing a tip about a March 13 town hall question to the Clinton campaign. (RELATED: Donna Brazile Leaked CNN Town Hall Question To Clinton Campaign)

"From time to time I get the questions in advance," Brazile wrote in a March 12 email to Clinton's communications director, Jennifer Palmieri.

The question, which was about the death penalty, was asked of Clinton by Roland Martin, a host with TV One, which co-hosted the debate with CNN.

"I did not receive any questions from CNN, let's just be very clear," a shaky Brazile told Kelly.

"Where did you get it?" the host shot back.

"First of all what information are you providing to me that will let me see what you are talking about?" said Brazile.

She grew more defensive.

"As a Christian woman I understand persecution, but I will not sit here and be persecuted because your information is totally false," the operative said.

"Podesta's emails were stolen. You're like the thief that what's to bring into the night what you found in the gutter," she continued.

Kelly then referred to an interview CNN anchor Jake Tapper gave last week in which he said that it was his understanding that the question came from Roland Martin or TV One. He called the leak "very, very troubling." (RELATED: Jake Tapper Says DNC Chair's Leak To Clinton Campaign Is 'Very, Very Troubling)

"I am not going to try to validate falsified information. I have my documents, I have my files," Brazile told Kelly.

"I never got documents from CNN," she reiterated, adding that "a lot of those emails I would not give them the time of the day. I've seen so many doctored emails. I've seen things that come from me at two in the morning that I don't even send." (RELATED: DNC Chair Now Says Podesta Emails Were 'Doctored')

Brazile then offered to share whatever documents she has. "If there is anything that I have I will share," she said.

Brazile did not return an email from The Daily Caller asking how she plans to prove that she did not send the question to Palmieri.

Martin, the TV One host suspected of giving Brazile the question, gave a convoluted answer last week when asked if he coordinated with Brazile.

Update: Brazile responded to TheDC's questions about the town hall questions and about her comments in the interview with Megyn Kelly.

Asked if she would make good on her pledge to share the information she has and why she refused to say that TV One was not the source of the town hall question, she responded: "You're so unprofessional."

TheDC followed up on the questions. "Ask where the doctored videos were made. Chinese or Russians," Brazile responded.

susan the other October 24, 2016 at 12:20 pm

It was painful watching Donna Brazile get caught in Megan Kelly's cross examination. She (Donna) was loyal to a fault, making herself look like an idiot, a very sad idiot, when she claimed the emails had been doctored.

[Oct 23, 2016] How political novice Trump ascended the obviously rigged primary system to become the Republican nominee and might win while Ron Paul knocked on this same door for decades and was quickly dispatched each time

Notable quotes:
"... in accordance with the prevailing American ideology, one can complain all they want about the system and pose limited questions why things are the way they are. But one is not allowed to seriously question the basis of the system without being labeled a heretic and banished to the hinterlands where demons and dragons reside. ..."
"... A perfect example is the setup we all witnessed during the final debate between Clinton and Trump. The Presidential Debates are long established ideological rituals designed to reinforce and affirm faith and belief in the system. They are part and parcel of the supporting façade the election process represents to the controlling meme. "We the People" select one of 'us' to travel to the capital city where rules and laws are enacted to protect 'us' from enemies foreign and domestic while at the same time enriching 'our' lives. ..."
"... It was no accident of chance the last question posed to both 'candidates' (would they accept and support the election results if they lose) was essentially a pledge of allegiance to the ideological ethos. And for Trump, the self appointed establishment heretic, it was a trap designed to fully ensnare and expel him, and his heathen campaign, into the fires of faithless hell. But by doing so the heretics are also affirmed in their belief both in their leader and their cause. ..."
"... Nor was it an accident Trump was chosen first to answer while the priest's favored candidate (whom I suspect was already alerted to the deception) sat ready to embrace the system and reject the wrong thinking dissenter. ..."
"... Of all the barbs and venom exchanged between the two candidates, is it really surprising at all that every major mainstream news outlet, known collectively as the mouthpiece of the ideological priests, led the next morning's ' news ' with huge headlines about the final nonconforming utterance from Trump? ..."
"... Burn the bastard at the stake, the angry priests wail in agony ..."
"... The more a prevailing political meme strays from its founding ideology, meaning in this case crony corruption and political favoritism, the tighter the screws must be turned to drive the antithetical strays back toward the center. And the place to begin this process is with its leadership, either established or budding. Uncharacteristically, the heretical plebes have long been without acknowledged leadership until Trump arrived on the scene. ..."
"... Whether he is controlled opposition, useful puppet or exactly who he appears to be, Trump has succeeded in flushing the misfits and malcontents from the redoubt woodpile and out into the open. This may be precisely why Trump was allowed to get this far and not promptly buried under the end zone in the new Giants Stadium when he first appeared on the political scene. ..."
"... How is it that political novice Trump not only appeared on the scene, but ascended the obviously rigged primary system to become the Republican nominee? Ron Paul (and others) knocked on this same door for decades and were quickly dispatched each time using time honored control techniques. Why not Trump? Because his time has come? Because he's the one? ..."
"... This is not to say Hillary Clinton isn't also being propelled forward by the very same mechanism that has empowered Trump. If " The Donald " is flawed, Hillary Clinton is mortally impaired. And it would made perfect sense from the control system's perspective to match or exceed the glaring imperfections of one candidate (Trump) with an even more egregious example of crony capitalism run riot in the other (Clinton). The great white hope verses establishment lackey and career criminal. The choice couldn't be both clearer and more obscure than as presented for your electoral blessing. ..."
"... This is the principal reason why I expect Trump to ' win ' this election, if not by hook then by mainstream crook. The crony capitalists represented by Clinton have had their fill at the public feeding trough and are more than capable of fending for their selves during the next spiraling leg downward. But those who had previously abandoned all hope, and thus were primed for more drastic (read destructive) measures if not properly corralled, have once again been engaged in the political system and have thrown their support behind the white knight. ..."
"... The golden rule of dying ideological Empires is simplicity itself. What it cannot subvert or corrupt it destroys. Significant and healing change cannot, and therefore will not, originate from within the Empire for that would disenfranchise the powerful priests, the hanger-on's and sycophants. ..."
"... Orders of magnitude hotter than burning magnesium, any effort made to dampen or disperse the white hot insanity of the dying Empire, either from within or externally, only succeeds in spreading and intensifying the Luciferian conflagration. Simply stated, madness breeds more madness. ..."
"... In my opinion this is the only explanation for the blatant media bias against Trump combined with the obviously scripted non media responses to all things Clinton, the in-your-face rigging and distortions of the political process ..."
"... Plato described the inability of a group of (ideological) prisoners chained in a cave to interpret reality based solely upon the play of shadows projected upon the stone wall in front of them. The utter futility of their efforts is only revealed when one prisoner frees himself, enabling him to fully view the puppeteers behind them creating the illusion. ..."
Zero Hedge
This is why, in accordance with the prevailing American ideology, one can complain all they want about the system and pose limited questions why things are the way they are. But one is not allowed to seriously question the basis of the system without being labeled a heretic and banished to the hinterlands where demons and dragons reside.

A perfect example is the setup we all witnessed during the final debate between Clinton and Trump. The Presidential Debates are long established ideological rituals designed to reinforce and affirm faith and belief in the system. They are part and parcel of the supporting façade the election process represents to the controlling meme. "We the People" select one of 'us' to travel to the capital city where rules and laws are enacted to protect 'us' from enemies foreign and domestic while at the same time enriching 'our' lives.

It was no accident of chance the last question posed to both 'candidates' (would they accept and support the election results if they lose) was essentially a pledge of allegiance to the ideological ethos. And for Trump, the self appointed establishment heretic, it was a trap designed to fully ensnare and expel him, and his heathen campaign, into the fires of faithless hell. But by doing so the heretics are also affirmed in their belief both in their leader and their cause.

Nor was it an accident Trump was chosen first to answer while the priest's favored candidate (whom I suspect was already alerted to the deception) sat ready to embrace the system and reject the wrong thinking dissenter.

Of all the barbs and venom exchanged between the two candidates, is it really surprising at all that every major mainstream news outlet, known collectively as the mouthpiece of the ideological priests, led the next morning's 'news' with huge headlines about the final nonconforming utterance from Trump?

Burn the bastard at the stake, the angry priests wail in agony, their power and prestige coming under serious attack from the process itself. Or so they piously claim.

The more a prevailing political meme strays from its founding ideology, meaning in this case crony corruption and political favoritism, the tighter the screws must be turned to drive the antithetical strays back toward the center. And the place to begin this process is with its leadership, either established or budding. Uncharacteristically, the heretical plebes have long been without acknowledged leadership until Trump arrived on the scene.

Regardless of who or what Donald Trump truly is, the long suffering and rapidly increasing ranks of the disenfranchised and disillusioned have rallied around The Donald, elevating him to the revolutionary figurehead of 'The Movement' determined to drain the ideological swamp that is present day Washington DC.

Whether he is controlled opposition, useful puppet or exactly who he appears to be, Trump has succeeded in flushing the misfits and malcontents from the redoubt woodpile and out into the open. This may be precisely why Trump was allowed to get this far and not promptly buried under the end zone in the new Giants Stadium when he first appeared on the political scene.

Since one must never be allowed to seriously question the system (because the doubt it raises is threatening to the system) if one does question and is allowed to continue and even flourish (ala Trump) there must be a hidden reason for this heretical event to occur 'naturally'.

Therefore to naively believe the priest's controllers have lost mastery over their ideology simply because a heretic has appeared and is growing amongst their ranks is to misunderstand the methods employed, honed and refined over thousands of years by those very same priests and their descendants, regardless of the prevailing controlling meme. They've been doing this for thousands of years folks and are quite accomplished at their craft.

How is it that political novice Trump not only appeared on the scene, but ascended the obviously rigged primary system to become the Republican nominee? Ron Paul (and others) knocked on this same door for decades and were quickly dispatched each time using time honored control techniques. Why not Trump? Because his time has come? Because he's the one?

Really?

I do not disagree with those who carefully document the growing instability of the dominant socioeconomic/political system. There is little doubt large and widening cracks are appearing in the carefully constructed and nurtured ideological façade.

But to believe the Empire is so close to collapse that a revolutionary could slip between the cracks and come within a few weeks of ascending to the throne is, in my humble opinion, pushing it just a wee bit too far. Those shadows on the cave wall have little to no relation to reality.

Take the time to study the disruptive techniques used by the ideological establishment to co-opt and control the last attempted American revolution, that of the anti war generation of the 60's and early 70's. Nearly every counter cultural uprising during that period of time was thoroughly infiltrated and sometimes directly controlled by operatives. To think this isn't happening today with the massive increase in intrusive spy technology is to remain firmly planted in La-La Land.

Trump's popularity among the great unwashed is a product of the mainstream media, the very same control device used on a daily basis to feed the indentured population its ration of Soma. However, in an effort to turn Trump into a super magnet for the downtrodden, the mainstream media needed to employ reverse psychology and condemn that which they wished to empower with credibility. Quite frankly, this only works if the population is so desperate for salvation to appear they would accept such a psychologically flawed and egotistic front man as Donald Trump.

Don't ever forget Donald Trump's media presence was honed and refined by the control mechanism itself, Hollywood and its various offshoots and tentacles. Best known as the billionaire producer and 'actor' in The Apprentice, Trump has a total of 19 credits as a producer, 20 credits as an actor and an incredible 222 credits as 'self'. This is a man who clearly knows how to play an audience, with his ego the star attraction.

That alone doesn't necessarily make Trump an establishment 'made man'. But while he wasn't breast fed at the political nipple, he certainly isn't an 'outsider' by any stretch of the imagination. And yet here he is……the embodiment of all the hopes and dreams of a vast cross section of disaffected and disenfranchised. It just doesn't get any better than this.

This is not to say Hillary Clinton isn't also being propelled forward by the very same mechanism that has empowered Trump. If "The Donald" is flawed, Hillary Clinton is mortally impaired. And it would made perfect sense from the control system's perspective to match or exceed the glaring imperfections of one candidate (Trump) with an even more egregious example of crony capitalism run riot in the other (Clinton). The great white hope verses establishment lackey and career criminal. The choice couldn't be both clearer and more obscure than as presented for your electoral blessing.

And ultimately this may be the purpose for this obviously concocted and orchestrated charade. The last stage of a dying Empire is the looting of the weak from within by the elite. When the barbarians finally break through the outer gates, all they will find are empty vaults and the scattered remains of a desperate native population, the valuables having long ago been strip-mined and spirited away.

But before this point in the end game can be reached, the natives must be held in place long enough for the final rape to commence. As public confidence in a political solution dissipates and restlessness (some might say desperation) grows, a false hope and belief must be re-instilled in various sub factions of the population in order to draw them back in, ultimately imprisoned by their own ideological bent.

This occurred in 2008 with the great black hope, Barrack Obama, and once again is happening in 2016 with the great white hope, Donald Trump. Both of these individuals, while presenting as one would expect political outsiders to appear, were/are deeply conflicted and entangled. Don't forget Obama was a political newbie with only a few years in public office before being miraculously elevated to the highest office in the land. It is more than coincidence they both talk a thoroughly convincing game to the sub-set they were created to enthrall.

This is the principal reason why I expect Trump to 'win' this election, if not by hook then by mainstream crook. The crony capitalists represented by Clinton have had their fill at the public feeding trough and are more than capable of fending for their selves during the next spiraling leg downward. But those who had previously abandoned all hope, and thus were primed for more drastic (read destructive) measures if not properly corralled, have once again been engaged in the political system and have thrown their support behind the white knight.

White Knight

All the king's horse's and all the king's men couldn't put the Empire back together again.

Emotionally stabilized and increasingly mesmerized, the plebes are now ripe for the rape if for no other reason than they will wait and see if the revolution is actually tweeted and originates from the White House.

I suspect 'they' will be severely disappointed.

The golden rule of dying ideological Empires is simplicity itself. What it cannot subvert or corrupt it destroys. Significant and healing change cannot, and therefore will not, originate from within the Empire for that would disenfranchise the powerful priests, the hanger-on's and sycophants.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely and power in the hands of the corrupt is never relinquished, only forcefully taken and then passed from one dirty hand to the next. This renders any discussion of a positive healthy change from within moot and a non starter.

This is an insanity very few understand when viewed from a distance, an all encompassing madness that is always underestimated in its ferocity and velocity. When face to face with this evil phenomenon, few have the strength of will to stand their ground, let alone survive the encounter. Evil madness of this magnitude always self consumes and can never be extinguished by an external force.

Orders of magnitude hotter than burning magnesium, any effort made to dampen or disperse the white hot insanity of the dying Empire, either from within or externally, only succeeds in spreading and intensifying the Luciferian conflagration. Simply stated, madness breeds more madness. To engage the madness is to feed the insanity.

In my opinion this is the only explanation for the blatant media bias against Trump combined with the obviously scripted non media responses to all things Clinton, the in-your-face rigging and distortions of the political process and the incomprehensible capitulation by so many previously withdrawn and cynical ideological escapees who are willingly walking back into the belly of the political beast to support a critically flawed and conflicted Trump.

Plato described the inability of a group of (ideological) prisoners chained in a cave to interpret reality based solely upon the play of shadows projected upon the stone wall in front of them. The utter futility of their efforts is only revealed when one prisoner frees himself, enabling him to fully view the puppeteers behind them creating the illusion.

Unless and until "We the Individuals" engage in a determined and consistent effort to see beyond our ideological horse blinders and fully grasp the true nature of our reality, "We the People" will remain at best mere spectators, and at worst indentured servants, to the reality puppeteers behind us.

As much as I wish this insanity would just end, I fear we have many miles to go before the final awakening.

[Oct 22, 2016] Rigged Debates Questions Arise Again Over Lighted Screen At Hillarys Podium Zero Hedge

Notable quotes:
"... Just remember, Hillary is honest. All Democrats are good. Hillary has your best interests in mind. Hillary never lies. ..."
Oct 22, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com

After the first debate, numerous videos surfaced alleging that Hillary was using some sort of teleprompter built into her podium to assist with answering questions or to offset whatever medical condition she's dealing with. The videos were largely dismissed as "cooky alt-right conspiracy theories" and didn't get much attention outside of those spheres.

But, when similar abnormalities surfaced on Hillary's podium in the third debate, combined with the fact that she spent an awkward amount of time during her answers peering down rather than at the camera, we grew a bit more curious.

With that said, here is a video analyzing the abnormalities from debate 1. Notice that around 18 seconds into this video one can very clearly see a light shut off on Hillary's podium even though there is no such light at Trump's podium.

But, you don't have to take that guy's word for it. Here is the actual debate footage from NBC.. .fast forward to the 1:38:30 mark at the very end of this video and you can see the exact same phenomenon.

And here is a screen capture from the end of the debate. Notice there is a light on Hillary's podium while Trump's is completely dark.

But where things get really interesting is that the exact same phenomenon occurred at debate 3 this week as pointed out by the following video posted by Anonymous.

Again, as you can see, there seems to be a light on Hillary's podium...

...but none at Trump's.

And here is one more angle...

And the two together...

But again, no need to take our word for it as you can simply scan through the full debate footage posted by USA Today and see the phenomenon for yourself. Also note that, at numerous points while answering questions throughout the debate, Hillary seems to be looking down at her podium for extended periods of time rather than at the camera...to the point that it was actually awkward for people watching the debate live.

Don't believe it? In the following video, fast forward to the 42:25 mark and watch Hillary's eyes as she responds to the question... where is she looking?

Now, recall that debate 2 was structured as a town hall discussion so this type of cheating would not have been feasible. That said, oddly enough, debate 2 was the one that almost everyone universally thought she lost.

Duc888 Oct 21, 2016 6:58 PM ,

Just remember, Hillary is honest. All Democrats are good. Hillary has your best interests in mind. Hillary never lies.

back to basics PrayingMantis Oct 21, 2016 7:08 PM ,
At this point, all I can master energy to do anymore is shake my head in disgust.
Al Gophilia back to basics Oct 21, 2016 7:24 PM ,
If this is rigged then so will the vote. All Trump supporters should stay at the booth on the day as a show of force. That could be our only chance at non-violent revolution. Identify with the group, T shirts (Bill is a Rapist!), placards, hats etc.

Turn up!

Rise Up!

Escrava Isaura swmnguy Oct 21, 2016 9:07 PM ,

It's fascinating watching the America far right (libertarians, nationalists, ultraconservatives) all in this election. Even the kitchen sink "teleprompter" they're throwing into our political and our social systems. Now, are they right or wrong in doing so? Or, does it really matter?

On the surface one would not think so. But I think it matters a lot. Wonder why?

What will happen if they lose?

Or worse, let's imagine that Trump won.

Will the "vast majority" of clueless Americans know, or have a clue what will be coming in either case?

Trump doesn't know how to lose unless there's something for him to gain. I do wonder what the system will have to offer the Devil for his concession speech? And good luck to them post election, because it will be impossible to govern, especially for the Republicans.

Now, the picture is much clear if Trump wins, and below is a good take, in my opinion. Found it very insightful. It's by Norman Pagett: The "weimar Period" puts it very neatly

It really is worth reading up on Hi-ler's speeches in the 30s-Trump word for word pretty much. HRC cant deliver any more than trump can, because the resources do not exist to "make America great again" or even to sustain the economy at its current level.

when Hit-ler was saying exactly the same thing he had to invade Poland to sustain his fantasy, and despite the wailing and contrition in 1945-the German people cheered him on when he was initially successful. The same millions are cheering Trump now.

When the system collapses, as it must (as Hit-ler's ponzi scheme), the chaos that will ensure will demand the takeover by a dictator, because faced with breakdown of society, governments have no option but to introduce martial law and in US political terms-that means a theofascism-the godbotherering wannabe dictators are waiting in the wings.
The military will fall in behind whoever pays their wages. There's no Poland to invade, and subjugate therefore the only "masses" to subjugate will be the American people-at least that section of them who are "unbelievers"-ie any kind of minority-and ultimately political opponent.
We all know what happened to minorities in Germany in the 30s. The same thing will happen again-someone has to take the blame for what's gone wrong wth the country and its economy. The parallels are exact.

The constitution?

Democracy is the child of affluence. It ends when democracy ends.

https://ourfiniteworld.com/2016/10/11/why-energy-prices-are-ultimately-headed-lower-what-the-imf-missed/comment-page-5/#comment-103139

philipat toro Oct 21, 2016 11:18 PM ,

Hey toro , previously mofio then santafe then Aristotle of Greece then Gargoyle then bleu then oops then lance-a-lot then most recently Loftie . Looks like Loftie got banned or just outed. I shall miss him! Let's see how long toro survives, shall we?

You are a serial spammer and a serial pain in the ass. Might I politely suggest that you go fuck yourself? And get a life.

PS. You might have noticed that my attempt to expose you for what you are is always the same. That's because your Spam is always the same (Using fake links to your BS site which has no connection to your comments; which are deliberately dramatic to mislead people into responding or clicking on the fake link) so it seems only fair that my exposure of your crap should also always be the same. An eye for an eye.

PrayingMantis philipat Oct 22, 2016 12:41 AM ,

... check out the scumbag john poo desta trying his best while he struggled to explain, lie some more and stuttered to deflect wikileaks facts exposed on his hacked emails and being called out for his lies while being heckled non-stop by the public ... >>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bce_1477088736

... and while you're at the site, take a look at this ... hiliary insults barack hussein at the al smith 2016 dinner ... too funny ... >>> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea3_1477070639 ...

... and btw, for libertarians, ..."... VIDEO: Rand Paul tells every Libertarian why they need to vote for TRUMP! " ... >>> http://endingthefed.com/video-rand-paul-tells-every-libertarian-why-they-need-to-vote-for-trump.html

jeff montanye PrayingMantis Oct 22, 2016 4:01 AM ,
that al smith dinner sounds like it was quite the do; will have to see both speeches.

http://qz.com/813971/final-presidential-debate-2016-all-of-the-questions...

the part of hillary's third debate performance that seeemed the oddest was the "surprise" question at the end as to why the voters should support them. hillary was first and ripped into it with nary a glance down, like she was expecting it.

trump went second and gave a worse performance on that question, imo.

Offthebeach Escrava Isaura Oct 22, 2016 4:08 AM ,
Not well educated.

Upton Sinclair, author 'Grapes of Wrath, The Jungle,. ' wrote ' It Can't Happen Here' in the 1930s.

Leonard Piekoff wrote 'The Ominous Parallels' in 1982.

The Ominous Parallels: The End of Freedom in America is a 1982 book by philosopher Leonard Peikoff, in which Peikoff compares the culture of the United States with the culture of Germany leading up to the Nazis......

Chris Dakota swmnguy Oct 22, 2016 1:38 AM ,
I said it was very dangerous Oct 16-21 with Mars conjunct Pluto at 15* Capricorn.

That is where the elites get the knife in the heart.

It happened at that Catholic dinner in NYC with media and Wall St bailout recipients.

Donald delivered it for us.

The Ruling Elite Has Lost the Consent of the Governed

Brimming with hubris and self-importance, the ruling Elite and mainstream media cannot believe they have lost the consent of the governed.

Every ruling Elite needs the consent of the governed: even autocracies, dictatorships and corporatocracies ultimately rule with the consent, however grudging, of the governed.

The American ruling Elite has lost the consent of the governed.

I was wrong, it wasn't a act of war between global powers, it is an act of war declared by Donald Trump on our behalf.

With the money channel whore dressed in scarlet with her tits out and white leather gloves on behind The Donald. The whole thing has been a magic lantern show put on by Hollywood to entertain the sheep. While wages go down, jobs shipped out and cheap labor flooding in.

The Catholics support Hillary's rape of Haiti and phony chairty that she enriched herself with. They were even uneasy with Donalds statement that "we need to celebrate the culture of life" meaning don't use abortion as birth control. Tim Kaine a Jesuit, which is basically a Jewish organization and Hillary 24 hrs before saying she supports partial birth abortion. They couldn't wait to congradulate her and fawn all over her.

Dying Killer Kissinger melting behind the white funeral flowers in the pyramid table arrangement.

I should have known at 15* Capricorn it would be this. Watching them boo and hiss at him, he was us and that was the knife in the heart with all masks down.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity.

-Willam Butler Yeats

This party is just getting started, I said it was going to start now and the real action (Execution of French King, Execution of English King) takes place at the Pluto/Uranus opposition in 2046-2048.

Jewish power is hanging by a thread, that's only 30 yrs.

I won't be here in this form, but maybe you will be.

fattail Soul Glow Oct 22, 2016 9:30 AM ,
Good point. Nothing left to chance. I was so frustrated with Trump and his stupid, banal, vapid speeches, and the fact that I could make all of the arguments against clinton better than him. Now it makes sense.
charms Soul Glow Oct 22, 2016 11:41 AM ,
Could very well be.

How do you get an incompetent corrupt, and malignant candidate elected? You stand them off against some other tainted character that will be just as controllable.

The pupetmasters have run this model to ground. They are not prepared to lose.

janus Occident Mortal Oct 21, 2016 8:33 PM ,
The fall of legacy media has assumed about it the hue of 'epic saga'. The People are really rooting for us. Legacy media, so thoroughly detested among the masses as it is, having in this last election permanently offended over 80% of their audience with demonstrative hostility to both of The People's candidates (Donald Trump & Bernie Sanders), will NEVER regain any semblance of trust or veneration in the broader public's sentiments. This David & Goliath epic being all the more heroic as The People know, in their heart of hearts, that these scheming gremlins in the media are rotten to the core, and they similarly know that we're pure of heart and motive. It truly is good vs. evil story-book heroics...and the crowd is roaring for us with each blow stricken. This is serious; The People not only want to see them defeated, they seek a punitive spectacle, they demand a grand finale -- the ornery and agitated mob lusts for its pound of flesh. Gotta give the people what they want.

A servant to all is mastered by none -- this has been my governing philosophy since declaring war on this establishment some five years ago. Before initiating phase one of my campaign and this adventure in Boston, I owned a restaurant back in Alabama. In that time, I learned a little bit about satisfying the public's appetite...in a distinct and idiosyncratic way. I've gone about revolution is just such a fashion -- iconaclastic and idiosyncratic. I've often had to improvise, but have always adhered to an overarching strategy...or i should say 'recipe'. I've been working on a formula of sorts...cooking up something for The People's consumption. I've been sorta chronicling my adventures within the broader context of this societal/political shift -- a seismic rearrangement of prevailing paradigm so profound and absolute you won't see anything like it for another millennia. Yes, I knew something BIG was abrew in the machinations of this species back in Hickstick, Alabama. Feeling janus had the wherewithal and talents sufficient to make some contribution to this great turning, I devoted myself wholly to it. I'm not alone. There are many who've risked everything. And it makes for a great story. But beyond the story, and regarding phase two, I have a bit of surprise up my sleeve for tptb: the truth is, janus is a more effective and persuasive speaker than writer. Please forgive me for saying so, and I do say this from a sense of rational modesty, but I have something of a gift for words and their arrangement. Again, I'm not attempting to boast -- I mean really, I would not keep going if I didn't know what kind of impact we're having on the Hedge... janus has from the beginning pledged his gifts to this campaign...us vs. them...good vs. evil. All the while I'd been hiding the greater talent under a bushel, preparing to make of it another donation.

tptb, you will soon be forced to deal with my perspicacity in an extemporaneous setting. There will be no way to mitigate the damages nor prepare. Imagine if you will the fearlessness, confidence and courage of Donald Trump but from a manner imminently polite and courteous -- even to a fault. Think about the quick and nimble thinking of Trump expressed with a command of language and erudition that would make Cicero jealous. Throw into this the ability to instantly structure highly complex arguments that are both cogent and stimulating to a wise mind. all of which is to say -- and pardon my french -- tptb, you're fucked. One way or another, janus will soon start speaking...you have my permission to start freaking. I told you all from the beginning, ain't a goddam thing you can do to stop me. I'm better than you all...you used to laugh and now you gulp. What's that ole saying about laughing last?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKuSoaIbpFU

heh heh heh

Meanwhile, as I rest and prepare my vocal chords, chef janus will carve another pound of flesh from the carcass of a freshly slain legacy-media, slicing off a hunk while the beast still simpers and serve it to the public rare, with the blood still in it. (just wait till I rip their heart out while it beats for the grande finale) I've entitled it:

As The Pendulum Swings

The ponderous procession of Providence is subject to the laws of stasis and extremes. All things tend to extremes and then return, ever so temporarily, to the equilibrium of stasis -- this is the pattern of dynamism in nature; the inertia intrinsic to this swing back to stasis has a value slightly greater than the force which propelled it to the most recent and retreating extreme. As this relates to the mass-sentiments governing the hive-mind of mankind, we are just now starting the descent from a peak of institutional perfidy. The political pendulum is edging ever so slightly away from a totalitarian control matrix so absolute it would make stalin blush. We will soon pick up speed and then accelerate quickly to arrests and trials. But the extreme to which these devils have pushed The People being so far beyond what's ever been done in the civilized world, I feel that by the time this is all over, we will see guillotines. Understand, this pitch of acrimony is still only nascent. Once the dollar goes and everyone's investments, jobs, food stamps, etc., we are going to see a ferocity within the masses unique in all of history.

yes, media clowns, you are in great peril. The people will be calling for your hides. Sure, you won't be the only targets, but you'll most certainly be a focus. How do you like it now that it's your emails being hacked and scrutinized? How will you like it when your sordid private lives are exposed? You thought it was funny when you were on the inside; but now that things are turning inside out, do you feel so insulated? Think you're protected? hardly...your masters will happily throw you to the baying mob hoping your hide will sate their appetite. Your fates are only these: prison, death or, if you're lucky, menial service sector jobs. Yes, those of you wise enough to start speaking the truth now will be spared prison or something more severe. I recommend you exercise this option. Perhaps you think janus is exaggerating...but after everything that's happened, do you think it wise to bet on tptb? janus has peered into the future. Predictable outcome: Good Guys win. Not even close. In fact, you could call it a blood-bath:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D97OxHZzBeQ

You reap what you sow in this world. The metaphysical concept of equilibrium is what we call justice; justice necessarily involves punitive measures. You journalists are the custodians of democracy. You have abrogated your end of the social contract. You have betrayed The Public in service to wickedness. Whether you did so from fear or to curry favor with The People's enemies is largely immaterial, you cast your lot with evil which has for a while flourished -- you just so happen to be involved in the time of its denoument...sucks to be you. In aiding and abetting the deception and fleecing of the public, you have several wars to your credit, rivers of blood stain you hands, the mass poisoning of the people has been undertaken as you advanced it...you have not only sat back and watched The People suffer, you have contributed your life's work to that end.

Same as Nuremberg, 'just following orders' will not be a permissible defense. As to this equilibrium and its relationship to the concept of justice, when the punishments are meted out, they will be far more severe than you can now fathom, but they will be proportionate to the sentiments of the time. When the pendulum reaches the other extreme of its travel, when The People discover the level of your involvement and participation, an eye for an eye won't do -- they'll be demanding two. Mark my words, legacy media. Be ye therefore wise and know the signs of the times.

Donald Trump is just the beginning...there are several more volumes to this story...and the best part is, there's a very happy ending.

The little seeds cast about here on the Hedge have germinated and are starting to take root in The Public...just wait till they bloom:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSzdXjwHACo

{btw, the above song is from a band to which i give a five star recommendation...first such honor since Houndmouth...and so, i introduce the Hedge to Shovels and Rope (gotta love that name)}

janus

[Oct 21, 2016] The Debate Between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Showed the True Nature of the Two Candidates by Robert W. Merry

Pro-Clinton interpretation, but with some interesting insights....
Notable quotes:
"... But Trump demonstrated greater self-control early in the debate than he has displayed at times previously, and he didn't take the bait. He countered by saying Clinton wanted "open borders" and emphasizing the necessity any sovereign nation has for clearly delineated borders. "Either we have a country or we don't," he said. "Either we have borders or we don't." ..."
"... "Look," he said at one point, "she's been proven to be a liar. This is just another lie." And he reverted to form late in the debate when he interjected into one of her perorations, "What a nasty woman!" ..."
"... In supporting his allegation that the election is "rigged," Trump cited three elements of concern. First, the mainstream media - "so bad, so dishonest, so corrupt; it is poisoning the minds of the voters." Second, he said millions of unqualified people have been added to the voter rolls when they shouldn't be registered. Third, he said Clinton "should not be allowed to run," presumably because of previous allegations of wrongdoing related to her private email server and the machinations of the Clinton Foundation. ..."
"... the suggestion that the media have poisoned the minds of citizens evinces a lack of faith in the voters' ability to sort through the events of the day and arrive at sound political judgments... ..."
Oct 21, 2016 | www.strategic-culture.org

... ... ..

The two existential challenges of any long-term government-democracy, dictatorship, oligarchy, royalty-are the necessity of legitimacy and the dangers of succession. The American Founders crafted a system designed to ensure both legitimacy and peaceful succession through a complex and delicately balanced system of popular sovereignty. That system is healthy only when the nation at large accepts its sanctity. Trump signaled that he might not accept it in the face of defeat.

The refusal was stunning in its revelation that this man who seeks the presidency wouldn't perceive how incendiary - and, in the view of millions of Americans, disqualifying-such a pronouncement would be. Perhaps Trump didn't really mean it. Perhaps he thought he was merely introducing "suspense" into the race, as he put it, when he said, "I will look at it at the time." And no doubt his core supporters will defend the position, tossing out comparisons to Al Gore in 2000 or Andrew Jackson in 1824. But, in the annals of recent American presidential politics, it is difficult to think of a candidate pronouncement more guaranteed to stymie that candidate's path to the White House.

Clinton, studied and pugnacious, avoided any such gaffe. After her first two outings with Trump, she had mastered the art of delivering body blows at every opportunity, citing specific episodes and anecdotes that she portrayed as demonstrating his unfitness for office-the controversy over his alleged mistreatment of women, his rough language toward illegal immigrants, his criticisms of a gold star family and a Hispanic federal judge, his purchase of Chinese steel to build his buildings. She chided him for not mentioning the border wall he wants to build during a recent visit with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto. "He didn't raise it," she declared, clearly seeking to get Trump's goat. "He choked."

But Trump demonstrated greater self-control early in the debate than he has displayed at times previously, and he didn't take the bait. He countered by saying Clinton wanted "open borders" and emphasizing the necessity any sovereign nation has for clearly delineated borders. "Either we have a country or we don't," he said. "Either we have borders or we don't."

But, when debate moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News, queried Clinton about a recent WikiLeaks revelation that she extolled "open borders" to foreign bankers, the candidate deftly elided the thrust of the question by saying she was talking merely about the transfer of electrical energy across borders through an international grid system. Then she pounced on the WikiLeaks mention to slam Trump for not condemning the Russians, considered by U.S. intelligence services to be behind the WikiLeaks revelations.

Trump drew a smattering of laughter by calling her segue "a great pivot" and suggested nobody really knows who is behind the ongoing WikiLeaks revelations. He repeated his call for better U.S. relations with Russia, particularly in combatting the Islamic State, or ISIS, in Syria.

Clinton also demonstrated her rhetorical dexterity in avoiding any direct response to Wallace's question about allegations of "pay to play" practices at the controversial Clinton Foundation, viewed by many as an institution designed primarily to bolster the Clintons' political clout and generate huge speaking fees for both Bill and Hillary Clinton. The Democratic candidate launched into an extensive defense of the foundation's lofty good works that proved so long and off-point that Wallace repeatedly sought to get her back to the question at hand. Clinton ignored him.

Trump seemed to enter the debate bent on avoiding the kind of jarringly harsh attacks he had engaged in previously, and he succeeded for the most part. But he still reached for his blunderbuss from time to time. "Look," he said at one point, "she's been proven to be a liar. This is just another lie." And he reverted to form late in the debate when he interjected into one of her perorations, "What a nasty woman!"

Wallace, who seemed resolved to get the candidates into some substantive discussions on major issues facing the nation, elicited serious exchanges on the role of the Supreme Court in the American constitutional system, abortion, immigration, economic policy, trade and the burgeoning national debt, fueled significantly by unchecked entitlement spending. On the latter question, neither candidate demonstrated much credibility as someone who particularly cares about reining in federal spending. Clinton said she would "go where the money is"-the corporations and the rich-and placed unrealistic expectations on the capacity of this fiscal approach to address the debt problem. Trump, without much detail, said his policies, including big tax cuts, would generate so much economic growth, and federal revenue, that entitlement spending won't be a problem.

Clinton seized every opportunity to direct her rhetoric to the constituent elements of her party women , minorities, the LBGT community, affluent liberals. Hers was a program of expanded entitlements, including federal support for college students, greater aid to education, and a solution to the Affordable Care Act that would entail greater federal intervention into health care. She said little that separated her from her socialist opponent in the primaries, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders.

In supporting his allegation that the election is "rigged," Trump cited three elements of concern. First, the mainstream media - "so bad, so dishonest, so corrupt; it is poisoning the minds of the voters." Second, he said millions of unqualified people have been added to the voter rolls when they shouldn't be registered. Third, he said Clinton "should not be allowed to run," presumably because of previous allegations of wrongdoing related to her private email server and the machinations of the Clinton Foundation.

While many observers, including some liberals, agree that the media establishment is largely against Trump, and probably more overtly than we have seen in recent memory, the suggestion that the media have poisoned the minds of citizens evinces a lack of faith in the voters' ability to sort through the events of the day and arrive at sound political judgments...

nationalinterest.org

[Oct 21, 2016] Trump got the best final line ever of a final presidential debate: you want another Obama term, vote for her (words to that effect).

Notable quotes:
"... Also, Wallace has kept control of this thing... asked good questions to both of them and been the best moderator (IMO) by far of the 3 previous debates. At least tonight, both of them have been able to actually talk about some relevant policy... although nothing close to enlightening from either. ..."
"... Basically you have a treacherous but effective salesman that stiffs contractors versus a treacherous career politician. Two of the top in their class, respectively. Ultimately Russia, Iran and China will need to assess the future threats and assert the defense of their interests in anticipation of whatever the result may be, while being diplomatically astute. ..."
"... He was constantly on-topic and superior ..."
"... In the debate, Trump came across to me as someone who would make a welcome change to the phoniness of Reagan and Obama (Bill Clinton and Bush 2 came across not so much as phonies as hicks), while Hillary came across as someone playing her on Saturday Night Live. ..."
"... And Trump got the best final line ever of a final presidential debate: you want another Obama term, vote for her (words to that effect). ..."
"... Ultimately I think Trump made Hillary look worse to me than she made him, so he won the debates based upon their respective records. That's me however, and not the general voting public. ..."
www.moonofalabama.org
jdmckay | Oct 19, 2016 10:13:16 PM | 108
Surprisingly civilized debate tonight, given these 2.

Also, Wallace has kept control of this thing... asked good questions to both of them and been the best moderator (IMO) by far of the 3 previous debates. At least tonight, both of them have been able to actually talk about some relevant policy... although nothing close to enlightening from either.

stumpy | Oct 19, 2016 10:20:01 PM | 109
Hillary sez USA will take back Mosul and then go into Syria to take back Raqqa. Take back? When did USA have it to begin with?
From The Hague | Oct 19, 2016 10:45:42 PM | 110
3th debate

Just Looked and listened to Trump and that crazy bitch from hell.

Saudi-Arabia
Trump:
Throwing from towers
Women rights
Why don't you give the money back?
Kill from Hell:
- - > no reaction

Jackrabbit | Oct 19, 2016 11:01:01 PM | 111
Trump seemed subdued. Trying to be more Presidential?

- He should've:

- spoken of the connection between the Khans and the Democratic Party;

- talked about Hillary's having lied to the Benghazi families about why the reasons for the Benghazi attack? (She says she has made working for families her life's work) ;

- discussed the failure of the Obama Administration to protect us from terrorism and the heroin epidemic - most heroin comes from Afghanistan where we have had troops for years;

- mentioned Hillary's public/private stance on issues (from Hillary's Goldman speeches) .

I think Trump made Hillary look worse to me than she made him, so he won the debates based upon their respective records. That's me however, and not the general voting public.

bbbb | Oct 19, 2016 11:06:06 PM | 112

The debate got particularly nasty. Trump went at her hard, but came off as being a bully. Hillary dodged and weaved through some treacherous waters, and both continued to affirm their positions, however good or bad.

Basically you have a treacherous but effective salesman that stiffs contractors versus a treacherous career politician. Two of the top in their class, respectively. Ultimately Russia, Iran and China will need to assess the future threats and assert the defense of their interests in anticipation of whatever the result may be, while being diplomatically astute.

From The Hague | Oct 19, 2016 11:06:36 PM | 113
- He should've:

He was constantly on-topic and superior

Demian | Oct 19, 2016 11:16:42 PM | 115
In the debate, Trump came across to me as someone who would make a welcome change to the phoniness of Reagan and Obama (Bill Clinton and Bush 2 came across not so much as phonies as hicks), while Hillary came across as someone playing her on Saturday Night Live.

And Trump got the best final line ever of a final presidential debate: you want another Obama term, vote for her (words to that effect).

bbbb | Oct 19, 2016 11:34:28 PM | 116
@111 But his bullying attitude possibly turns off many (female) voters, and he's most definitely stiffed workers and investors. He is very very salesmanish, which is not such a good thing. Hillary doesn't change her tune, despite how awful it is. I can't say the same about Trump.

Ultimately I think Trump made Hillary look worse to me than she made him, so he won the debates based upon their respective records. That's me however, and not the general voting public.

I think people will hold their nose and vote for Hillary, while others will be scared to associate themselves with Trump by voting for him. That's how I see it anyway. Perhaps the level of anger with the status-quo will be substantial enough to tip the scales for Trump.

ben | Oct 20, 2016 12:10:20 AM | 119
On e-voting. worth a listen... http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=14545#newsletter1

[Oct 20, 2016] Obama Vote Rigging Is Impossible - Unless In Favor Of Hillary Clinton

Notable quotes:
"... It is high time for the U.S. to return to paper-ballots and manual vote counting. The process is easier, comprehensible, less prone to manipulations and reproducible. Experience in other countries show that it is also nearly as fast, if not faster, than machine counting. There is simply no sensible reason why machines should be used at all. ..."
"... There is simply no sensible reason why machines should be used at all." Of course there is - to rig elections. What do you think they are used for. ..."
"... The price to pay is the ability to be alerted when vote rigging is going on. Bush won in 2000 because his people controlled the processes that mattered in Florida. ..."
"... There are the same allegations about 2004 in regards to Ohio. ..."
"... Here's the best statistical analysis of US vote count irregularities to date. Not a pretty picture. ..."
"... There is more needed than just paper ballots. A proportional system, a limit on donations and partisan/donor government posts, a stop to the corporate and lobbyist revolving doors. ..."
"... At present the US seem to be on their way to a one party system. Any democratic process will take place within this "private" club including a very small part of the population. ..."
"... for the 1 percent the system is not rigged, they have a preferred globalization candidate, and a police state fall back should the peasants rebell. ..."
"... US citizens are reduced to vote in a block to this power in the Senate and the House in continuous cycles. In the end that blocks any political progress there might be. ..."
"... There's lots of evidence that the 2004 election was stolen for Bush in Ohio. ..."
"... "smartmatic" is obviously the right choice. it's a name we know and trust. Like Deibold, Northrup, KBR, and Bellingcat. The integrity stands for itself. ..."
"... Just think of how many residents of graveyards will be voting their consciences (or lack thereof) this year. Remember Chicago advise - vote early, vote often. ..."
"... obomber has a friend in the vote rigging business. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-18/robert-creamer ..."
"... Concerted media campaign (scripted) against Trump portrays him as hysterical. Recall the trumped-up "(Howard) Dean Scream". ..."
"... Hillary is as nasty and hysterical as Trump or worse. She uses the F bomb regularly. Screams at her subordinates and she annihilated several countries worth of women and children. ..."
"... We should all be aware of what occurred in the two Baby Bush elections as far as voter machine tabulations and judicial fraud in his becoming president in both elections and the likely murder(s) to cover the fraud up. Small plane crashes being almost untraceable. ..."
"... paper vote or bust. Everything else hides an attempt at control and ultimately fraud. ..."
"... How does that help Trump? Most DNC *and* RNC Deep State insiders favor Hillary. ..."
"... Who is leaking all this stuff so well-timed together? Might just be the FBI, finding itself unable to prosecute officially, not only for fear of retribution, but also because the heap of shit that would get uncovered could be enough for the rest of the world to declare war on the US. ..."
"... In Vietnam, as in Iraq, the U.S. government pushed hard to get an election to sanctify its puppet regime. Ellsberg, who spent two years in Vietnam after his time in the Pentagon, aided some of the key U.S. officials in this effort who sought an honest vote. But when U.S. Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge heard their pitch, he replied, "You've got a gentleman in the White House right now [Johnson] who has spent most of his life rigging elections. I've spent most of my life rigging elections. I spent nine whole months rigging a Republican convention to choose Ike as a candidate rather than Bob Taft." Lodge later ordered, "Get it across to the press that they shouldn't apply higher standards here in Vietnam than they do in the U.S." ..."
"... Why is policy discussion absent from this election cycle? Its all Trump bashing,wo one iota of his policies being broadcast? ..."
"... Obomba, the most un-criticised POTUS in American history, is a laughable pos concerned about his terrible corrupt legacy of death war and division which Trump will reveal, once in. ..."
"... Election Fraud within the Outlaw US Empire has a long history. One very intrepid investigator and expert on this is Brad Friedman who runs the Brad Blog, whose current lead item is about this very topic. ..."
"... The Vote 'No Confidence' movement is growing. It's being actively discussed on FB and ZH now ..."
"... Trump say the election is rigged ? Obama's setting up a straw mam by changing the story to election fraud. There may well be fraud in the voting process but we are unlikely to ever know how much. But as to the election being rigged , that's so plainly obvious it's painful. ..."
"... And Germany doesn't allow electronic voting machines. Gotta be a clue there somewhere. ..."
"... There is ample evidence of election fraud, vote fraud, and various types of 'rigging' or 'organising' in the US it is just too long to go into in a short post. ..."
"... Poll Pro-HRC results are not trustworthy. They aren't necessarily outright fabricated (is easy to do and very hard to detect / prosecute), nor even fraudulently carried out, but 'arranged' to give the desired result, which might even, in some cases, be perfectly unconscious, just following SOP. (I could outline 10 major problems / procedures that twist the results.) ..."
"... Then, the media take it up, and cherry-pick the results, pro HRC. That includes internet sites like real clear politics, which I noticed recently is biased (paid?) in favor of HRC. ..."
"... It is amazing to me, yet very few ppl actually dig into the available info about the polls. (Maybe 300 ppl in the world?) HRC needs these fakelorum poll results because they will 'rig' the election as best as they can, they need to point back to them: "see we were winning all the time Trump deplorables yelling insults who cares" - Pathetic. Also, of course, controlling the polls while not the same as 'riggin' the election is part of the same MO. (See Podesta e-mails from Wikileaks.) ..."
"... I think things could get pretty ugly on Nov 9 if Trump wins because i don't see Hillary going quietly into the night and the dems have seeded "putin is rigging" the election idea to contest the results. Plus the establishment that wants Hillary controls the media and the executive office. ..."
"... Trump's delegitimizing the election before it takes place is definitely color revolution stuff - the carrot revolution? ..."
"... "Hillary Clinton now says her "number one priority" in Syria is the removal of Bashar al-Assad, putting us on the path of war with Syria and Russia next year. ..."
"... no-fly zone" over Syria will certainly be followed by the shooting down of both Russian and U.S. jets, in an unpredictable escalation that could easily spread ..."
"... Note the sums are shards of chewed peanuts and their shells. MSM are bought, controlled and are put in a lowly position, and pamper to power, any.… They will go where the money is but it takes them a long time to figure out who what where why etc. and what they are supposed to do. They cannot be outed as completely controlled, so have to do some 'moves' to retain credibility, and their clients/controllers understand that. Encouraging a corrupt 4th Estate has its major downsides. ..."
"... Rigged. Right. Let me tell you about rigged. The US system is rigged in a far larger sense than any Americans realize. It's rigged to blow off the Constitution. ..."
"... the idea of the Electoral College was that every four years communities vote for a local person who could be trusted to go to Washington and become part of the committee that chooses a president and vice-president. ..."
"... The process is "supposed" to be more akin to the Holy See choosing a pope. The electors were to meet in Washington, debate the possibilities, come up with short list, go to the top person on the list and ask if they would be willing to be president (or vice-president, as the case may be), and if they agreed, the deal was done. If not, go to the second person. ..."
"... And demand hand counted paper ballots that cannot be rigged by "Russian hackers". It's called simple score because it is almost the same as other well-known forms of score (and "range") voting, except it's optimized for hand counted paper ballots (i.e. no machines). ..."
"... Need to comb through the propositions carefully. Against big business and self serving liberals.. BTW, I'm a Californian from the Central Valley. Oh! How I wish there is a proposition. Should Hussein Obomo II charge for crimes against humanity? ..."
"... it is absolutely evident that Donald Trump is not only facing the mammoth Clinton political machine, but, also the combined forces of the viciously dishonest Mainstream Media." ..."
"... "When was the last time the media threw 100% of its support behind one party's presidential candidate? What does that say about the media?" ..."
"... Do you feel comfortable with the idea that a handful of TV and print-news executives are inserting themselves into the process and choosing our leaders for us?" ..."
"... It looks like ALL of the Neocon war criminals and architects of the mass slaughters in Iraq (Libya, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc) are standing with Hillary Clinton: ..."
"... Here's a partial list of neocon war criminals supporting Miss Neocon: Paul Wolfowitz (aka, the Prince of Darkness), Eliot Cohen, Richard Perle, David Wurmser, Robert Kagan, Max Boot, Bill Kristol, Dov Zakheim, Douglas Feith, Michael Ledeen, Marc Grossman, David Frum, Michael Chertoff, John Podhoretz, Elliot Abrams, Alan Dershowitz, etc ..."
"... All neocons stand with the CrookedC*nt because there hasn't been nearly enough pointless war, slaughter, dismemberment, death or trauma, it needs to go on FOREVER. ..."
"... To be blunt. It is not only MSM who are prostitutes of oligarchic ruling elite but all or most even so called left-leaning or independent media are all under guise of phony "opposition" or diversity of opinion where there is none. ..."
"... MSM even lacks this basic foundation of a rational thought and must be dismissed entirely. ..."
"... The freedom of speech and press, democracy and just simple decency are simply not allowed in these US under penalty of social marginalizing or even death as Assange and Manning are facing. The entire message of MSM propaganda false flag soldiers is fear. ..."
"... The US Elections themselves are regularity defrauded (read Greg Palast) for decades in thousands of well-documented different and additional ways to polls such as: ..."
"... No independent verification of the vote or serious reporting by international observers about violations, or independent exit polls, and many, many more ways every election is stolen as anybody who opens eyes can see. ..."
"... "The individual loses his substance by voluntarily bowing to an overpowering and distant oligarchy, while simultaneously "participating" in sham democracy." ..."
"... Remember this is a person that actually publicly admits he took 6 months off (from what?) to campaign for Mr Changey Hopey, The drone Bombing Nobel Peace Prize winner, so it's not like he could ever 5have any political insights worth listening to, now is it? ..."
"... Oddly, I looked to Russia for inspiration. RF believes in international law so greatly that she strives mightily at every turn to make it the way nations interact. And what we can see if we choose, is that this effort is paying off. The world is changing because of what Russia believes in. ..."
"... Although Clinton Won Massachusetts by 2%, Hand Counted Precincts in Massachusetts Favored Bernie Sanders by 17% ..."
"... Massachusetts, one of the participating states for the Super Tuesday election results, may need further scrutiny to allay concerns over election fraud using electronic voting machines. 68 out of the state's 351 jurisdictions used hand counted ballots and showed a much larger preference of 17% for Bernie Sanders than the rest of the jurisdictions tabulated by electronic voting machine vendors ES&S, Diebold and Dominion. Hillary Clinton was declared the winner of Massachusetts by 1.42 %. ..."
"... In the Dominican Republic's last elections (May 2016) voters forced the Electoral Office to get rid of the electronic count in favor of paper ballots, which were counted both, by scanner and by hand, one by one, in front of delegates from each party. This action avoided a credibility crisis and everything went smooth. ..."
Oct 20, 2016 | www.moonofalabama.org

Is rigging the U.S. election possible?

Obama says it is not possible:

Obama was asked about Trump's voter fraud assertions on Tuesday [..] He responded with a blistering attack on the Republican candidate, noting that U.S. elections are run and monitored by local officials, who may well be appointed by Republican governors of states, and saying that cases of significant voter fraud were not to be found in American elections.

Obama said there was "no serious" person who would suggest it was possible to rig American elections , adding, "I'd invite Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes."

That is curious. There are a lot of "non serious" persons in the Democratic Party who tell us that Russia is trying to manipulate the U.S. elections. How is it going to that when it's not possible?

Moreover - Obama himself suggested that Russia may interfere with the U.S. elections: Obama: 'Possible' Russia interfering in US election

Is rigging the election only impossible when it is in favor of Hillary Clinton? This while rigging the elections in favor of Donald Trump, by Russia or someone else, is entirely possible and even "evident"?

Curious.

That said - I do believe that the U.S. election can be decided through manipulation. We have evidently seen that in 2000 when Bush was "elected" by a fake "recount" and a Supreme Court decision.

The outcome of a U.S. presidential election can depend on very few votes in very few localities. The various machines and processes used in U.S. elections can be influenced. It is no longer comprehensible for the voters how the votes are counted and how the results created. *

The intense manipulation attempts by the Clinton camp, via the DNC against Sanders or by creating a Russian boogeyman to propagandize against Trump, lets me believe that her side is well capable of considering and implementing some vote count shenanigan. Neither are Trump or the Republicans in general strangers to dirty methods and manipulations.

It is high time for the U.S. to return to paper-ballots and manual vote counting. The process is easier, comprehensible, less prone to manipulations and reproducible. Experience in other countries show that it is also nearly as fast, if not faster, than machine counting. There is simply no sensible reason why machines should be used at all.

* (The German Constitutional Court prohibited the use of all voting machines in German elections because for the general voters they institute irreproducible vote counting which leads to a general loss of trust in the democratic process. The price to pay for using voting machines is legitimacy.)

Posted by b on October 19, 2016 at 01:54 AM | Permalink

wj2 | Oct 19, 2016 2:00:43 AM | 1
I just found out that many states in the US use electronic voting systems made by Smartmatic which is part of the SGO Group. Lord Mark Malloch-Brown is the chairman of SGO. This man is heavily entangled with Soros. Hillary is Soros' candidate. You simply can't make this sh*t up
Blue | Oct 19, 2016 2:27:24 AM | 2
" There is simply no sensible reason why machines should be used at all." Of course there is - to rig elections. What do you think they are used for.
Erast Fandorin | Oct 19, 2016 2:40:48 AM | 4
So much for Smartmatic: https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06CARACAS2063_a.html
Julian | Oct 19, 2016 2:50:37 AM | 5
No. The price to pay is the ability to be alerted when vote rigging is going on. Bush won in 2000 because his people controlled the processes that mattered in Florida.

There are the same allegations about 2004 in regards to Ohio.

Adjuvant | Oct 19, 2016 3:36:40 AM | 6
Here's the best statistical analysis of US vote count irregularities to date. Not a pretty picture.
http://www.electoralsystemincrisis.org/

And here's a broader analysis of voting integrity issues this year.
http://electionjustice.net/democracy-lost-a-report-on-the-fatally-flawed-2016-democratic-primaries-table-of-contents/

But don't worry: the Department of Homeland Security wants to step in to protect our elections -- with a new Election Cybersecurity Committee that has no cybersecurity experts, but plenty of people embroiled in election fraud lawsuits!
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160902/06412735425/dhss-new-election-cybersecurity-committee-has-no-cybersecurity-experts.shtml
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrloTS3p-fY

somebody | Oct 19, 2016 5:09:02 AM | 7
There is more needed than just paper ballots. A proportional system, a limit on donations and partisan/donor government posts, a stop to the corporate and lobbyist revolving doors.

And diverse political parties that present voters with a choice. At present the US seem to be on their way to a one party system. Any democratic process will take place within this "private" club including a very small part of the population.

But democracy never meant the power of the poor. So, no, for the 1 percent the system is not rigged, they have a preferred globalization candidate, and a police state fall back should the peasants rebell.

And in the end, this is the way things are run in Russia and China, with a lot less media circus.

somebody | Oct 19, 2016 5:20:28 AM | 8
Posted by: somebody | Oct 19, 2016 5:09:02 AM | 7

Add - a limit to presidential power for one person. US citizens are reduced to vote in a block to this power in the Senate and the House in continuous cycles. In the end that blocks any political progress there might be. The US are the oldest modern democracy. It is like being stuck in the age of steam engines.

nmb | Oct 19, 2016 5:51:09 AM | 9
Stein: this so-called debate is a sad commentary on what our political system has become
Seamus Padraig | Oct 19, 2016 6:44:12 AM | 10
@ wj2 (Oct 19, 2016 2:00:43 AM | 1):

Good one, wj2! Here's some more info on Lord Malloch-Brown and George Soros, courtesy of WikiPedia:

Malloch Brown has been closely associated with billionaire speculator George Soros. Working for Refugees International, he was part of the Soros Advisory Committee on Bosnia in 1993–94, formed by George Soros. He has since kept cordial relations with Soros, and rented an apartment owned by Soros while working in New York on UN assignments. In May 2007, Soros' Quantum Fund announced the appointment of Sir Mark as vice-president. In September 2007, The Observer reported that he had resigned this position on becoming a government minister in the UK. Also in May 2007, Malloch Brown was named vice-chairman of Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Institute, two other important Soros organisations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Malloch_Brown,_Baron_Malloch-Brown#Association_with_George_Soros

lysias | Oct 19, 2016 8:10:37 AM | 11
There's lots of evidence that the 2004 election was stolen for Bush in Ohio.
shh | Oct 19, 2016 8:50:59 AM | 14
DOOOOOOOOOM! "smartmatic" is obviously the right choice. it's a name we know and trust. Like Deibold, Northrup, KBR, and Bellingcat. The integrity stands for itself. With a population so gleefully ignorant and self centered as D'uhmerica, you should be lowering your expectations significantly.
Ken Nari | Oct 19, 2016 8:57:45 AM | 15
Are honest elections even legal in Texas and Louisiana? How about Massachusetts and New York? They may be legal there but it would be dangerous to try to enforce that.
Formerly T-Bear | Oct 19, 2016 9:06:36 AM | 16
Just think of how many residents of graveyards will be voting their consciences (or lack thereof) this year. Remember Chicago advise - vote early, vote often.
jo6pac | Oct 19, 2016 9:19:36 AM | 17
obomber has a friend in the vote rigging business. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-18/robert-creamer

Voting Green in Calif.

fastfreddy | Oct 19, 2016 9:45:56 AM | 18
PB 13 "Concerning attacks from both sides, Trump is definitely more hysterical."

Concerted media campaign (scripted) against Trump portrays him as hysterical. Recall the trumped-up "(Howard) Dean Scream".

Trump's hysterical rants (and the smear campaign) are played up in a organized attempt to knock him out. People are getting kneecapped (Billy Bush) to demonstrate to others the wrath that may be visited upon them for supporting the wrong candidate.

Take Bill O'Reilly for example, He told a subordinate female employee (documented court record) that he wanted to "get a few wines in her and soap up her tits in the shower with a loofah and falafel. There was a settlement and the story was under-reported. Forgotten and forgiven. In fact Bill O stands as an arbiter of moral virtue.

Hillary is as nasty and hysterical as Trump or worse. She uses the F bomb regularly. Screams at her subordinates and she annihilated several countries worth of women and children.

It is simply "not in the script" to malign Hillary with her own words and obnoxious behavior. By the way, she is also a drunk.

john | Oct 19, 2016 10:06:05 AM | 19
rufus magister says: Y'all keep on diggin' well, there's this , and i didn't even have to break ground.
BRF | Oct 19, 2016 10:16:56 AM | 20
We should all be aware of what occurred in the two Baby Bush elections as far as voter machine tabulations and judicial fraud in his becoming president in both elections and the likely murder(s) to cover the fraud up. Small plane crashes being almost untraceable. https://spectregroup.wordpress.com/2008/12/26/bushs-it-guy-killed-in-plane-crash/
Northern Observer | Oct 19, 2016 10:21:48 AM | 21
paper vote or bust. Everything else hides an attempt at control and ultimately fraud.
dumbass | Oct 19, 2016 10:22:18 AM | 22
>> "The vast majority of battleground states have Republicans overseeing their election systems," These officials actually count the votes,

How does that help Trump? Most DNC *and* RNC Deep State insiders favor Hillary.

> and they, like Ohio's Husted, have criticized the Day-Glo Duckhead.

Yes.

persiflo | Oct 19, 2016 10:29:06 AM | 23
Here's another one: http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/17/politico-reporter-sends-story-to-hillary-aide-for-approval-admits-hes-a-hack/

Who is leaking all this stuff so well-timed together? Might just be the FBI, finding itself unable to prosecute officially, not only for fear of retribution, but also because the heap of shit that would get uncovered could be enough for the rest of the world to declare war on the US.

lysias | Oct 19, 2016 10:54:38 AM | 25
Daniel Ellsberg, in his book Secrets , recounts what he had learned during his government service about the honesty of U.S. elections. As reported in Counterpunch :
In Vietnam, as in Iraq, the U.S. government pushed hard to get an election to sanctify its puppet regime. Ellsberg, who spent two years in Vietnam after his time in the Pentagon, aided some of the key U.S. officials in this effort who sought an honest vote. But when U.S. Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge heard their pitch, he replied, "You've got a gentleman in the White House right now [Johnson] who has spent most of his life rigging elections. I've spent most of my life rigging elections. I spent nine whole months rigging a Republican convention to choose Ike as a candidate rather than Bob Taft." Lodge later ordered, "Get it across to the press that they shouldn't apply higher standards here in Vietnam than they do in the U.S."

But Lodge's comments were downright uplifting compared with a meeting that Ellsberg attended with former Vice President Richard Nixon, who was visiting Vietnam on a "fact-finding mission" to help bolster his presidential aspirations. Former CIA operative Edward Lansdale told Nixon that he and his colleagues wanted to help "make this the most honest election that's ever been held in Vietnam." Nixon replied, "Oh, sure, honest, yes, honest, that's right … so long as you win!" With the last words he did three things in quick succession: winked, drove his elbow hard into Lansdale's arm, and slapped his own knee.

dahoit | Oct 19, 2016 11:00:42 AM | 26
12,13,will you clowns keep your zippers closed? Your propaganda is unseemly, and we'll see just whose victory will be huge Nov.8,won't we? Why does anyone put any credence in serial liar polls? Why is policy discussion absent from this election cycle? Its all Trump bashing,wo one iota of his policies being broadcast?

That is his vote rigging angle, that the MSM is corrupt and is politically assassinating him daily,not the polls themselves being a major factor in the rigging accusations.

Obomba, the most un-criticised POTUS in American history, is a laughable pos concerned about his terrible corrupt legacy of death war and division which Trump will reveal, once in. And only commie morons would oppose that.

karlof1 | Oct 19, 2016 11:46:58 AM | 27
Election Fraud within the Outlaw US Empire has a long history. One very intrepid investigator and expert on this is Brad Friedman who runs the Brad Blog, whose current lead item is about this very topic. I suggest those interested in learning more take the time to investigate his site and its many years of accumulated evidence proving Election Fraud a very big problem, http://bradblog.com/
TheRealDonald | Oct 19, 2016 11:50:32 AM | 28
The Vote 'No Confidence' movement is growing. It's being actively discussed on FB and ZH now. A bloviating bunko artist vers a grifting crypto neocon is not a 'choice', it's a suicide squad lootfest it's taking America down.

... ... ..

Nobody | Oct 19, 2016 12:17:59 PM | 30
In Humboldt County California we still use paper ballots. Our polling place also has one electronic voting machine sitting in a corner for voters who can't use the paper ballots. I have never seen it being used. There was a transparency program that I think they still do where all ballots were scanned and the images made available online for the public to double check results. I'm no wiz with machine vision but I think I could knock together enough code to do my own recount.

I'm not paying much attention but doesn't Trump say the election is rigged ? Obama's setting up a straw mam by changing the story to election fraud. There may well be fraud in the voting process but we are unlikely to ever know how much. But as to the election being rigged , that's so plainly obvious it's painful.

And Germany doesn't allow electronic voting machines. Gotta be a clue there somewhere.

Noirette | Oct 19, 2016 12:43:09 PM | 31
There is ample evidence of election fraud, vote fraud, and various types of 'rigging' or 'organising' in the US it is just too long to go into in a short post. (See for ex. Adjuvant @ 6, john @ 18)

Ideally, one would have to divide it into different types. It is also traditional, which some forget, I only know about that from 'realistic' novels, I recently read Dos Passos' Manhattan Transfer, and was amazed how little things change (despite horse-drawn carriages, rouge, spitoons, cigars, sauerkraut, etc.) - see karlof1 @ 25.

Poll Pro-HRC results are not trustworthy. They aren't necessarily outright fabricated (is easy to do and very hard to detect / prosecute), nor even fraudulently carried out, but 'arranged' to give the desired result, which might even, in some cases, be perfectly unconscious, just following SOP. (I could outline 10 major problems / procedures that twist the results.)

Then, the media take it up, and cherry-pick the results, pro HRC. That includes internet sites like real clear politics, which I noticed recently is biased (paid?) in favor of HRC.

It is amazing to me, yet very few ppl actually dig into the available info about the polls. (Maybe 300 ppl in the world?) HRC needs these fakelorum poll results because they will 'rig' the election as best as they can, they need to point back to them: "see we were winning all the time Trump deplorables yelling insults who cares" - Pathetic. Also, of course, controlling the polls while not the same as 'riggin' the election is part of the same MO. (See Podesta e-mails from Wikileaks.)

This is also the reason for the mad accusations of Putin interference in US elections - if somebody is doing illegit moves it is Trump's supporter Putin and so the 'bad stuff' is 'foreign take-over' and not 'us', and btw NOT the Republicans, or Trump circle, which is very telling.

I didn't see the O Keefe, Project Veritas, vids mentioned. Here the first one. There is a second one up and more coming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

alaric | Oct 19, 2016 12:49:20 PM | 32
I think things could get pretty ugly on Nov 9 if Trump wins because i don't see Hillary going quietly into the night and the dems have seeded "putin is rigging" the election idea to contest the results. Plus the establishment that wants Hillary controls the media and the executive office.

Oh boy.

somebody | Oct 19, 2016 1:05:09 PM | 33
Posted by: jdmckay | Oct 19, 2016 12:11:35 PM | 27

Trump's delegitimizing the election before it takes place is definitely color revolution stuff - the carrot revolution?

It is an interesting experiment if you can make people vote for a candidate they don't like by it being the only way to prevent a candidate they dislike even more. You just showed you aren't able to.

Petri Krohn | Oct 19, 2016 1:49:49 PM | 37
My link collection on the elections is here: US presidential elections - ACLOS

Topics discussed:

anon | Oct 19, 2016 2:03:32 PM | 39

"Hillary Clinton now says her "number one priority" in Syria is the removal of Bashar al-Assad, putting us on the path of war with Syria and Russia next year.

Any "no-fly zone" over Syria will certainly be followed by the shooting down of both Russian and U.S. jets, in an unpredictable escalation that could easily spread

Russia will not back down if we start shooting down its aircraft. Is Hillary willing to risk nuclear war with Russia in order to protect al-Qaeda in Syria?

Mina | Oct 19, 2016 2:07:19 PM | 40
latest fisk
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/saudi-arabia-human-rights-imprisonment-every-decent-man-who-speaks-out-in-jail-robert-fisk-a7369276.html
Noirette | Oct 19, 2016 2:32:17 PM | 46
96% of disclosed campaign contributions from journalists went to the Clinton campaign. From the MSM: TIME.

Note the sums are shards of chewed peanuts and their shells. MSM are bought, controlled and are put in a lowly position, and pamper to power, any.… They will go where the money is but it takes them a long time to figure out who what where why etc. and what they are supposed to do. They cannot be outed as completely controlled, so have to do some 'moves' to retain credibility, and their clients/controllers understand that. Encouraging a corrupt 4th Estate has its major downsides.

http://time.com/money/4533729/hillary-clinton-journalist-campaign-donations/

Denis | Oct 19, 2016 2:53:54 PM | 48
Rigged. Right. Let me tell you about rigged. The US system is rigged in a far larger sense than any Americans realize. It's rigged to blow off the Constitution.

If you want to know how badly rigged, ask any voter when they leave the voting venue: "What is the name of the elector you just voted for?" You'll get either: 1) a dumb stare; 2) a laugh, or 3) a "WTF is an elector?"

Under the Constitution, Americans vote for electors. They do not vote for presidents, and there's a reason for that. It's called "mass stupidity."

The Fondling Fathers were smart enough to know that the people are too stupid to choose their own leader. So the idea of the Electoral College was that every four years communities vote for a local person who could be trusted to go to Washington and become part of the committee that chooses a president and vice-president.

There is not "supposed" to be any campaign, candidates, or polls. The process is "supposed" to be more akin to the Holy See choosing a pope. The electors were to meet in Washington, debate the possibilities, come up with short list, go to the top person on the list and ask if they would be willing to be president (or vice-president, as the case may be), and if they agreed, the deal was done. If not, go to the second person. Pretty much how the CEO of a large corporation is chosen.

Having the people of a community vote for the local person who would be the most trustworthy to deliberate on who should be president is a reasonable objective. I mean, essentially the question for the voter would be reduced to: "What person in our community would be least likely to be bought off?" But having a gang-bang of 60 million voting Americans who don't really know shit about the morons they are voting into office . . . that, on its face, is a sign of mass self-deception and insanity. It is mass stupidity perpetuating itself.

The circus that the US presidential election has turned into – including the grotesque primaries – just goes to show how fucking stupid Americans are. The system is an embarrassment to the entire country. And it is an act of flipping-off the Fondling Fathers and their better judgment every four years. But worst of all, the present system is virtually certain to eventually produce the most powerful person in the world who is a complete moron, and who will precipitate a global catastrophe – economic, or military, or both.

Two names come immediately to mind.

blues | Oct 19, 2016 2:59:19 PM | 50

... ... ...

And demand hand counted paper ballots that cannot be rigged by "Russian hackers". It's called simple score because it is almost the same as other well-known forms of score (and "range") voting, except it's optimized for hand counted paper ballots (i.e. no machines).

Jack Smith | Oct 19, 2016 3:09:23 PM | 52
Hey MoA,

Just got my mail-in ballots from the postman. Voting against all Democrats except, for POTUS. Take a few days and vote either Jill Stein or Donald Trump.

Need to comb through the propositions carefully. Against big business and self serving liberals.. BTW, I'm a Californian from the Central Valley. Oh! How I wish there is a proposition. Should Hussein Obomo II charge for crimes against humanity?

anon | Oct 19, 2016 3:16:23 PM | 53

"For any minimally conscious American citizen, it is absolutely evident that Donald Trump is not only facing the mammoth Clinton political machine, but, also the combined forces of the viciously dishonest Mainstream Media."

-Boyd D. Cathey, "The Tape, the Conspiracy, and the Death of the Old Politics", Unz Review

"When was the last time the media threw 100% of its support behind one party's presidential candidate? What does that say about the media?"

Do you feel comfortable with the idea that a handful of TV and print-news executives are inserting themselves into the process and choosing our leaders for us?"

from Mike Whitney, Counterpunch

To read more:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/19/trump-unchained/

Bruno Marz | Oct 19, 2016 3:26:32 PM | 54
If Jill Stein needs 5% of the vote in order to be considered a legitimate candidate (or to bring the Green party up to legitimate third-party status for the 2020 election), then you can rest assured that no matter how many votes she actually gets, her percentage will never be above 4.99%. Just like when Obama swept into office in 2008, the powers-that-be made sure the Democrats never had a filibuster-proof majority. Give 'em just enough to believe that the system works, but never enough to create a situation where the lack of change can't be explained away by "gridlock". Brilliant in its malevolence, really.
anon | Oct 19, 2016 3:32:17 PM | 55

It looks like ALL of the Neocon war criminals and architects of the mass slaughters in Iraq (Libya, Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc) are standing with Hillary Clinton:

Here's a partial list of neocon war criminals supporting Miss Neocon: Paul Wolfowitz (aka, the Prince of Darkness), Eliot Cohen, Richard Perle, David Wurmser, Robert Kagan, Max Boot, Bill Kristol, Dov Zakheim, Douglas Feith, Michael Ledeen, Marc Grossman, David Frum, Michael Chertoff, John Podhoretz, Elliot Abrams, Alan Dershowitz, etc

https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2016/10/15/neocon-architects-of-illegal-war-in-iraq-stand-with-hillary-clinton/

All neocons stand with the CrookedC*nt because there hasn't been nearly enough pointless war, slaughter, dismemberment, death or trauma, it needs to go on FOREVER.

Kalen | Oct 19, 2016 3:35:05 PM | 56
To be blunt. It is not only MSM who are prostitutes of oligarchic ruling elite but all or most even so called left-leaning or independent media are all under guise of phony "opposition" or diversity of opinion where there is none.

Actually MOA is one of few, more or less independent, aligning itself with any sane ideology, a welcome island of order in the ocean of media cacophony and I often disagreed with MOA but I appreciate its logical consistency and integrity, hard facts based journalism,no matter from what moral stand MOA writings are coming from. MSM even lacks this basic foundation of a rational thought and must be dismissed entirely.

But there is much, much more rigging going on, on massive, even global scale. The fraud is so massive and so visible that blinds people from the truth about it. From the truth of how massively they are being controlled in their opinions and thoughts.

The freedom of speech and press, democracy and just simple decency are simply not allowed in these US under penalty of social marginalizing or even death as Assange and Manning are facing. The entire message of MSM propaganda false flag soldiers is fear.

It may seem shocking for people under spell of overwhelming propaganda, but this government run by Global oligarchs is dangerous to our physical and mental health and must be eradicated as a matter of sanitary emergency.

Let's sweep all those political excretions into the sewage pipes where they belong. But first we have to recognize the scale of their influence and their horrifying daily routine subversion of social order, gross malfeasance or even horrendous crimes also war crimes covered up by MSM.

Only after we get rid of this abhorrent, brutal regime, cut the chains of enslavement we can have decent democracy or voting, not before.

John Stuart Mill - "Government shapes our character, values, and intellect. It can affect us positively or negatively. When political institutions are ill constructed, "the effect is felt in a thousand ways in lowering the morality and deadening the intelligence and activity of the people"

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, "I had come to see that everything was radically connected with politics, and that however one proceeded, no people would be other than the nature of its government.

And here we are, believing the shit those mofos and feeding us about freedom and democracy citing bought and sold lies as "scientific research" concocted for one reason alone, to fuck us up , exploit and discard when not needed.

Here is, in a small part, about how they do it, starting from phony polls that suppose to sway you one way or another into following supposed projected winner anointed by the establishment.

Polls are routinely skewed, even MSM pundits say use polls they can trust i.e. which give them results their bosses seek.

Now over hundred top newspapers and media outlets endorsed Hillary so you can safely remove them from your list of polls you can rely on.

Anyway most polls are rigged even more than elections themselves, mostly by skewing the content of a poling sample like in the above example. If you poll Dems about Reps that exactly you get what you seek. But they are more insidious like doubling or tripling polling sample and then pick an choose what answers they like, or focus sample on the area you know there is overall support for your thesis or assertion of candidate regardless of official affiliation, and many more down to raw rigging by fixing numbers or adjustments.

The US Elections themselves are regularity defrauded (read Greg Palast) for decades in thousands of well-documented different and additional ways to polls such as:

By limiting selection of possible candidates and their access to statewide or national ballot box via rigged undemocratic caucuses and primaries and other unreasonable requirements, goal-seeking ad-hoc rules. by eliminating and/or confusing voters about voting at proper physical location often changed in last moments, forcing into never counted provisional vote by purposely hiding registered lists, purging made up "felons" from voter lists, requiring expensive or unavailable or costly to obtain due to extensive travel, identifying documents, threatening citizen (of color) with deportation, accusing them of voter fraud [baseless challenging that automatically pushes voter into provisional vote], or strait offering meaningless provisional ballots instead of proper ballot for people who can't read (English) well, eliminating students and military vote when needed on phony registration issues, signature, pictures, purposefully misspelled names, mostly non-British names etc., reducing number of polling places where majority votes for "rouge" candidate, forcing people to stand in line for hours or preventing people from voting al together.

Selecting remote polling locations with obstructed public access by car or transit, paid parking, exposed to weather elements, cold, wind and rain in November.

Hacking databases before and after vote, switching votes, adding votes for absent voters, and switching party affiliations and vote at polling places as well up in the data collating chain, county, state, filing in court last minute frivolous law suits aimed to block unwanted candidates or challenging readiness of the polling places in certain neighborhoods deemed politically uncertain, outrageous voting ON a WORKING DAY (everywhere else voting is on Sunday or a day free of work) skewing that way votes toward older retired people.

Massive lying propaganda of whom we vote for, a fraudulent ballot supposedly voting for "candidates" but in fact voting on unnamed electors, party apparatchiks instead, violating basic democratic principle of transparency of candidates on the ballot and secrecy of a voter, outrageous electorate college rules design to directly suppress democracy. Requirement of approval of the electoral vote by congress is an outrageous thing illegal in quasi-democratic western countries due to division of powers.

Outrageous, voting day propaganda to discourage voting by phony polling and predictions while everywhere else there is campaigning ban, silence for two to three days before Election Day.

No independent verification of the vote or serious reporting by international observers about violations, or independent exit polls, and many, many more ways every election is stolen as anybody who opens eyes can see.

All the above fraud prepared by close group of election criminals on political party payroll, months/years before election date often without any contribution from ordinary polling workers who believe that nothing is rigged.

If somebody thinks that they would restrain themselves this time, think again. The regime, in a form of mostly unsuspecting county registrars are tools of the establishment and will do everything, everything they can and they can a lot, to defraud those elections and push an establishment candidate down to our throats, without a thought crossing their comatose minds. "Just doing their jobs like little Eichmanns of NAZI regime".

One way or another your vote will be stolen or manipulated up and down the ticket at will and your participation would mean one thing legitimizing this abhorrent regime.

We must reject those rigged elections and demand that establishment must go, all of them GOP, DNC and that including Hillary before any truly democratic electoral process worth participating may commence.

"The individual loses his substance by voluntarily bowing to an overpowering and distant oligarchy, while simultaneously "participating" in sham democracy."
C. Wright Mills,"The Power Elite" (1956)

and here is why:
https://contrarianopinion.wordpress.com/2016/09/17/faux-elections-and-american-insanity-of-fear/

Any sane person must thus conclude that an act of voting in the current helplessly tainted and rigged political system is nothing but morally corrupting tool that divides us, conflicts us, extorts from us an approval for the meaningless political puppets of the calcified, repugnant oligarchic US regime, in a surrealistic act of utter futility aimed just to break us down, to break our sense of human dignity, our individual will and self-determination since no true choice is ever being offered to us and never will.

Idea of political/electoral boycott, unplugging from the system that corrupts us and ALTERNATIVE POLITICAL PROCESS designed, developed and implemented for benefit of 99% of population is the only viable idea to express our political views that are absent from official regime candidates' agendas and from the rigged ballots. Let's not be afraid, it was already successfully done in the past. It works." Without courage there is only slavery.

jdmckay | Oct 19, 2016 3:50:06 PM | 57
Bo Dacious @ 41
Remember this is a person that actually publicly admits he took 6 months off (from what?) to campaign for Mr Changey Hopey, The drone Bombing Nobel Peace Prize winner, so it's not like he could ever 5have any political insights worth listening to, now is it?

Grow up.

I took the time off (I'm a software engineer) after the primaries (having supported neither BO or HRC) because that's who get got. We were coming off 8 years of BushCo which was, in summary... a horror. The republicans were 100% unrepentant, and McCain was a far louder and steadfast supporter of Iraq then Hillary... wasn't even close. McCain burried his Abramhoff investigation, sealed their findings for 50 years. And his running mate was not just bereft of any policy expertise, she was a loudmouth loon... even FOX canceled her post election show.

I was well aware of BO's questions/limitations. He didn't put his time in as a Senator and sponsored no meaningful legislation. He played it safe. He had no real policy track record. And as a Senator he quietly slipped away and hob-nobbed with Bush several times (no other Dem Senator at the time did this that I was aware). So yeah, Obama was on open question.

But he was the guy we got....

ALAN | Oct 19, 2016 4:20:32 PM | 65
The Best of Joachim Hagopian https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/10/joachim-hagopian/war-us-russia/
Grieved | Oct 19, 2016 4:27:54 PM | 66
I was going to pass on this election, but I've read a lot here about it and started to consider what as a US voter I might do.

Oddly, I looked to Russia for inspiration. RF believes in international law so greatly that she strives mightily at every turn to make it the way nations interact. And what we can see if we choose, is that this effort is paying off. The world is changing because of what Russia believes in.

I believe in voting. I believe in multiple parties. I believe the game is totally rigged but sometimes you can win, except that you have to play for this to happen. I believe that you have to be the thing you want.

I believe in a Green Party and I admire the sanity that comes from Dr. Jill Stein every time I encounter her position. This is the world I believe in. This is the world I'll vote for and support, with all tools that comes to hand, forever.

~~

I don't believe in the view that aspiring for betterment is foolish or naive, or the view that current status cannot change or be changed. Such views fail to acknowledge the physical reality of a new universe manifesting in each moment, always different in some way from that of the previous moment. Such views are lost, bewildered, behind the curve, forever.

blues | Oct 19, 2016 4:45:09 PM | 69
Term limits are useless. There could never be a Cynthia McKinney or a Dennis Kucinich -- Ever! Term limited representatives would by definition be track record-free representatives. If you really would like positive change, you simply need to get strategic hedge simple score voting:
SHSV

Nothing else can possibly help.

Jackrabbit | Oct 19, 2016 4:58:09 PM | 72
The Donald describes what this election is about (ht Saker)
lysias | Oct 19, 2016 5:19:33 PM | 74
I am disappointed in how critical of Assange Glenn Greenwald and Naomi Klein are in this piece: IS DISCLOSURE OF PODESTA'S EMAILS A STEP TOO FAR? A CONVERSATION WITH NAOMI KLEIN .
Wat | Oct 19, 2016 6:07:24 PM | 77
http://sweetremedy.tv/electionnightmares/archives/278

Although Clinton Won Massachusetts by 2%, Hand Counted Precincts in Massachusetts Favored Bernie Sanders by 17%

Mar 06 2016

J.T. Waldron

Massachusetts, one of the participating states for the Super Tuesday election results, may need further scrutiny to allay concerns over election fraud using electronic voting machines. 68 out of the state's 351 jurisdictions used hand counted ballots and showed a much larger preference of 17% for Bernie Sanders than the rest of the jurisdictions tabulated by electronic voting machine vendors ES&S, Diebold and Dominion. Hillary Clinton was declared the winner of Massachusetts by 1.42 %.

Malvin | Oct 19, 2016 6:15:15 PM | 78
In the Dominican Republic's last elections (May 2016) voters forced the Electoral Office to get rid of the electronic count in favor of paper ballots, which were counted both, by scanner and by hand, one by one, in front of delegates from each party. This action avoided a credibility crisis and everything went smooth.

[Oct 20, 2016] Donald Trump accuses Hillary Clinton of being given the debate questions

Notable quotes:
"... claims that the election is rigged, putting officials on the defense weeks before most voters head to the polls. ..."
"... Why didn't Hillary Clinton announce that she was inappropriately given the debate questions - she secretly used them! Crooked Hillary. ..."
Oct 20, 2016 | www.bostonglobe.com

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump added one more accusation against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton: "inappropriately" getting the debate questions.

Trump's tweet with the latest allegation comes the day after the final presidential debate in which he refused to commit to the outcome of the Nov. 8 election.

Why didn't Hillary Clinton announce that she was inappropriately given the debate questions - she secretly used them! Crooked Hillary.
- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 20, 2016

Less than two hours after sending the tweet, the real estate mogul told a rally in Ohio that he would accept the results of the election - if he wins.

"I would like to promise and pledge . . . that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election if I win."

Trump later said in the rally that he would accept a clear result but reserves the right to contest a questionable outcome.

Trump's comments about the election results during the debate were blasted by politicians on both sides of the aisle, including Governor Charlie Baker and Libertarian vice presidential candidate Bill Weld, a former governor of Massachusetts. Weld called the debate remarks "the death knell for [Trump's] candidacy."

Senator John McCain of Arizona, a top Republican who withdrew his support of Trump earlier this month, said he conceded defeat "without reluctance" in 2008 when then-Senator Barack Obama won the presidential election. McCain said the loser has always congratulated the winner, calling the person "my president."

"That's not just the Republican way or the Democratic way. It's the American way. This election must not be any different," McCain said in a statement.

Trump and his supporters have been making unsubstantiated claims that the election is rigged, putting officials on the defense weeks before most voters head to the polls. Civil rights activists have called some of the accusations a thinly veiled racist attack.

Fred C. Dobbs said... October 20, 2016 at 10:37 AM
(As if!)

Trump accuses Clinton of being
secretly given debate questions
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/10/20/donald-trump-accuses-hillary-clinton-being-given-debate-questions/ilt6tiNdDQxRsB7jldMB2I/story.html?event=event25
via @BostonGlobe - Nicole Hernandez - October 20, 2016

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump added one more accusation against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton: "inappropriately" getting the debate questions.

Trump's tweet with the latest allegation comes the day after the final presidential debate in which he refused to commit to the outcome of the Nov. 8 election.

Donald J. Trump ✔ ‎@realDonaldTrump

Why didn't Hillary Clinton announce that she was inappropriately given the debate questions - she secretly used them! Crooked Hillary.

10:55 AM - 20 Oct 2016

Less than two hours after sending the tweet, the real estate mogul told a rally in Ohio that he would accept the results of the election - if he wins.

"I would like to promise and pledge ... that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election if I win."

Fred C. Dobbs said in reply to Fred C. Dobbs...

(But he didn't want the job anyway.)

President? It would be a demotion, says
Donald Trump Jr http://dailym.ai/2eJLQ71
via @MailOnline - Oct 20

Donald Trump Jr said last night moving into the White House would be a 'step down' for his father.

Trump Jr was being interviewed on Fox News after the third presidential debate in Las Vegas and was asked how he thought the Republican candidate had performed during the final presidential debate. ...

[Oct 20, 2016] The third debate wrapup

Notable quotes:
"... "Now we have the three [Goldman] transcripts. Everyone can read them, and everyone should. What they show is Clinton's extraordinary understanding of our world - its leaders and their politics, terrorist groups and their vulnerabilities, the interplay of global forces, and the economic well-being of Americans" ..."
"... I think this debate especially was "priced in" - any Trump supporter at this stage has lost the capacity for changing minds, especially as so much of it is anti-Hillary. ..."
"... It is astounding that with all her money and MSM support/collusion HRC is only a few digits ahead in the polls. I still see a slim chance that Trump will win, if his hidden and shy voters go out and some of Hillary's stay home (lazy and complacent). ..."
"... Having said that, the establishment is terrified of a Trump win, and so many of those voting machines don't leave an audit trail… ..."
Oct 20, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Days until: 18.

Debate Wrapup

I can tell what how the press stories will read from the headlines and the writers, so I won't bother to link to them. See the NC debate live blog for a rice bowl-free discussion.

"Trump had done well, delivering his best prepared and most substantive performance, but it wasn't nearly good enough to reshape the race. He came into Las Vegas trailing big time, and surely leaves the same way" [ New York Post ]. "Absent an unforeseeable black swan event that tips the table in his favor, Hillary Clinton is headed to the White House." Although I'd bet the terrain is quite different today from the terrain Clinton imagined back when she was influence peddling at Goldman in 2015.

... ... ..

And then there's this, which does seem to under cut the bizarre "our electoral system is perfection itself" narrative that Democrat loyalists are pushing:

... ... ...

UPDATE "But the negativity in this campaign has been something else, and the debates have been very heavy on character attacks. In terms of the overall impact on the health of American democracy, I think there's one thing that's particularly concerning: These two candidates, whose personal conduct and character have been impugned over and over, both went through competitive primaries. There were other candidates. Clinton and Trump both won their nominations, fairly and decisively. But for people who might tune in sporadically, the conclusion that this is the best we can do might produce real dismay." [ FiveThirtyEight ]. Yes, it's called a legitimacy crisis.

"The stream posted on his Facebook wasn't anything different than what people saw on CNN or Fox News or MSNBC, just a livestream of the debate, but more than 170,000 watched it at once. By the time the broadcast ended, more than 8.7 million had tuned in at some point. Compare that to the half a million views Time posted for its debate lifestream, or the nearly 900,000 who watched BuzzFeed News'" [ Independent Journal Review ]. "Welcome to the first broadcast of Trump TV."

War Drums

"Anyone who believes the United States is not fighting enough wars in the Middle East can be happy this week. We have just plunged into another one. Twice in recent days, cruise missiles fired from an American destroyer have rained down on Yemen. The Pentagon, a practiced master of Orwellian language, calls this bombing 'limited self-defense'" [ Boston Globe ]. "American forces were already involved in Yemen's civil war. Since 2002, our drone attacks have reportedly killed more than 500 Yemenis, including at least 65 civilians. We are also supplying weapons and intelligence to Saudi Arabia, which has killed thousands of Yemenis in bombing raids over the last year and a half - including last week's attack on a funeral in which more than 100 mourners were killed." But I'm sure none of the mourners were women or people of color. So that's alright, then.

Wikileaks

"Now we have the three [Goldman] transcripts. Everyone can read them, and everyone should. What they show is Clinton's extraordinary understanding of our world - its leaders and their politics, terrorist groups and their vulnerabilities, the interplay of global forces, and the economic well-being of Americans" [ RealClearPolitics ].

This is the line the Moustache of Understanding took. Which is all you need to know, really Although this writer is a little vague on just how they are "extraordinary."

"Walmart, Wendy Clark, Target and Apple: More WikiLeaked Clinton Campaign Messaging Secrets" [ Advertising Age ].

The Trail

"Trump Holds On To 1-Point Lead As Debate Sparks Fly - IBD/TIPP Poll" [ Investors Business Daily ]. Incidentally, IBD sounds like the sort of publication Trump would read.

allan October 20, 2016 at 2:51 pm

Washington's foreign policy elite breaks with Obama over Syrian bloodshed [WaPo]

There is one corner of Washington where Donald Trump's scorched-earth presidential campaign is treated as a mere distraction and where bipartisanship reigns. In the rarefied world of the Washington foreign policy establishment, President Obama's departure from the White House - and the possible return of a more conventional and hawkish Hillary Clinton - is being met with quiet relief.

The Republicans and Democrats who make up the foreign policy elite are laying the groundwork for a more assertive American foreign policy via a flurry of reports shaped by officials who are likely to play senior roles in a potential Clinton White House. …

This consensus is driven by broad-based backlash against a president who has repeatedly stressed the dangers of overreach and the limits of American power, especially in the Middle East. "There's a widespread perception that not being active enough or recognizing the limits of American power has costs," said Philip Gordon, a senior foreign policy adviser to Obama until 2015. "So the normal swing is to be more interventionist." …

Smart investors will go long producers of canned food and manufacturers of fallout shelter materials.

Bunk McNulty October 20, 2016 at 4:02 pm

Who Are All These Trump Supporters? (New Yorker)

George Saunders strives mightily to have us believe our economic situation has nothing to do with the attractiveness of The Donald to certain constituencies. But even he has to acknowledge what people are angry about (emphasis added):

"All along the fertile interstate-highway corridor, our corporations, those new and powerful nation-states, had set up shop parasitically, so as to skim off the drive-past money , and what those outposts had to offer was a blur of sugar, bright color, and crassness that seemed causally related to more serious addictions. Standing in line at the pharmacy in an Amarillo Walmart superstore, I imagined some kid who had moved only, or mostly, through such bland, bright spaces, spaces constructed to suit the purposes of distant profit, and it occurred to me how easy it would be, in that life, to feel powerless, to feel that the local was lame, the abstract extraneous, to feel that the only valid words were those of materialism ("get" and "rise")-words that are perfectly embodied by the candidate of the moment.

Something is wrong, the common person feels, correctly: she works too hard and gets too little; a dulling disconnect exists between her actual day-to-day interests and (1) the way her leaders act and speak, and (2) the way our mass media mistell or fail entirely to tell her story. What does she want? Someone to notice her over here, having her troubles. "

Pavel, October 20, 2016 at 4:06 pm

I blissfully ignored the televised "debate" last night though I followed the comments here at NC and on Twitter for a while. Not sure my blood pressure would survive 90 mins of Hillary's voice and smug smile or anything about Trump.

It is amusing to note the OUTRAGE that Trump might dare question the election results. Jesus H Christ the media are just taking us all for amnesiac idiots, aren't they?

I think this debate especially was "priced in" - any Trump supporter at this stage has lost the capacity for changing minds, especially as so much of it is anti-Hillary.

It is astounding that with all her money and MSM support/collusion HRC is only a few digits ahead in the polls. I still see a slim chance that Trump will win, if his hidden and shy voters go out and some of Hillary's stay home (lazy and complacent).

Having said that, the establishment is terrified of a Trump win, and so many of those voting machines don't leave an audit trail…

[Oct 20, 2016] Interesting read on what got discussed and what didn't get discussed in the three debates

Oct 20, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com

JohnH -> pgl... , October 20, 2016 at 08:59 AM
Interesting read on what got discussed and what didn't get discussed in the three debates:

Russia/Putin: 137
Social Security: 15
Poverty/the Poor: 8
Climate Change: 3
NSA/Privacy/Surveillance: 0

Basically the debates consisted of a lot of noise with very little substance...a pathetic performance in a democracy.

An informed citizenry is a threat to a corrupt duopoly...

pgl -> JohnH... , October 20, 2016 at 09:21 AM
They talked about poverty 8 times in one night? Krugman only mentioned it 6 times yesterday. Krugman NEVER talk about income inequality. Seriously - do you not get why your own dog says you are a stupid bore?
JohnH -> JohnH... , -1
Link to above:
http://fair.org/home/russia-terror-and-taxes-dominate-debates-climate-poverty-abortion-barely-mentioned/

[Oct 20, 2016] The third Presidential debate: Trump should clearly delineate himself from HRC by saying he wants no war with Russia. People hate war.

Notable quotes:
"... Trump should be ready for the Russia thing. I expect him to clearly delineate himself from HRC by saying he really really really wants no war with Russia. in fact, he's already said if he's elected he will meet with Putin before he's even inaugurated. It's a winning position for Trump. People hate war. ..."
"... I am skeptical of how much that will win over people in Hillary's base, since many well-to-do liberals I know swallow the Putin-is-evil propaganda without question and consider the threat of nuclear war as a distant, impossible thing. For them Trump is an immediate, concrete threat and bad relations with Russia leading to nuclear war a considerably more abstract proposition. ..."
"... Clinton: Citizens United "undermined" our democratic system. So, in other words, the system is indeed rigged. Glad they agree on something. ..."
"... I'm watching with a former TV producer who just pointed out that they've got soft light on her and hard light on him. ..."
"... I noticed that too, this debate and the last one. She has that Doris Day'ish type of look and he looks pale. The lighting – ..."
"... The heroin use is from having no jobs. ..."
"... and from doctors and Big Pharma pushing it. Marijuana appears to be better for pain and less harmful. ..."
"... That "she always supported the wall, never gets anything done so no wall" was quite adroit ..."
"... Clinton can't resist gleeful smirk, she can throw in some of her prepared remarks. ..."
"... Wikleaks=Russians=PayNoAttentionToThoseSpeechesToTheBanks PUTIN!!!! ..."
"... ooh-Clinton's already on wikileaks and Russia and Putin. 17 intelligence people have supposedly confirmed they were trying to change the election. ..."
"... Trump–great calling her out on her pivot off the borders. ..."
"... "You encouraged espionage of our people" I remember Hillary calling for a bolstering of NSA surveillance efforts after Orlando? ..."
"... Of course no mention that Obama has deported more people than any other president. ..."
"... Clinton's pivot from "hemisphere without borders" to Wikileaks/Russia/Putin interfering with out democracy. Pathetic. The audience found it laughable. ..."
"... she just lied about nuclear weapons…the secty of defense has to approve…she…is…well…she always lies so what else is new… ..."
"... Hillary's eyes are very glassy, She's doped up ..."
"... Trump saying jobs are stagnant, last report so bad "I should win the election". ..."
"... Your 30 years of experience coincide with the utter screwing over of the working people. ..."
"... Amen. I just watched about two minutes… all I could take. Her smirk and lies drive me nuts. ..."
"... Her basic narrative is she is the single most qualified person in the history of things to ever be deign to run for President and then she mumbles about one thing she did between being a lawyer for Wal-Mart and the governor's wife. It's a terrible narrative. Oh, and being on the wrong side of every foreign policy decision for 25 years. ..."
"... American bombs and bullets are humanitarian, dontcha know? ..."
"... NBC set up the Billy Bush tape, if that's what's being referred to. The Clintons set up the big frontpage NYT 'accusers,' or whatever it was. ..."
"... These agents provacateurs accusations against Clinton are quite plausible (hey, they were on PBS Newshour) even if the source is shady. They just feel very Clintonesque. ..."
"... Dirty politics Clinton style. ..."
"... There is a lot of evidence dug up by reddit amateur investigators after the tape leaked. They found people on the tape in a few protest videos as well as a woman on the Clinton payroll. I don't trust the voter fraud tape at all, but the inciting violence at riots tapes looks like the real deal. ..."
"... They go along well with the shots fired into and the burglary/ransacking of Sander's Nevada campaign headquarters, and the firebombings of Republican campaign offices in swing states. ..."
"... well done $hillary…the question was for her to respond about bill and his stuff…good diversion…congrats… ..."
"... "America is great because America is good." We kill because we love… ..."
"... She twists everything. Chubby Checker would be proud of Shillary. ..."
"... Now he's bringing up her emails. What happened to the FBI, he asks? Talks about 1 guy getting 4 yrs in jail for 1 lie to the FBI, a 4-star general, but she makes hundreds of lies. ..."
"... Has Hillary Clinton ever apologized for anything? Or just said "I misspoke." ..."
"... Hillary did not respond to Trump's charge that she paid for people to riot in Chicago before his rally. Instead she began to speak very slowly to eat up her time. ..."
"... Oooh, Clinton uses rhetoric–says Trump is "dark, divisive, dangerous". She practiced that one. There was no context. ..."
"... Wallace is pressing her more on pay to play. Trump says it's a criminal enterprise, Saudi & Qatar giving lots of money. They kill women & treat them horribly, push gays off buildings, but Clinton takes their money. He says she should give their money back. He says in Haiti they hate Clinton, what the foundation did was a disgrace. ..."
"... Clinton claims they spend 90% of donations on their programs. (Pinocchio moment, anyone?) ..."
"... Spending money on programs is lawyerly language. From what I have read, CF runs events but does little that benefits people "on the ground" ..."
"... Too bad Trump doesn't have any facts on Haiti. He could have buried her. This is so boring. Just low grade snipes at each other. ..."
"... Almost focusing on Haiti, almost a good point, then narcissism derails Trump … ..."
"... Media dishonest & corrupt, NYT wrote about it, poisoned the minds of voters but he thinks people can see through it. ..."
"... the fbi did a one year investigation or a three day cover up…? ..."
"... Clinton claims we've had "free and fair elections". Now there's a huge lie. Bigger lie than about her emails. ..."
"... Oh noes, Trump is denigrating our democracy. So did the DNC by rigging the primaries. ..."
"... She's appalled? What hypocrisy! ..."
"... Grabbing women. Nine came forward, said you groped them. Why would so many women all make up these stories, and Clinton, what your husband, was that worse? ..."
"... Hey, it's the best democracy that Organized Money can buy! ..."
"... "Intelligence surge." Sounds bad and worse. ..."
"... I do have to say without Trump in this election the lid would not have been blown off the criminality of the government in Washington. Mouthing off about it all the time every chance he gets. Not that Trump will do anything to change it. But still. ..."
"... Good point. He's exposing this fraud for what she is. ..."
"... This election would have been all about transgender bathrooms. ..."
"... Trump: Sanders supporting Clinton is a big mistake. Amen. ..."
"... To Americans of either side who are sick of our failed foreign policy and wondering whether it's intentionally duplicitous, yah, I think it's a winner. Keep reading, you'll see. ..."
"... Hillary sticking to technicals and official truths – "FBI cleared me after a year-long investment"; "Google Trump Iraq – all these sources" etc. If she can validate it, it must be true! ..."
"... He should have mentioned wikileaks. They found her own oppo research said his Iraq war opposition would be a huge problem for her. ..."
"... Trump is kicking butt. Stein or Trump… Can't stomach Bill in the WH again. ..."
"... Wallace asks Clinton about no fly zone, risk of starting a war. She says those are genuine risks, but thinks she could "strike a deal". ..."
"... Oh god, she says no-fly zone would save lives…. ..."
"... Trump occasionally emits MMT-like sounds, but I'm not sure that he believes them. For example, he has previously accurately noted that US can't be forced to default on USD-denominated debt, since it prints its own currency. Then he suggested that we could reduce the outstanding debt by negotiating down the price of previously issued Treasury bonds (not sure the details; perhaps threaten to default, hammer the price by terrifying bond-holders, and buy the depressed price bonds.) ..."
"... Hillary has become a traditional Republican with regard to American exceptionalism. ..."
"... I couldn't believe it when she was appalled Trump criticized Reagan. All Obama did was say Reagan had some "good ideas." ..."
"... Liberal talking heads are hyperventilating about the Donald dissing Reagan. Tells me all I need to know. ..."
"... She's gonna create two classes of SS/Medicare recipients. Great. Some will get a fraction more, most will be screwed. ..."
"... I guess you could say Donald at least can learn. He's gotten better in each debate in terms of not appearing to be a drug addict with anger issues. ..."
"... "Because neo-liberalism. Because I like the idea, a lot, of catching the Mount Pelerin Society, Pinochet, Diane Rehm, the Friedmans, Joe Biden, Rush Limbaugh, and the people who drafted the Democratic platform in one big net, and then deep-sixing the entire squirming and gesticulating political class with language that's "exceptionally bloggy and aggressively casual and implicitly ironic." ..."
"... Media all freaking out about the "respect the results of the election" question. Strange that nobody has brought up Al Gore - it certainly would have been better for the country if Al had pushed harder in 2000. ..."
"... Wow ABC, the elections ain't rigged but Russia hacked them?! Make up your damned minds already, this is more schizophrenia in a single sentence than I can handle… ..."
"... #Breaking: Trump's lead advisor Roger Ailes has left the Trump campaign. According to reports: "[Fox] said the pair had a falling out, with both sides saying debate prep had not gone the way they wanted. The report came just hours before Wednesday's third presidential debate in Las Vegas, where Trump will try to dig out of a recent polling hole. ..."
"... The report said that Ailes had concerns that Trump could not focus and that preparation would be a "waste of time," while Trump thought Ailes spent too much prep time telling old stories." ..."
"... And Hillary is against Citizens United, now that she has been the one who has benefited the most and won't need it anymore. ..."
"... Just in terms of tone, whenever Clinton says something appalls her, it makes me think "Gee, that might be a good idea!" Not that it is, but that's my reaction at this point. ..."
"... With that forced smile of HER's …. I wouldn't get within 5 kilometers of the bloody white hag -- ..."
"... 'families' …. Cosa Nostra ?? ..."
"... The Clinton dynasty needs to be brought down asap. Their grip and influence is even more than most realize, I suspect. ..."
"... I thought Trump did pretty well, said more about "jobs" than Clinton, which is usually a smart move. Not a lot of specifics. Closing minute was a flop though. Clinton spent far too long accusing Russian hackers, which she can't substantiate, and people care less about than the content of the leaked information. ..."
"... And Hillary, do you promise then not to rig the elections with your allies like you did the Democratic primaries? "Bernie Sanders will not be a factor in N.J." 9/22/2015. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9846 ..."
"... Biggest muffed issue: Wallace asks Clinton if she'd shoot down a Russian plane that violated her no-fly zone. Clinton dodges, Wallace does not press her, Trump does not press her either. "No, Hillary, I'm anxious to know. How badly do you want a new war, this time with Russia?" or some such. ..."
"... I stand by my opinion of chris wallace being the best and this is really awkward but fox has great post-debate commentary. ..."
"... Fox is probably more free to push Clinton because their networks of political access are less tied to her campaign than all the other outlets, who seem scared shitless of being thought to cause the slightest embarrassment for her. ..."
"... actually, mr. wallace did the best job by far of any of these "moderators". ..."
"... The fact that wallace hit both sides hard made trump loom better. ..."
Oct 20, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

EndOfTheWorld October 19, 2016 at 8:49 pm

Trump should be ready for the Russia thing. I expect him to clearly delineate himself from HRC by saying he really really really wants no war with Russia. in fact, he's already said if he's elected he will meet with Putin before he's even inaugurated. It's a winning position for Trump. People hate war.

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 8:55 pm

I am skeptical of how much that will win over people in Hillary's base, since many well-to-do liberals I know swallow the Putin-is-evil propaganda without question and consider the threat of nuclear war as a distant, impossible thing. For them Trump is an immediate, concrete threat and bad relations with Russia leading to nuclear war a considerably more abstract proposition.

jrs October 19, 2016 at 9:04 pm

Agreed, they swallow it.

Tom Allen October 19, 2016 at 10:04 pm

…[T]he 1980s, they're now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because, you know, the Cold War's been over for 20 years.

- Barack Obama to Mitt Romney, in the final presidential debate of 2012.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 8:56 pm

I may switch to watching Call the Midwife on PBS after the first hour so as to restore my faith in humanity and universal national healthcare, instituted in the UK seven decades ago during the years of extreme postwar austerity while we trudge along here in "never ever" land.

John October 19, 2016 at 9:07 pm

Fitting as it's a crap shoot for the country no matter who "wins".

Lee October 19, 2016 at 9:09 pm

Clinton: Citizens United "undermined" our democratic system. So, in other words, the system is indeed rigged. Glad they agree on something.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 9:11 pm

Supreme Court….

CLINTON Clinton Need Supreme Court stand up for women LBTQ, stand up on Citiznes United [chutzpah]

Not reverse Roe v Wade, not reverse marriage inequality, stand up and say Supreme Court should represent all of us

TRUMP What it's all about. Imperative have right justice. Ginsberg forced to apologize for statements she made

Uphold Second Amendment, which is under seige. Justices I name pro-life, great scholars, interpret the way the Founders waned it interpreted. Constitution way it was meant to be…

* * *

Clinton "stand up" often punched…

optimader October 19, 2016 at 9:26 pm

LBTQ didn't say Q….she's not all inclusive

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:14 pm

Is it just me, or does this seem like nothing related to what either one would do as president? Just a show. A weird kind of reality show.

Clinton's doing word soup about 2nd amendment etc. saying nothing.

Wallace sounds a little nervous. Trump sounds calm, portrays Clinton as "extremely upset". Painting her as overly emotional. Sexist.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 9:16 pm

CLINTON Respect Second Amendment. But 33K year die, need background checks, close loopholes, sensible reforms that do not conflict.

Heller: Disagree with SC application in that case. DC wanted to protect toddlers, a reasonable regulation

WALLACE How will you ensure 2A protected?

TRUMP SHe was angry when Heller came down. Scalia well-crafted.

W Were you upset?

CLINTON Yes bc toddlers kill people with guns. No doubt I respect 2A and right to bear arms. No conflict w sensible regulation. I understand Donald is funded by NRA and running millions of ads against me.

W You support a national right to carry law?

TRUMP Chicago toughest laws, more violence than any other city. I support 2A, very proud to have the NRA endorsement. We are going to appoint justices that will feel strongly about 2A, won't damage it.

Synoia October 19, 2016 at 9:18 pm

Because in DC speak "open" = "speaking in the open" (as opposed to closed doors).

3.14e-9 October 19, 2016 at 9:30 pm

I'm watching with a former TV producer who just pointed out that they've got soft light on her and hard light on him.

Susan C October 20, 2016 at 12:07 am

I noticed that too, this debate and the last one. She has that Doris Day'ish type of look and he looks pale. The lighting –

John October 19, 2016 at 9:22 pm

The heroin use is from having no jobs.

Bob October 19, 2016 at 9:41 pm

In central Indiana (Gov. Pence's bailiwick) another 350 union manufacturing jobs are going to Mexico. Yesterday it was announced that Rexnord will close its local plant. That's on top of the 1400 jobs lost with the departure of Carrier announced months ago. http://www.wthr.com/article/mayor-hogsett-announces-task-force-for-carrier-rexnord-jobs

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 9:45 pm

and from doctors and Big Pharma pushing it. Marijuana appears to be better for pain and less harmful.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:23 pm

Trump fear mongering immigrants people kill people. Sheesh. Talking about heroin flooding across the southern border. I bet he won't mention the prescription opiate issue.

jrs October 19, 2016 at 9:24 pm

And why are we in Afghanistan anyway?

IowanX October 19, 2016 at 10:55 pm

+1

John October 19, 2016 at 9:24 pm

There is no way the 11 million figure is real. No way. They have been telling us it's 11 million for over 3 decades. It's got to be over 30 million by now.

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 9:25 pm

Hillary totally glossing over Obama-era deportations

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:25 pm

Trump says "bad bad bad". Clinton – on immigration starts with things that sound sane then goes all cerebral, just more word soup. She doesn't know when to shut up.

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 9:26 pm

That "she always supported the wall, never gets anything done so no wall" was quite adroit

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:27 pm

Both trying so hard to be controlled. Clinton can't resist gleeful smirk, she can throw in some of her prepared remarks.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 9:28 pm

Okay, get the current 15 million out of the shadows so as to eliminate their downward pressure on wages. Then what?

jrs October 19, 2016 at 9:32 pm

She's crazy can't vote for her. Stein or bust.

John October 19, 2016 at 9:28 pm

Everyone these two know uses illegals as their nannies, cooks, drivers, house cleaners, gardeners etc.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:29 pm

He says she'll be a disaster with open borders and she gets her big grin again. It's a game of facial expression and emotive words.

allan October 19, 2016 at 9:30 pm

Wikleaks=Russians=PayNoAttentionToThoseSpeechesToTheBanks PUTIN!!!!

Patricia October 19, 2016 at 9:30 pm

"Russians", twice! And Putin!

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 9:30 pm

Ding! Russia/Putin deflection of WikiLeaks. Took longer than I thought.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:31 pm

ooh-Clinton's already on wikileaks and Russia and Putin. 17 intelligence people have supposedly confirmed they were trying to change the election.

Trump–great calling her out on her pivot off the borders.

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 9:33 pm

"You encouraged espionage of our people" I remember Hillary calling for a bolstering of NSA surveillance efforts after Orlando?

jrs October 19, 2016 at 9:33 pm

She's on that when the topic is immigration, she's WAY off topic.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 9:37 pm

Was this the same outfit that confirmed WMDs in Iraq?

HBE October 19, 2016 at 9:34 pm

These debates seem to be mainly focused on scaring each tribe into showing up to vote there is certainly no appeal to independents by either side.

Hillary really gave the liberals a good he's Hitler scare on immigration, "round them up", "put them on trains", hmm I wonder what focus groups said those phrases reminded them of.

Of course no mention that Obama has deported more people than any other president.

John k October 19, 2016 at 10:42 pm

Any job an illegal gets is a job a legal could have had, albeit at a higher wage. This includes apple picking and all the others. And the legal Hispanics and others have all worked this out.

John Zelnicker October 19, 2016 at 11:01 pm

When Alabama passed laws against undocumented immigrants, the tomatoes rotted on the plants because no one else would do the work, even at higher wages.

Yves Smith October 19, 2016 at 11:28 pm

I've pointed that out, but that is because the wages weren't high enough because….drumroll….those farmers competed with farmers in other states that can and do hire illegal workers.

So this isn't a valid test of what would happen if you shut down the seasonal worker flow on a widespread basis. You probably would have a very painful transition the first year as farmers tried bidding for workers and bid too low.

When I was a kid, lots of kids picked strawberries in the summer. Not terribly pleasant work but reasonably paid and only a few weeks. You could probably get teenagers in the summer for crops that had short harvest windows.

Ivy October 20, 2016 at 12:17 am

Picking various crops meant new school clothes and a new bicycle for many kids back in the day. There was a sense of camaraderie and shared experience that made the work seem easier, and some brought transistor radios to provide background music. People generally had a good time and kids saw the work ethic in action.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:57 pm

Guess you never had to work those jobs to survive; manual labor jobs like construction and working in a restaurant and just about anything else that the little people do. Now most Americans can't get hired at those jobs.They go to illegals.

ggm October 19, 2016 at 9:44 pm

Clinton wants to rip babies from their mother's wombs and Trump wants to tear families apart through deportation. Who are these people??

Trump did finally mention Hillary's border wall vote and Obama's deportations. Literally Hitlers.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 9:34 pm

Clinton's pivot from "hemisphere without borders" to Wikileaks/Russia/Putin interfering with out democracy. Pathetic. The audience found it laughable.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:34 pm

Trump's digs are more effective–short, clear words. "She's the puppet" Clinton's ideas are sometimes better but it's overly cerebral and too word-soupy. Trump – "Putin has outsmarted her in Syria", etc. etc.

just_kate October 19, 2016 at 9:37 pm

this is insane. hillary upset about foreign interference ??

alex morfesis October 19, 2016 at 9:37 pm

she just lied about nuclear weapons…the secty of defense has to approve…she…is…well…she always lies so what else is new…

Jolly Tommo October 19, 2016 at 9:37 pm

As in first debate Trump holds it together for about half an hour and then starts to throw a wobbly.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 9:38 pm

W Immigration. Trump wall, Clinton 100 days include pathway to citizenship

TRUMP Amnesty unfair to people waiting in line for years. In audience 4 mothers killed by illegal immigrants. We have no country if we have no borders. Border control and ICE endorsed me. It means their job is tougher. They want strong borders. Up NH, single biggest problem heroin, poisoning the blood of our youth. Strong borders, amnesty, ICE, they all want the wall [Trump starts sniffing]. When the border is secured, we'll make a determination [about the rest of it]

CLINTON Carla, worried she was born here, parents were not. I don't want to see parents separated from children. 11M undocumented, 4 million children. Would need a massive law enforcement presence to round up the undocumented, then put them on trains and buses. Not in keeping with who we are, would rip our country apart. Voted for border security. My comprehensive plan includes border security. Get rid of violent. Trump went to Mexico, didn't mention the wall, got into a twitter war

TRUMP Mexican President nice man, CLinton fought for the wall in 2006 but she never gets anything done so naturally it was't built

WALL I voted for border security. It is clear what Donald has a different view of what to do. Bring undocumented out of the shadows. Donald used undocumented workers to build Trump tower. Don't want employers to exploit.

TRUMP Under Obama millions have already been moved out. We're a country of laws. We either have a border or we don't. MIllions in line and waiting and unfair to have open borders, also a disaster on trade. Obama has deported millions

CLINTON Open borders a rank mistatement. Used to be partisan

W $225K from bank stpeech, "my dream is open trade and open borders"

CLINTON I was talking about energy [!!]. I want an electric grid. Wikileaks has engaged in espionage against Americans. Hacked and given info. Clearly from Putin himself, as 17 intel officials say Most important question: Will Trump admit and condemn Russians have done this. Those are the questions we need answered

TRUMP Big pivot she wants open borders. How'd we get to Putin

W [dithers]

TRUMP She wants open borders, 550% [more Syrians]. If Russia and US got along and went after ISIS that would be good.

TRUMP 1800 nuclear warheads and she's playing chicken.

CLINTON He's rather have a puppet

TRUMP You're the puppet

CLINTON You are willing to sign up for Putin's wish list. He has a clear favorite. We've never had a foreign govt try to interfere. 17 agencies all conclude highest levels Russian

TRUMP SHe has no idea if it's Russia or China

CLINTON 17 agents sworn to protect

TRUMP Putin has outsmarted her every step of the way. In Syria–

W Even if you don't know who, do you condemn?

TRUMP Of course I condemn. If we were friends with Russian. Putin has outsmarted them at every step of the way. All you have to do is look at the Middle East. We've spent six trillion dollars and they've taken over the middle east

CLINTON I find it ironiic she's raised nuclear weapons since he's been cavalier. Bottom line on nuclear weapons When President gives order it must be followed. 4 minutes between order and launch. 10 people who had responsibility would not trust Turmp

TRUMP 200 generals endorse. As far as Japan and other countries, all I said is we have to renegotiate [can't afford].

Look, she's been proven to be a liar in so many ways.

CLINTON US has kept the peace through our alliances. They've made us safer.

otis October 19, 2016 at 9:38 pm

Hillary's eyes are very glassy, She's doped up

Ivy October 20, 2016 at 12:21 am

Clinton seemed to almost tear up a little when she heard a particularly damning salvo, as when Wallace asked about Bill, and then she pivoted. Her wet eyes were a tell.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:39 pm

Wallace is nervous. You can tell he feels what happens in the election will depend on his performance as moderator.

John October 19, 2016 at 9:41 pm

Still can't believe he's Mike Wallace's son.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 9:42 pm

Wallace is doing a good job framing the questions as polarities subtly favoring the conservative position.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:41 pm

Weird that after Trump had mentioned twice he'd want to work with Russia, then Clinton said he'd want to tear up his agreements.

ggm October 19, 2016 at 10:05 pm

I'm biased against her admittedly, but I think he is kicking her ass here.

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 9:43 pm

Both are really solidifying their anti-status quo and pro-status quo credentials. No one who still professes to be undecided is going to be convinced beyond their own pre-conceived tendencies.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:43 pm

It's so surreal. now Trump is on about horrible deals, how to get paid by foreign countries like Saudi Arabia. Making a great deal with NAFTA.

Now Clinton "will translate"–he says "You can't".

jrs October 19, 2016 at 9:45 pm

He really should push on the TPP, not decades old deals, but he's just not that smart. Where the ball is going to be and all that.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:44 pm

Clinton now talking about how to control the debt, do it like Big Bill.

John October 19, 2016 at 9:45 pm

Not what was "happening", what Wall Street CAUSED.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:46 pm

Trump says Wallace is "correct" (during his debt/bailout related question to Clinton), with big grin/smirk, some laughter from audience at how he got that in there.

Clinton feels like she's on the defensive about her budget's ability to get the economy moving.

alex morfesis October 19, 2016 at 9:47 pm

$hillary…has there ever been an economic crash anywhere in the world where the clowns who were running the show/economy into the ground were allowed and continue to be allowed to run the show…??

usually it is off with their heads…even if it is symbolic…

here…not so much…

John October 19, 2016 at 9:47 pm

What both of them want is for Americans to work for 3 bucks a day.
Truth

dcblogger October 19, 2016 at 9:48 pm

I am only following this on Twitter, but it does not look like Trump is doing at all well.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:50 pm

Depends what you mean by "doing well". He's holding his own, getting in a good few zingers, not losing it. She keeps going on and on and on and sounds more defensive, he's more confident.

sleepy October 19, 2016 at 9:58 pm

I think he's doing well as far as these things go.

Yves Smith October 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

Unless you also have right wing political commentators on your Twitter feed, you are suffering from sample bias. The MSM is all in for Clinton. Ditto any political sites in the center and left save the pretty far left ones like Counterpunch and Black Agenda Report, which are willing to entertain the idea that Clinton is the more effective evil.

Now here is a different slice of sample bias: my only mother in law survey has been of the guys in my gym. Upscale Upper East Side (I get a big break by having been a charter member 21 years ago). They chat at night like hens, even about their love lives (which is kinda cute, particularly given that the youngest guy is in his late 30s). So I am highly confident that only one guy there is right wing (and he's the only guy who knows what I do, he's a Zero Hedge reader with a classic libertarian mindset). Most were Sanders voters.

They are all gonna vote for Trump, including one of the trainers (who is clearly of a lower-class background from the way he speaks, and he is one of the Sanders supporters). And what surprises me more is that they are wiling to say this out loud in this neighborhood (heavy Clinton supporters) when there are women (besides me) within earshot.

Just sayin'.

Now Trump may indeed not be doing all that well, but my Twitter feed is dominated by journalists, and I don't even need to look to tell you that they would declare Clinton the winner, as they did in debates with Sanders when polls later deemed Sanders to have come out on top.

dcblogger October 19, 2016 at 11:02 pm

I always follow these events via hashtag, so it is whoever is using the hashtag.

jonf October 19, 2016 at 11:46 pm

You said upscale. That kinda gives it away. My experience in this neighborhood is those with higher incomes generally are in or near management and generally vote republican even though they may have little idea of the issues. Sanders may have tickled their fancy but Hillary, after all, is a felon. Right? It says so right here all over my FB.

MojaveWolf October 19, 2016 at 11:10 pm

Was not on twitter during debate so I don't know what it was like there but I thought he did both well and horrifically, depending on when/what. He was decent at the infighting part (very good at the non-policy infighting), not so good at the policy part (granted, he has to get the horrible-at-policy base to turn out, and what will work for them will not work for me).

He actually did a good job pointing out real (and some possibly not-real, I dunno about some of it) corruption. If his allegations were false, Clinton certainly didn't seem in a hurry to make impossible to walk back flat denials.

Clinton was on her game to begin with and cleaning his clock, except when she went stupid/scary w/the anti-Russia stuff, but her evasions were glaringly obvious in places and he got better the first third of the debate.

Debate also started w/Supreme Court, which was the one area the Dems have always been able to reliably scare people into voting for candidates they don't want. And choice, where HIllary was great and Trump was awful. Rest of debate occasionally appeared to have been sponsored by the Peterson Foundation.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:48 pm

Trump saying jobs are stagnant, last report so bad "I should win the election".

John October 19, 2016 at 9:48 pm

Clinton got Trump on the Chinese steel.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 9:49 pm

"doesn't add a penny to the debt." hmmm…

John October 19, 2016 at 9:50 pm

The Pentagon is missing 9 TRILLION. Talk about that Trump, Clinton.

homeroid October 19, 2016 at 9:50 pm

Anyone notice that Trump looks just like that puppet Jeff Dunham used. You know the grumpy one.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:54 pm

He has a new facial expression–lips in a straight line, quasi-smile it looks like he's practiced it–like his stately version of her gleeful smirk.

otis October 19, 2016 at 9:51 pm

If I can't say her red glassy eyes are red and glassy you can not have the donation I planned. I'm disappointed in the moderation of this thread. Will not forget.

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 9:51 pm

Your 30 years of experience coincide with the utter screwing over of the working people.

JCC October 19, 2016 at 9:54 pm

Amen. I just watched about two minutes… all I could take. Her smirk and lies drive me nuts.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:52 pm

Now Trump is attacking her about losing $6 Billion from the State Department. Criticizes her record, her "bad experience". Oh no she's going on about Children's Defense Fund again. But she's on the defensive. Trying to build up her experience–the trouble is she hasn't really done much.

NotTimothyGeithner October 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

Her basic narrative is she is the single most qualified person in the history of things to ever be deign to run for President and then she mumbles about one thing she did between being a lawyer for Wal-Mart and the governor's wife. It's a terrible narrative. Oh, and being on the wrong side of every foreign policy decision for 25 years.

Then of course, there are the weekly introductions to the real Hillary her crooked friends really like.

oh October 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

look st her silly (S___ Eating) grin/

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

W econonomy

CLINTON I want biggest jobs program since WWII. New jobs and clean energy [she goes all singsong when emitting talking points.] Raise minimum wage, equal pay. You will not get a tuition bill from public college or u if plan Sanders and I worked out. Most gains gone to the top, and the rich will pay for their share. Plan analyzed by experts, would gain 10 million jobs. Trump tax cuts trickle down economics on steroids, cost us jobs, lead to recession

TRUMP Her plan will raise and even double your taxes. The rest of the public will pay for her tuition.

Start off where we left. Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia. They're very rich, why aren't they paying? Since I questioned, they've all started to pay up. She says "We love our allies," but that makes it hard for them to pay up. DUring his regime, deficit doubled.

Look at all the places I just left, our jobs have fled. I'm going to renegotiate NAFTA, and if we can't, walk away. Bring offshore taxes back into the country

CLINTON Let me translate that if I can.

TRUMP You can't

CLINTON He wants tax cuts. I have said no tax increase $250K. He mentioned the debt. We went from deficit to surplus. Obama has cut the deficit by two-third. One of the ways you create jobs is by investing in people. We've tried cutting taxes on the weathy

W Your plan similar to Obama stim plan, slowest growth

TRUMP Corrent

W Is your plan a continuation of Obama stimulus plan?

CLINTON Never seen people as physically distraught as Bushies. Obama doesn't get credit he deserves for hard decisions. I'm proposed we invest from the middle out and the ground up. My proposal won't add a penny to the debt. We're beginning to see increasing wages.

W Trump, even conservative economists say your numbers don't add up?

TRUMP India is growing at 8%, China at 7%. We are growing at 1% and I think it's going down. Is that the last jobs report before the election? I should win easily! We've lost our jobs, products pouring in from all over the world. I pass factories that were thriving 20 years ago. It's horrible what happened. She can say her husband did well. Now she wants to sign TPP. She lied when she said it wasn't gold standard

CLINTON When I saw the TPP, I was against. There's only one of us that's shipped jobs to China and that's Donald. I fought Chinese dumping steel, but Donald bought Chinese steel. Crocodile tears!

TRUMP She's been doing this for 30 years, why the hell didn't she do it for the last 15 years? You have experience over me, but it's bad experience. The problem is you talk and don't do anything. At State, $6 billion dollars is missing. Where did it go?

CLINTON State Dept untrue and debunk. [Deploys Children's Defense Fund]. On the day I was in the briefing room [watching OBL get whacked], he was on the Apprentice

TRUMP I think I did a better job. I built a phenomenal company with that million dollar loan. Take a look at Syria, Look at ISIS. She and Obama created a vacuum. She gave us ISIS as sure as you're sitting there.

Anonymous October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

So does this mean the private colleges–except for Ivies and those in like financial condition–are all going to be forced out of business?

Lee October 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

Clinton: "Trump has bought Chinese steel." So have we all, along with a lot of other substandard stuff. Bridge Comes to San Francisco With a Made-in-China Label http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 9:54 pm

American bombs and bullets are humanitarian, dontcha know?

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:55 pm

He accused Clinton of setting up the sexual harassment tapes.

JSM October 19, 2016 at 10:28 pm

NBC set up the Billy Bush tape, if that's what's being referred to. The Clintons set up the big frontpage NYT 'accusers,' or whatever it was. The latter story was written by Haberman & Jonathan Martin, two of the Clinton campaign's favorite hacks named in the Wikileaks emails. Interesting, no?

(PS. With all due respect to site policy it is not a certainty that the NYT allegations are false, but they are certainly suspicious for the reason given.)

Lee October 19, 2016 at 9:56 pm

These agents provacateurs accusations against Clinton are quite plausible (hey, they were on PBS Newshour) even if the source is shady. They just feel very Clintonesque.

oh October 19, 2016 at 9:59 pm

Dirty politics Clinton style.

ggm October 19, 2016 at 10:12 pm

There is a lot of evidence dug up by reddit amateur investigators after the tape leaked. They found people on the tape in a few protest videos as well as a woman on the Clinton payroll. I don't trust the voter fraud tape at all, but the inciting violence at riots tapes looks like the real deal.

JSM October 19, 2016 at 10:31 pm

They go along well with the shots fired into and the burglary/ransacking of Sander's Nevada campaign headquarters, and the firebombings of Republican campaign offices in swing states.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/sanders-shots-were-fired-into-my-campaign-office-in-nevada/article/2002438

Everything is random people, just listen to Clinton's measured, dulcet tones and fasten on her innocent smile…

alex morfesis October 19, 2016 at 9:57 pm

well done $hillary…the question was for her to respond about bill and his stuff…good diversion…congrats…

donald donald donald…

when she said you had a problem with what you did with these women and could not apologize…

you could have asked her… are you talking about me or your husband bill…

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 9:57 pm

"America is great because America is good." We kill because we love…

oh October 19, 2016 at 9:58 pm

She twists everything. Chubby Checker would be proud of Shillary.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 9:58 pm

Clinton is calling out Trump's criticism of women, their appearance, etc. She's on stronger ground here. Now she's losing it again, word soup about what our country is. Why can't she stay on a topic? She keeps weakening her points by going on and saying nothing. Making America great again. Using his memes.

Trump saying no one respects women more than here.

Now he's bringing up her emails. What happened to the FBI, he asks? Talks about 1 guy getting 4 yrs in jail for 1 lie to the FBI, a 4-star general, but she makes hundreds of lies.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 9:58 pm

my god, grab her by the pushiness, donald!

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 9:59 pm

Has Hillary Clinton ever apologized for anything? Or just said "I misspoke."

Susan C October 19, 2016 at 9:59 pm

Hillary did not respond to Trump's charge that she paid for people to riot in Chicago before his rally. Instead she began to speak very slowly to eat up her time.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 10:05 pm

She does not refute. This one may have legs.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:01 pm

Oooh, Clinton uses rhetoric–says Trump is "dark, divisive, dangerous". She practiced that one. There was no context.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 10:02 pm

more wikileaks?!? go, chris, go!

Lee October 19, 2016 at 10:03 pm

Trump is playing the hypocrisy card against Clinton rather well.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:03 pm

Wallace asks her questions about Foundation, donation. Wallace is nervous. (When questioning Trump, he uses a different tone – he's not as scared, he's more deprecating.)

Wallace is pressing her more on pay to play. Trump says it's a criminal enterprise, Saudi & Qatar giving lots of money. They kill women & treat them horribly, push gays off buildings, but Clinton takes their money. He says she should give their money back. He says in Haiti they hate Clinton, what the foundation did was a disgrace.

Clinton claims they spend 90% of donations on their programs. (Pinocchio moment, anyone?)

Samuel Conner October 19, 2016 at 10:11 pm

Spending money on programs is lawyerly language. From what I have read, CF runs events but does little that benefits people "on the ground"

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:05 pm

Too bad Trump doesn't have any facts on Haiti. He could have buried her. This is so boring. Just low grade snipes at each other.

jrs October 19, 2016 at 10:05 pm

Almost focusing on Haiti, almost a good point, then narcissism derails Trump …

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:06 pm

Trump: "You gave us these tax loopholes." True. They both suck

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:06 pm

Trump talks about his foundation, 100% used. Wallace asks if the money was used to pay his debts. Trump says it went to building houses for veterans and disabled.

Clinton says we won't know cuz he won't release his tax returns, so we can't prove anything. She claims her tax returns reveal something. (Ha ha ha ha–Clinton Foundation docs don't reveal much.)

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:08 pm

Trump says Clinton should have changed the law, she gets lots of money. He mentions his beautiful hotel and she says again "built with Chinese steel", audience laughs. Wallace asks Trump about rigged election, will he commit to accept the result of the election, he says he'll look at it at the time.

Media dishonest & corrupt, NYT wrote about it, poisoned the minds of voters but he thinks people can see through it.

Voter roles – people on the register who shouldn't be.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:09 pm

Trump says she should never have been allowed to run because she's guilty of serious things, the emails and more.

Wallace returns to ask if he'll go along with the election result, Trump says he'll let him know.

Clinton says Trump always claims things are rigged if they don't go his way.

alex morfesis October 19, 2016 at 10:10 pm

the fbi did a one year investigation or a three day cover up…? but the question or statement was the transition of power… donald…just respond since he is not in power there is no issue here

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:11 pm

Clinton claims we've had "free and fair elections". Now there's a huge lie. Bigger lie than about her emails.

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:11 pm

Oh noes, Trump is denigrating our democracy. So did the DNC by rigging the primaries.

oh October 19, 2016 at 10:21 pm

She's appalled? What hypocrisy!

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:11 pm

well, of course, that's why Gore and Kerry conceded, It would have been impolite not to.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:12 pm

W Grabbing women. Nine came forward, said you groped them. Why would so many women all make up these stories, and Clinton, what your husband, was that worse?

TRUMP Debunked. I think she made them come forward. My rally in Chicago violent because them. I didn't even apologize to my wife, sitting right here, bc I didn't do it. I don't know why. I believe she got these people to step forward, or 10 minutes of fame. Lies or fiction

CLINTON At the last debate, we heard what Donald did. Others come forward. He went on to say "Look at her." Donald thins belittling women makes him bigger. So we now know how Donald thinks of women. That's who Donald is. It's up to all of us to say who we are. We want to celebrate our diveristy. America is great because America is good….

TRUMP Nobody has more respect for women than I do. I want to talk about something slightly different. What isn't fictionalized are her emails, where she destroyed 33K emails after getting a subpoena. We have a general going to jail for 1 lie. She's A four star general. And she gets away with it, and she can run for President.

CLINTON Every time Donald is pushed, he goes for denying responsibility. [Kahn, McCain…] It's not onte thing, it's a pattern of divisiness, a dark vision where he incites violence at his rallies.

TRUMP So sad when she talks about violence at my rallies when she incites it!

W Clinton, in 2009 you promised to avoid appearance of Clinton with CF. Can you really say you kept your pledge? WHy is this not "pay to play"

CLINTON Everything I did in furtherance of our country. CF is a world-renowned charity. 11M get HIV treatment. We have made environment

W The question went to pay to play

TRUMP It's a criminal enterprise. Saudis gave millinos. These are people who kill gays. Why don't you give back the money? In Little Haiti and they hate the Clintons because of what the CF did in Clinton

CLINTON Happy to compare to Donald's foundation, portrait. Haiti is the poorest country. CF raised 30 million. We're going to keep working to help.

TRUMP They don't want your help.

CLINTON Hasn't released his tax returns, so we don't know anything about his charities. Half of all immigrants actually pay income taxes

TRUMP We're entitled to depreciate because of laws you passed. Most of her donors have done what I did. You should have changed the law when you were a Senator. But you want change the law because you've taken so much ad. I sat there and watched ad after ad after ad paid for by your friends on Wall Street

W Trump, warned election rigged. Pence pledges will accept, Ivanka said will accept.

TRUMP I will look at it at the time. What I've seen is so bad. The media is so corrupt and the pile-on is so amazing. If you look at your voter rolls you will see millions that are registered to vote that shouldn't be. She's guilty of a serious crime and should not be allowed be to run. In that respect it's rigged!

W A tradition is the peaceful transition of power. The country comes together.

TRUMP What I'm saying is that I'll tell you at the time.

CLINTON Donald always says everything was rigged. Trump U, claims judge is rigged. There was even a time he didn't an Emmy three times. This is mindset, it's how he things. Funny but troubling. We've been around 240 years, we've had free and fair elections [!!!!!]. Obama said, when you're whining, you're not up to doing the job! He is denigrating, talking down to our democracy. I am appalled.

TRUMP What the FBI did and the Justice did, including meeting with the AG on the tarmac in Arizona, is a disgrace.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 10:12 pm

how dare you insult democracy, donald?

John October 19, 2016 at 10:13 pm

Especially the fake, rigged kind we have in this country.

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:14 pm

Hey, it's the best democracy that Organized Money can buy!

John October 19, 2016 at 10:12 pm

Did anyone hear a word about how these two would create the 50 million jobs
we need at half decent wages?

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:12 pm

Trump brings up Big Bill's mtg with AG in plane on tarmac–audience claps him enthusiastically.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 10:13 pm

IF only Clinton would use her moments of impassioned rhetoric to talk about doing things for the American people rather than pushing to shame Trump or defending the FBI… Now back to droning Clinton on protecting soldiers and conflict in Syria (yawn)

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:13 pm

"Intelligence surge." Sounds bad and worse.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:14 pm

Clinton says we have a lot of work to do. Syria etc. We have to keep our eye on ISIS, we need an "intelligence surge". Continue to push for no fly zone and gain leverage on Syrian gov't and the Russians to bring the conflict to an end.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:16 pm

Trump – we had Mosul, she left, her fault. No secrecy, people talking about Mosul for 3 months. Clinton wants to look good for the election. The leaders we wanted to get (in Mosul) are all gone. Iran is taking over Iraq, we've made it easy for them. We'll take Mosul and Iran will benefit.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:17 pm

I do have to say without Trump in this election the lid would not have been blown off the criminality of the government in Washington. Mouthing off about it all the time every chance he gets. Not that Trump will do anything to change it. But still.

oh October 19, 2016 at 10:24 pm

Good point. He's exposing this fraud for what she is.

ggm October 19, 2016 at 10:29 pm

This election would have been all about transgender bathrooms.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 10:18 pm

Trump name drops "Bernie Sanders" x2… Clinton x1 everybody Drink, Drink, Drink!

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Clinton about Trump supported the Iraq invasion, he says "wrong".

Trump says she's unfit, says Podesta says horrible things about her and he was right. Says Sanders was right about her, bad judgment.

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Trump: Sanders supporting Clinton is a big mistake. Amen.

johnnygl October 19, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Clinton: 'safe zones in syria to get leverage on russia and assad' - wtf?!?!!!??

Trump with this 'element of surprise' thing is so dumb! Does he think this is a winner?!!?? Also, the guy is so scatter-brained!???

Trump's as bad as the first debate. Maybe worse.

jgordon October 19, 2016 at 10:27 pm

Oh I don't know. I thought that when Trump pointed out the objective fact that Hillary is a criminal who should be in prison right now rather than running for president that was pretty much all that needed to be said for him to win.

JSM October 19, 2016 at 10:36 pm

To Americans of either side who are sick of our failed foreign policy and wondering whether it's intentionally duplicitous, yah, I think it's a winner. Keep reading, you'll see.

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Hillary sticking to technicals and official truths – "FBI cleared me after a year-long investment"; "Google Trump Iraq – all these sources" etc. If she can validate it, it must be true!

Trump, on the other hand, is winging it with "homebaked" truths – some bald lies, some half-truths, some actual truths. However, if it resonates with the gut feeling of enough people, it is much better basis for argument than pure technicality.

She just giggled after calling him the most dangerous man to have ever run for the Presidency. Wtf.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

Yes, her laughing and smiling never help

ggm October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

He should have mentioned wikileaks. They found her own oppo research said his Iraq war opposition would be a huge problem for her.

I noticed she stopped plugging her website. Afraid he will reply with a plug for wikileaks?

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:22 pm

Wallace says Aleppo has fallen, Trump says it's still there, still happening. Wallace sounds shaky. Trump again "it's so sad". Says Assad is tougher than Clinton & Obama. Says it's our fault Iran is powerful, we gave them bundles of cash, $1.7 Billion.

We're backing the rebels, but we don't know who the rebels are. If they ever did overthrow Assad, they might end up with something worse than Assad. Causes Great Migration, in many cases they are ISIS-aligned, great Trojan horse, "Thanks a lot Hillary for doing a great job."

tawal October 19, 2016 at 10:23 pm

Trump is kicking butt. Stein or Trump… Can't stomach Bill in the WH again. Even though I'm in CA, and should vote Stein; what if, Trump gets the majority???

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 10:25 pm

On the contrary, I think he did a good job – kinda recast it as a sequel to Iraq.

johnnygl October 19, 2016 at 10:25 pm

Wallace is the best moderator yet! Thanks for asking about no fly zone meaning war with russia!

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:25 pm

Wallace asks Clinton about no fly zone, risk of starting a war. She says those are genuine risks, but thinks she could "strike a deal".

Re: refugees, they will be vetted, but not close our doors, that boy with blood coming down his face is haunting. Orlando Pulse Nightclub killer born in Queens just like Donald. (Wow that's a low blow.)

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:27 pm

"We will make it very clear to Russia" ain't exactly 'striking a deal.'

polecat October 19, 2016 at 10:55 pm

a real kidney punch that one …. i think she turn virtually all of Queens … HIS WAY --

WJ October 19, 2016 at 10:25 pm

Clinton: This great country of America is good because greatness of our good people. I don't believe that Donald has greatness good enough for America because of his ungood comments about women reporters I've disabled in defense of Children's Defense Fund. That's not the kind of double plus goodness of America I want to fight for.

Trump: I have the highest regard for all overweight and disabled women. Always have. I will let them speak for my successes. But Hillary is trying to distract from emails. Lots of generals are in prison for breaking security but the FBI has to look the other way, because 6 billion is lost in Syria and there is no action. I will renegotiate the Missouri Compromise, and the Louisiana Purchase if I have to. They were bad deals for America's workers, and I have a lot of money.

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

"Nobody can believe how stupid our leadership is." Wrong!

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

W If we push ISIS out, you put troops into that vacuum?

CLINTON I am encouraged there is an effort by Iraq in Syria. Will not support American troops "as an occupying force" [ZOMG, the lawerly parsing!] Hopeful that the hard work military advisors. Intelligence surge… I'm going to continue to push for a no-fly zone. Need serious negotation to bring conflict to an end.

TRUMP I've been reading about Mosul for three months. What about the element of surprise? They've all left. Why are we doing it? So she can look tough for the election. So Mosul is going to be a wonderful thing, and Iran should write us a letter of thanks.

CLINTON Once again, Donald is implying he dind't support Iraq. I just want everybody to Google "Donald Trump Iraq" and you can hear the audio [thank you Eric Schmidt]. What's really important is to understand all the interplay. We need to go after the leadership, "get rid of them" in Mosul, then move on to Rakka. I'm amazed to see Donald thinks all these governments [colluded to elect me].

TRUMP Wikileaks. Podesta said some horrible things about you and boy was he right. "Terrible instincts." Sanders "bad judgment" I agree with both.

CLINTON Sanders says you're the most dangerous person to run and I think he's right

W Aleppo? Said some wrong things about Alepp

TRUMP It's a disaster

W ALso said Syria and Russia fighting ISIS but they've been been bombing.

TRUMP By fighting Assad, he was tougher and smarter than her and Obama. Now he's aligned with Russia, and Iran, who we made stronger. They don't want ISIS. We're backing rebels. We don't know who the rebels are. If the rebels overthrow Assad, could be worse. If she did nothing, we would be better off. And she caused the Great Migration. What 'til you see what happens. Lots of luck Hillary. Great job

W No-fly, Obama has refused to do. What if a Russian plane violates, shoot it down?

CLINTON I am aware of the legitimate concerns you have expressed. I think we could strike a deal and make it clear that this was something in the best interests of people on the ground.

I am not going to get anybody into the country not vetted. Picture of the 4-year-old haunting. We have [Doesn't answer about shooting the plane down]

TRUMP Had a ceasefire, Russia took over land, ceasefire ends. We are so outplayed by Putin and Assad and Iran. Nobody can believe how stupid our leadership is.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

Trump says ISIS never should have happened. No one can believe how stupid our leadership is. (He's probably right about that. Can't imagine what foreigners make of this crazy election.)

Bjornasson October 19, 2016 at 10:36 pm

I can contribute my two cents!

Four years ago I would have been surprised to see that the rhetoric and tactics are quite similar to those frequently employed in Indian politics; I somehow thought that the developed, Enlightened West would be above that. The thing that surprises me is not the abysmal quality of the candidates, but the attitude of Americans towards this election.

They are much better informed than their developing world counterparts and much better (or longer) educated – on average. And yet, they are either enthusiastic for their candidate or unable to grasp just how truly broken their political system is. They joke about it, post memes and get self-righteous on social media and in-person, but they seem to have little to no concern about what it means in the big picture. They have no willingness to be open-mindedness (although all of them worship the innovation and out-of-the-box thinking of Silicon Valley and Steve Jobs) and consider points of view that may not align with their preferences. As you may have guessed, I live on a University campus – which is not representative of the USA, but is definitely the pool of people from which the "future leaders of the free world" are expected to be drawn. I am not enthusiastic about that prospect.
This then, to me, is perhaps the most disappointing aspect of life in America and the most clarifying aspect of this election.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 10:49 pm

"I somehow thought that the developed, Enlightened West would be above that."

Patricia October 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

Oh god, she says no-fly zone would save lives….

allan October 19, 2016 at 10:27 pm

And now a message from Peter Peterson.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 10:27 pm

jeezus frickin' murphy! please, please, please let me debate this vile woman.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:27 pm

So cutting taxes on the rich is going to create tremendous jobs. Heard that so many times I can't count.

Micky9finger October 19, 2016 at 10:28 pm

Hard to take. One suggestion, put a switch on the microphones and switch them off when they won't stop talking.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:28 pm

Trump "I'm going to create the kind of country we used to be".

[Well God save us from someone who wants to take us backwards.]

We have to use our great people. We will create an economic machine, the likes of which we haven't seen in many decades, companies that will grow and expand and start from new.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 10:29 pm

National Debt now = 77% of GDP

Clinton = Ndebt to 86% of GDP
Trump = Ndebt to 105% of GDP

Trump: "We will have created a tremendous … machine once again"
Clinton: "I will not add one penny to the National debt"

So is Trump more MMT than Clinton?!

"

Samuel Conner October 19, 2016 at 10:43 pm

Trump occasionally emits MMT-like sounds, but I'm not sure that he believes them. For example, he has previously accurately noted that US can't be forced to default on USD-denominated debt, since it prints its own currency. Then he suggested that we could reduce the outstanding debt by negotiating down the price of previously issued Treasury bonds (not sure the details; perhaps threaten to default, hammer the price by terrifying bond-holders, and buy the depressed price bonds.)

At other times Trump has criticized the level of debt, for example the fact that the nominal public debt doubled under Obama (after doubling under Bush II, it must be admitted). It appears to me that Trump favors lower nominal debt as a good thing in itself, without consideration of the effect of lowering the debt on other sectors.

I'm not confident that Trump actually believes any MMT principles.

OTOH, I'm pretty confident that HRC rejects MMT completely. She boasts of WJC's surpluses, for example. She evidently doesn't know elementary accounting facts such as the sectoral balances identity.

alex morfesis October 19, 2016 at 10:29 pm

back in 1987…he basically said then what he says now…because her beltway buddies have been doing fine since 1987….the folks in youngstown ohio and johnstown pennsylvania….not so much…

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:30 pm

Clinton criticizes a $100,000 ad Trump took out in 1987 criticizing things.

Clinton says she doesn't add a penny to the national debt. How we'll pay for education, infrastructure, get prescription drug costs down–ask wealthy & corporations to pay their fair share, it won't diminish growth.

We have to get back to building the middle class, I want to invest in you. (wonder who she means by that)

Trump–"we've heard this before" He says he disagreed with Reagan on trade.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:31 pm

Cut the military and spook budgets in half and we are good to go on Social Security.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 10:31 pm

holy crap, she reaganed!

donald, wake up, she's out-americanning you big time.

allan October 19, 2016 at 10:31 pm

CFRB approves of this message.

Starveling October 19, 2016 at 10:31 pm

Puppies are great because puppies are good…. ugh. Hillary has become a traditional Republican with regard to American exceptionalism.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:51 pm

> Reagan had ten thousand golden retriever puppies, all of them named America.

Well, that wins the Internet! I couldn't believe it when she was appalled Trump criticized Reagan. All Obama did was say Reagan had some "good ideas."

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:53 pm

Liberal talking heads are hyperventilating about the Donald dissing Reagan. Tells me all I need to know.

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:32 pm

OK, here comes the Grand Bargain. Isn't this over yet? He's punting to Obamacare.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:32 pm

Wallace on entitlements, 60% of the budget, neither one has a plan to deal with this.

Trump – says cut taxes, grow the economy. Repeal & replace Obamacare, it's destroying out businesses. It'll probably die of his own weight, premiums going up 70 80 100%. He says Clinton wants to make it worse.

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:33 pm

Her snarky side comments are not really helping her, at least for me.

Lee October 19, 2016 at 10:33 pm

Trump: Repeal and replace Obamacare. A lot of sticker shocked Americans nodding their heads.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:34 pm

Nothing is making premiums go down but ending the health insurance extortion racket once and for all.

dbk October 19, 2016 at 10:33 pm

I don't understand how people accepted referring to SS and Medicare as "entitlements".

T: Obamacare has to go – increase in premiums – bad health care at most exp. price.

W: Same question: will you +taxes /-benefits to save SS?

C: I want to increase benefits for those who have been disadvantaged.
ACA extended solvency of Medicare Trust Fund. Have to get costs down, increase value (???), emphasize wellness.

Depressing topic.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:34 pm

Wallace's question is really limiting the framing of the question about benefits, taxes, entitlements. No room in his world for MMT or any kind of non-austerity approach.

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:34 pm

They have not "agreed" to closing statements? Weird.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:35 pm

W Clinton debt/GRP ratio to 86% and debt to 105%. Why aren't you dealing with the problem?

TRUMP They're wrong, because I'm going to create jobs. We could get to 1% growth to 5%. Have business people not political hacks making trade deals. We will create an economic machine like we haven't seen for decades. People will get back to work

CLINTON When did he think the country was great? Trump has been criticizing our government for decades. He was criticizing President Reagan. To the debt, I won't add a penny to the debt. We are going where the money is. Ask the rich and corps to pay their fair share. What economists call "middle-out growth" [they do?]

TRUMP I disagreed with Reagan on trade. Now we're going to do it right.

W Biggest driver is entitlements, neither has a serious plan on Medicare and Social Security running out of money?
Would President Trump do a Grand Bargain?

TRUMP Cutting taxes and grow economy. Repeal and replace ObamaCare. It's probably going to die of its own weight. Premiums. "Bad health care at the most expensive price."

CLINTON I am on record as saying we need to put more money in SS Trust Fund, taxing rich, assuming Donald doesnt' get out of them.

TRUMP Such a nasty woman

CLINTON I will not cut benefits. I want to enhance benefits for poor and women who have been disadvantages.

CLINTON Trump tax cuts disaster effect on debt.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:35 pm

1 Trillion a year is a depleted military according to Trump. Gag

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:38 pm

Don't handshake, I want a steel cage grudge match!

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:37 pm

Wallace gives them each 1 minute closing statement why they should be elected.

Clinton- everyone watching, I'm reaching out to everyone to help make our country what it should be, make it fairer for everyone, we need your talents, energy, ambition. (Yeah she'll suck out our energy for sure.) I'll stand up for your interests against powerful corporations. (Really???)

Trump–she's raising money from the people she wants to control. I'll take care of veterans better than our immigrants. Law & order. Take care of everyone. I'll take better care of African Americans & Latinos, better than she could do in a hundred years. We can't take 4 more years of Barack Obama and that is what we would get with her.

ginnie nyc October 19, 2016 at 10:38 pm

She's gonna create two classes of SS/Medicare recipients. Great. Some will get a fraction more, most will be screwed.

John October 19, 2016 at 10:40 pm

You'll wish you were dirt poor. You'll be better off.

Come to think of it, that's already how it works.
If you have nothing you are taken care of.
If you have a tiny bit you are on your own.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:38 pm

W Asks for closing statements, one minute

CLINTON Reaching out to all Americans because we need everybody to make country what it should be. I've been privileges to see presidency up close. I will stand up for families against powerful interests, good jobs, rising incomes. Hope give me a chance to server.'

TRUMP She's raising money from people she wants to control. It doesn't work that way. Military, police, law and order and justice. Inner cities a disaster. I will do more for AAs than she can do in ten lifetimes. We are going to make America great again. We cannot take four more years of Obama and that's what you get with her.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 10:38 pm

Did Clinton just hug Meg Whitman in the audience???

John October 19, 2016 at 10:41 pm

Yes. Who was that man behind her that shook Clinton's hand next?

Kim Kaufman October 19, 2016 at 10:39 pm

I guess you could say Donald at least can learn. He's gotten better in each debate in terms of not appearing to be a drug addict with anger issues.

polecat October 19, 2016 at 10:59 pm

It's too bad that Hillary had a bigger boat -- …she was floating in a leaky dinghy at this debate, however …

Skippy October 19, 2016 at 10:40 pm

In the immortal words once electronically presented here on NC….

"Because neo-liberalism. Because I like the idea, a lot, of catching the Mount Pelerin Society, Pinochet, Diane Rehm, the Friedmans, Joe Biden, Rush Limbaugh, and the people who drafted the Democratic platform in one big net, and then deep-sixing the entire squirming and gesticulating political class with language that's "exceptionally bloggy and aggressively casual and implicitly ironic."

Whats that thingy again about being oblivious about irony…. oh yeah….

Excessive examples

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irony

... ... ...

Octopii October 19, 2016 at 10:41 pm

Media all freaking out about the "respect the results of the election" question. Strange that nobody has brought up Al Gore - it certainly would have been better for the country if Al had pushed harder in 2000.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:43 pm

Yes the defending of our crap election systems and crap democracy is beyond belief. People have no idea how bad it is.

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:45 pm

And Podesta is claiming it was a "low moment" for Trump that he said he'd wait and see. Why should anyone accept results in advance with so much election rigging past & present? Podesta again talks about "a dark place"–same wording Clinton used. That must be the new meme.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:48 pm

Trump won't buy a pig in a poke. That speaks well of him.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 11:16 pm

agreed. that was a trap and he wouldn't budge.

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 10:41 pm

Wow ABC, the elections ain't rigged but Russia hacked them?! Make up your damned minds already, this is more schizophrenia in a single sentence than I can handle…

Skippy October 19, 2016 at 10:43 pm

#Breaking: Trump's lead advisor Roger Ailes has left the Trump campaign. According to reports: "[Fox] said the pair had a falling out, with both sides saying debate prep had not gone the way they wanted. The report came just hours before Wednesday's third presidential debate in Las Vegas, where Trump will try to dig out of a recent polling hole.

The report said that Ailes had concerns that Trump could not focus and that preparation would be a "waste of time," while Trump thought Ailes spent too much prep time telling old stories."

Go Green or go HOME October 19, 2016 at 10:47 pm

The statements re: wikileaks no doubt were discussed, and Ailes couldn't support that. Has Trump been to enough shitty mid-western and southern towns with empty factories and had an epiphany? Perhaps he's not just going to throw the election to H->

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:45 pm

My hot take:

Nothing we didn't know before. She's a corrupt, lying warmonger with a record of policy debacles. He's a stew of conservative talking points and failed policy nostrums, personal behaviors perhaps no worse than many other billionaires, spiced with occasional sharp perceptions. Neither of them are nice people. I wouldn't want to have a beer with him, and if I had coffee with her, I'd be sure to bring a taster.

Tactically, Trump did well (although the Beltway is going to go nuts on Putin and Trump not rolling over for a stolen election* like Gore did). If Trump had brought his game to this level in debates one and two, he'd be a lot closer.

NOTE * Not that Trump is correct to say that voter fraud is significant; that's one of the many conservative talking points that are just wrong.

jgordon October 19, 2016 at 10:55 pm

I would have gone along with you on that a few days ago. However please explain why Democrats are systematically engaging in election fraud, as proven by videos over the past two days, if it has no impact. I changed my opinion on this subject specifically because of these videos by the way.

johnnygl October 19, 2016 at 11:01 pm

Welcome to the party! Did you sleep through the dem primaries?

WJ October 19, 2016 at 11:08 pm

Problem is that if Trump calls out election fraud, he won't be understood by his base, who for various reasons prefer to believe that elections are rigged by busloads of sweaty brown people with fake ID's rather than by a well-dressed white man sitting at a computer.

kimsarah October 20, 2016 at 12:20 am

And Hillary is against Citizens United, now that she has been the one who has benefited the most and won't need it anymore.

HBE October 19, 2016 at 11:01 pm

It really seemed both were focused on appealing to their tribes and not much else. There certainly appeared to be no attempt to reach "undecideds" or independents. Maybe because internal polls show they are mostly staying home or voting third party? So no point (al la CNN changing 3Rd party to "undecideds"). Basically, scare your tribe into showing up to vote, but only your tribe. Not even a passing shout out to independents on positions (except trump on Russia)

polecat October 19, 2016 at 11:27 pm

Again, I say they should've both been given skateboards … and a choice of the trident or a pike ..and then allowed to go at it …..

….while answering to the moderator's questions .. of course -- ':]

Double-plus good if Chris was decked out in a Roman Centurion's gear ….. holding a staff

OIFVet October 19, 2016 at 11:29 pm

Celebrity deathmatch is the only acceptable format given the current crop of candidates.

polecat October 20, 2016 at 12:05 am

well, yeah .. it is what it is …. a bad spectacle !!

and we're living it …..

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 11:11 pm

voter fraud is not significant, but election fraud sure is.

alex morfesis October 19, 2016 at 10:46 pm

on c-span…huma keeps whispering to her…we have to go…we have to go…and $hillary is not going…interesting dynamic…

finally she is off camera….

uncle tungsten October 19, 2016 at 10:47 pm

Listening to Hilary is like wearing a cilice on the inner ear.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:53 pm

Just in terms of tone, whenever Clinton says something appalls her, it makes me think "Gee, that might be a good idea!" Not that it is, but that's my reaction at this point.

polecat October 19, 2016 at 11:15 pm

With that forced smile of HER's …. I wouldn't get within 5 kilometers of the bloody white hag --

TheCatSaid October 19, 2016 at 10:47 pm

Media showing Clintont & Podesta, not showing Trump. Says it all.

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:54 pm

I watched CBS, saw both families.

polecat October 20, 2016 at 12:10 am

'families' …. Cosa Nostra ??

crittermom October 20, 2016 at 12:04 am

I watched a prime time show (on my computer) recently and noted it had a several second shot of a street sign named Clinton that had no bearing whatsoever to the story. (Having become a cynic during this election, I now notice small things like that) Swell. Subliminal messaging it seems, since apparently all the in-your-face-naming ('Clinton, Clinton'!) wasn't judged to be sufficient.

The Clinton dynasty needs to be brought down asap. Their grip and influence is even more than most realize, I suspect.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 10:53 pm

I thought Trump did pretty well, said more about "jobs" than Clinton, which is usually a smart move. Not a lot of specifics. Closing minute was a flop though. Clinton spent far too long accusing Russian hackers, which she can't substantiate, and people care less about than the content of the leaked information.

Clinton also tried too hard to show she's knowledgeable about foreign policy getting too far into the weeds on Middle East strategy, so basically talking over the heads of most people. Her closing statement was pretty good and well rehearsed (has she used this elsewhere?)

JSM October 19, 2016 at 10:58 pm

*Unasked question (after asking Trump whether he'll accept results).

And Hillary, do you promise then not to rig the elections with your allies like you did the Democratic primaries? "Bernie Sanders will not be a factor in N.J." 9/22/2015. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9846

WJ October 19, 2016 at 11:14 pm

But what does this really mean? It sounds like state-party politics in-speak but I am not certain I understand what is being said. Here's the fuller quote from the email you link to:

"Presently the Chair has given the line to Hillary in 20 of the 21 counties which only assures that Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders will not be a factor in N.J. Also, all of the major city mayors are aligned with us as well."

Could mean lots of things, not all of them shady, no?

Lambert Strether October 19, 2016 at 10:59 pm

Biggest muffed issue: Wallace asks Clinton if she'd shoot down a Russian plane that violated her no-fly zone. Clinton dodges, Wallace does not press her, Trump does not press her either. "No, Hillary, I'm anxious to know. How badly do you want a new war, this time with Russia?" or some such.

johnnygl October 19, 2016 at 11:13 pm

That is why i think trump lost. He cannot afford to miss those opportunities. I've got a few beers in me so i'm missing dodges. Trump should have smelled blood and hammered those dodges. He only picked at her over the 'open borders'

I stand by my opinion of chris wallace being the best and this is really awkward but fox has great post-debate commentary. Am i just wasted? I swear they really are being fair and balanced. Maybe they are doing their job because of their mixed feelings on trump?

WJ October 19, 2016 at 11:35 pm

Fox is probably more free to push Clinton because their networks of political access are less tied to her campaign than all the other outlets, who seem scared shitless of being thought to cause the slightest embarrassment for her. One upside to her presidency will be watching Wolf Blitzer and Chuck Todd try to outdo one another like two beaten dogs in performing the requisite rituals of submission.

frosty zoom October 19, 2016 at 11:07 pm

actually, mr. wallace did the best job by far of any of these "moderators".

johnnygl October 19, 2016 at 11:24 pm

The fact that wallace hit both sides hard made trump loom better.

Edward October 19, 2016 at 11:20 pm

I thought the questions in this debate were better then the last one. The answers from the candidates were still mostly hot air. How many nanoseconds would a President Clinton need to decide she actually likes trade agreements and Wall Street giveaways and the resulting contributions after all? I liked that fact that Trump was calling out Clinton on her miserable record, even though his facts/critique often seemed garbled/superficial. I was also glad he was questioning the validity of our elections, although his reasons sounded wrong. I found Wallace's suggestion that questions of election fraud should be ignored for the sake of unity disturbing. When a journalist says something like this you have to wonder what crimes they are covering up in their own reporting for "unity". I agreed with Clinton that Trump's economic and immigration plans are bogus nonsense.

If Trump becomes president I expect his truth-telling will end. As an outsider, speaking "truth to power" helps him nut it would hurt him as an insider.

Qrys October 19, 2016 at 11:33 pm

Looks like John T. Harvey didn't waste any time: Another Thing Donald Trump And Hillary Clinton Get Wrong In This Election: The National Debt
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2016/10/19/one-more-reason-to-be-depressed-about-this-years-election/#2f6ba3ae3ae2

5. The private sector cannot consistently generate sufficient demand to create jobs for everyone who wants one. As technology and productivity have increased, so it has become more difficult. Entrepreneurs cannot be blamed for adding self-checkout lanes, they have families and stockholders. But it means the store can sell the same volume of output with fewer employees–unemployment therefore rises. (For more, see "Why the Private Sector NEEDS the Government to Spend Money.")

Hence, we need the public sector to spend in deficit so that a.) the private sector can net save and b.) jobs are created to supplement those generated by the market system. And it creates neither a default risk nor inflation–unless we are already at full-employment, which means we don't need to be spending that much in the first place! It is noteworthy that when, in the midst of the Great Depression, the government decided to try to reduce the deficit, unemployment jumped from 14% (after having fallen from nearly 25%) to 19%. Once WWII hit, however, any worries about government spending went right out the window and unemployment plummeted to 1.9%. There's no reason we can't be there right now. Only bad policy can stand in our way.

Eleanor Rigby October 20, 2016 at 12:08 am

I may have to re-watch to make sure I have this right, but I was shocked that Chris Wallace said it would be 2-minute answers and then 10 minutes of free discussion.

But, with the first topic about the Constitution, after the 2-minute answers, he immediately asked Clinton a question about partial-birth abortion …. wth did that come from? I have not heard either candidate talking much about this … Trump has been tongue-tied about that earlier in the year, and it's not one of his big points, anyway. Now, watching the C-Span post-debate calls, people are harranguing Clinton for wanting to kill babies in the days before birth, when she wouldn't do anything to touch Roe v. Wade, so it's a false issue. That didn't come from Trump; it came from the moderator!!!!!

I feel the whole debate as sandbagged at that point, and it freed the topic about women to get pivoted to Russia.

PhilU October 20, 2016 at 12:12 am

George Soros owns voting machines in 16 states!
http://www.smartmatic.com/case-studies/article/united-states-elections/
https://www.smartmatic.com/news/article/smartmatic-announces-the-sale-of-its-subsidiary-sequoia-voting-systems/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/smartmatic-sgo-malloch-brown-soros-operative-buys-election-cj-wilson

Or at least is tied to some shady business that does.

[Oct 20, 2016] The Third Presidential Debate

Notable quotes:
"... To this day, I am dumbfounded that the Trump campaign has never used "We came, we saw, he died!" or "What difference, at this point, does it make?" against Clinton. To not replay these gaffes over and over again is quite possibly the worst case of political amateurism I have ever seen. ..."
"... At least Trump *started,* however haltingly, to put the Washington foreign policy consensus under scrutiny. That was a small but unprecedented step for a major-party presidential candidate. ..."
"... This election has focused so (word removed by author) much on scandals about foundations and emails and groping and "OMG he said this" and "OMG she said that" that there's no room left to talk about actual policy. ..."
"... Trump is leading a voice desperate to be heard and needing to be heard, but he's the worst man for the job. ..."
"... His record and past is incredibly flawed and wide open to character attacks. This allowed Clinton to pivot every question she didn't like right into a character issue. Free trade issues? Trump used illegal Chinese Steel. Taxes? Trump never paid any. Jobs? Trump hires illegals and doesn't pay his contractors. Foreign policy? Trump worships Putin and wants to nuke and grab all the oil. So on so on. ..."
"... the folks of TAC and other conservative areas have plenty of good ideas of how he could do it, Trump doesn't do it. He just makes the same generic insults ("she's a disaster, it's a disaster, everything is a disaster, and everyone is smarter too") but beyond the initial quote-worthy line he doesn't press hard on specifics nor does he focus on enough specifics on what makes him better. ..."
"... Clinton is a candidate that started out with a lot of flaws and very low support from her base. A strong Republican Candidate would've either forced Clinton to clean up her act and pivot more into a populist stance or resulted in a stronger Democratic primary due to a desperate need to put up a more electable contender to follow up on Obama. ..."
"... Trump was put up as an alternative to Clinton. And after we saw him a hawkish extremely pro-life perfect example of "typical politician" with a lot of skeletons doesn't seem all that bad anymore. ..."
"... Look at this and tell me all he ways Trump is demonstrating his blatantly obvious dementia. Wandering speech. Inability to concentrate. Irrelevant replies to specific questions. Inability to remember his own talking points. Inability to recognize the meaning of what is said to him and around him. Inability to distinguish fact from fancy, his own fantasies from reality. The man is senile. ..."
"... let's remember that the three biggest crackpots in the primaries – Carson, Cruz, and Trump – got more than 60% of the votes. So, before we go around trying to make ourselves feel better by telling ourselves that, without Trump, everything would have been fine, just imagine what a disaster the GOP would be facing if Ted Cruz were the nominee. ..."
"... The alternative to Trump wasn't Rubio the lightweight, Jeb the retread, or Kasich. It was Cruz. Just ruminate on that a bit. ..."
"... Clinton lied through her teeth on the issue of the Clinton Foundation; which she made sound like God's personal charity. He didn't lay a glove on her on that issue. Why? ..."
"... As a Christian, I find Hillary Clinton unacceptable. I also find Donald Trump unacceptable. I think most people who are not Christians feel the same way. 2016 is a loss for everyone. ..."
"... Our republic– I'm sorry, our oligarchy - is in bad shape. But to the debate: The election isn't rigged if you are such an idiot that you are clearly losing it by your own fault. ..."
"... Cruz pokes all sorts of people (including people he needs as allies and voters) in their eyes, repeatedly, and then tells them it's for their own good, when it's perfectly apparent that his ego is so needy he will abandon his principles when the right opportunity arises (viz his endorsement of Trump as Trump looked likely to overtake HRC). ..."
"... Rubio is an empty suit for the Israel-Saudi Arabia neocon set. ..."
"... Because Cruz is a Dominist. Meaning he specifically wants to establish a Christian theocracy in America and thinks he was sent by God to create it. Claiming that the first amendment only applies to Christians is so antithetical to the American foundation it scares this even of us who dont share his beliefs. ..."
"... Foreign Policy is an area where Trump could have scored some points on Hillary Clinton's rather flawed record, Libya, Syria, etc. However, Trump is so undisciplined and unfocused that he failed to really nail her. ..."
"... On top of all of this, the Republican Party is fractured between the GOP Establishment and the GOP Base. The GOP Base strongly supports Trump, the the GOP Establishment is weak at best. Indeed, many of the GOP elite, such as the Bush Family cannot stand him and refuse to support him. ..."
"... He knew the question about his accepting the outcome of the election should he lose was going to come up, and he know he could only hurt himself by the answer he gave. He intentionally shot himself in the foot, once again. ..."
Oct 20, 2016 | www.theamericanconservative.com
The third presidential debate was arguably the most substantive of the general election, but that wasn't a high bar to clear. It was also probably Trump's best performance against Clinton, but it still wasn't nearly good enough to close the gap between them. His refusal to say simply that he would accept the result of the election became the main takeaway from the debate and the banner headline in practically every newspaper. Trump was very likely to lose the election anyway at this point, but he seems determined to lose it in a way that will bring even more discredit on him and his supporters. He managed to overshadow everything else he said during the debate with that one answer, and anything else he said–for good or ill–will receive very little attention. Since Trump was already trailing Clinton going into the debate, the onus was on him to score a clear victory. He did not, and he missed his last major chance to make the election more competitive. That failure is his, and no one else did it to him.

Clinton was forced to dodge questions about donors to the Clinton Foundation and her support for a "no-fly zone" in Syria, but that was the result of tough questioning from the moderator. Her answers to these questions were woefully inadequate and evasive, but her opponent didn't take advantage of them. Trump never really managed to get the better of Clinton the entire night, and he tended to ramble aimlessly in response to questions that might have worked to his advantage. On more than one occasion, he ended up railing against the nuclear deal with Iran in response to questions that had nothing to do with it. This not only kept him from giving a coherent answer to the questions he was asked, but it also showed how heavily he relied on discredited hawkish talking points when he ran into difficulty. At one point, Trump tried to attack Clinton over New START, which he laughably called "the start-up." Even if there had been merit to Trump's criticism, he made such a hash of it as to make his attack useless.

The result of all this was that Clinton was able to escape scrutiny of most of her record. She was never asked to defend her support for the Libyan war, nor did she really have to answer for anything else that she did as Secretary of State. Once again, her opponent didn't know enough to know how to use her record against her. Despite her poor record on foreign policy, Clinton was able to get off almost completely scot-free.

Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged Donald Trump , Hillary Clinton , Iran , Libyan war , New START , Syria

Viriato , says: October 20, 2016 at 8:13 am

"The result of all this was that Clinton was able to escape scrutiny of most of her record. She was never asked to defend her support for the Libyan war, nor did she really have to answer for anything else that she did as Secretary of State."

Yes. I would have expected this if Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush had been the GOP nominee, but I truly expected better from Trump.

To this day, I am dumbfounded that the Trump campaign has never used "We came, we saw, he died!" or "What difference, at this point, does it make?" against Clinton. To not replay these gaffes over and over again is quite possibly the worst case of political amateurism I have ever seen. Just think back to 2008: one of the Obama campaign's most devastating tactics was to constantly remind voters of McCain's "The fundamentals of the economy are strong" gaffe.

The GOP had a golden opportunity this year. Clinton is an incredibly flawed candidate. Yet the GOP blew it by nominating a bad person who is totally unqualified to be President. My only consolation is that Rubio or Bush would have been even worse candidates than Trump… and probably worse Presidents than Clinton.

At least Trump *started,* however haltingly, to put the Washington foreign policy consensus under scrutiny. That was a small but unprecedented step for a major-party presidential candidate. Hopefully, it will pave the way for a more serious, profound, and systematic critique of the Washington consensus from a major-party candidate in the future. Right now, I don't see who that could possibly be, but then I never imagined Trump would ever actually throw his hat into the ring, much less win the GOP nomination.

Dakarian , says: October 20, 2016 at 8:26 am
Firstly, let me start up with a suggestion for the country: Figure out a way to clone Wallace twice and have each one of them run a debate. The only reason why this debate actually had a bit of meat to it is because of what Wallace put into it and I loved how he kept both candidates feet on the fire while actually letting them debate and go after each other at times.

The problem is that he had far too many issues to go over and not enough time to do it. This election has focused so (word removed by author) much on scandals about foundations and emails and groping and "OMG he said this" and "OMG she said that" that there's no room left to talk about actual policy. That's part of the problem.

The main part, though, is Trump. Not his original platform, which I've repeatedly said is appealing (even if I disagree with a good portion of it, it brings points of discussion that need to be addressed) or his voter base (some of which are crazy, but as we've seen, the crazies of the democrats are also fully active). Trump is leading a voice desperate to be heard and needing to be heard, but he's the worst man for the job.

His record and past is incredibly flawed and wide open to character attacks. This allowed Clinton to pivot every question she didn't like right into a character issue. Free trade issues? Trump used illegal Chinese Steel. Taxes? Trump never paid any. Jobs? Trump hires illegals and doesn't pay his contractors. Foreign policy? Trump worships Putin and wants to nuke and grab all the oil. So on so on.

Of course you can do similar against Hillary and she's just as open. But while the folks of TAC and other conservative areas have plenty of good ideas of how he could do it, Trump doesn't do it. He just makes the same generic insults ("she's a disaster, it's a disaster, everything is a disaster, and everyone is smarter too") but beyond the initial quote-worthy line he doesn't press hard on specifics nor does he focus on enough specifics on what makes him better. Or he's hitting points that hurt him more than help. He based his claim that Clinton wants open boarders on immigration on a wikileaks document that was about energy policy? He's attacking the Clinton Foundation while holding a similarly shady Foundation of his own?

Though really all of this is moot since he tends to take ALL of the air out of the room with talking points that have nothing to do with Clinton's policy issues or his benefits on policy but are all about Trump. I take note that everyone, from the analysis after the debate to the news sites to even TAC's first point to bring up about the debate was Trump's answer when asked if he'll respect the results of the election. He could've spent the entire debate pinning Clinton to the wall with a powerful performance and it'll all be useless because:

"Trump won't commit to accepting election results if he loses"

is the big takeaway.

And that's why I cringed when I saw what Republicans were selecting during the primaries. It wasn't just because Trump is Trump, but also because a weak Republican candidate results in a weak Democratic candidate that wins anyway. Clinton is a candidate that started out with a lot of flaws and very low support from her base. A strong Republican Candidate would've either forced Clinton to clean up her act and pivot more into a populist stance or resulted in a stronger Democratic primary due to a desperate need to put up a more electable contender to follow up on Obama.

But we got Trump. Which, I remind myself, was still the best option from the primary (given that Rand Paul fell off a cliff somehow). And because we got Trump THIS is the election we got.

Honestly the folks I feel worst about are his voting base, and I mean in a "I feel for your loss" way. It's full of people who are either losing their way of life, such as blue collars that used to be in manufacturing, and those who fear they are going to lose it, such as the evangelicals. They have real issues, and this election realized their party isn't going to solve them, so they looked for an alternative that would help.

And they got someone who, after wooing them by showing how little he's related to the GOP, spent all his time with a horribly managed campaign, attacks that don't hold water even when they are valid, presents enough material to easily feed a political media hungry for viewers, and who pivots to become more like the GOP when he needs to get to specifics.

It's like Samsung and Apple. Apple brings out an expensive, disliked phone, Samsung decides to throw a phone thinking "any phone will do that's not Apple." and now not only did it blow up in their face but the public isn't as bothered about a phone with no headphone jack.

And so here. Trump was put up as an alternative to Clinton. And after we saw him a hawkish extremely pro-life perfect example of "typical politician" with a lot of skeletons doesn't seem all that bad anymore. Perhaps she also needs an election win rivaling Reagan and supreme court slot left open just for her and her newly minted Democratic Senate?

I would say "perhaps this will result in a better, more reasonable, and stronger Republican party come next time" but I said that in 2008 with McCain. And instead I get Trump.

So I don't know. Maybe folks like me who are left-of-center will be considered conservatives now after this Left-shift is over. I'm already on the TAC more than I'm in the more leftward sites.

But if there's still hope for the current Right in 2020, please PLEASE, no more "anyone buts". And seriously. Wallace Clones. 10 of them. THAT would help Make America Great Again.

Rugeirn Drienborough , says: October 20, 2016 at 8:37 am
Look at this and tell me all he ways Trump is demonstrating his blatantly obvious dementia. Wandering speech. Inability to concentrate. Irrelevant replies to specific questions. Inability to remember his own talking points. Inability to recognize the meaning of what is said to him and around him. Inability to distinguish fact from fancy, his own fantasies from reality. The man is senile.
Brooklyn Blue Dog , says: October 20, 2016 at 9:58 am
Before we get too much into ego-salving revisionism about which candidates would have been better opponents to Hillary, let's remember that the three biggest crackpots in the primaries – Carson, Cruz, and Trump – got more than 60% of the votes. So, before we go around trying to make ourselves feel better by telling ourselves that, without Trump, everything would have been fine, just imagine what a disaster the GOP would be facing if Ted Cruz were the nominee.

The alternative to Trump wasn't Rubio the lightweight, Jeb the retread, or Kasich. It was Cruz. Just ruminate on that a bit.

Carl , says: October 20, 2016 at 9:59 am
Clinton lied through her teeth on the issue of the Clinton Foundation; which she made sound like God's personal charity. He didn't lay a glove on her on that issue. Why?
DanJ , says: October 20, 2016 at 10:17 am
Overseas reader here. A little bit off topic, but I'd really like to have TAC's writers (and commenters) take on how the political processes would work if Trump in fact won the election. A President totally unacceptable to all Democrats and many establishment Republicans, would he face a majority working against him on all issues? Would we see the office of the President cut down to the bare minimum the Constitution permits, or beyond? Would he be the lamest of lame ducks?
Mac61 , says: October 20, 2016 at 10:22 am
As a Christian, I find Hillary Clinton unacceptable. I also find Donald Trump unacceptable. I think most people who are not Christians feel the same way. 2016 is a loss for everyone. My hope is that a chastened Republican Party regroups and finds better leaders for 2018 and 2020. Trump is an idiot savant at best. You can't assign thoughtful strategy to him. Our republic– I'm sorry, our oligarchy - is in bad shape. But to the debate: The election isn't rigged if you are such an idiot that you are clearly losing it by your own fault.
Liam , says: October 20, 2016 at 11:28 am
"I really don't understand why no one likes Cruz. He seems like a well-spoken, principled social and fiscal conservative that has a healthy skepticism of U.S. interventions abroad."

In case you forget or never understood, it's because Cruz pokes all sorts of people (including people he needs as allies and voters) in their eyes, repeatedly, and then tells them it's for their own good, when it's perfectly apparent that his ego is so needy he will abandon his principles when the right opportunity arises (viz his endorsement of Trump as Trump looked likely to overtake HRC).

It doesn't help that his personality screams that he has Daddy Issues (his father treats him like a new Messiah). People see him and go "eew" in a different way than they go "eew" with Trump.

Rubio is an empty suit for the Israel-Saudi Arabia neocon set.

Cruz and Rubio were even worse than Trump. Which is saying a ton.

GregR , says: October 20, 2016 at 11:34 am
"I really don't understand why no one likes Cruz. He seems like a well-spoken, principled social and fiscal conservative that has a healthy skepticism of U.S. interventions abroad."

Because Cruz is a Dominist. Meaning he specifically wants to establish a Christian theocracy in America and thinks he was sent by God to create it. Claiming that the first amendment only applies to Christians is so antithetical to the American foundation it scares this even of us who dont share his beliefs.

And this isn't some light weight Anglican theocracy, he wants to bring back Old Testament punishments for crimes… a woman who gets raped must be stoned to death and all of that.

Then Cruz wraps his amazingly scary theocracy nonsense in a creepy, slimy exterior.

Uncle Billy , says: October 20, 2016 at 12:48 pm
Foreign Policy is an area where Trump could have scored some points on Hillary Clinton's rather flawed record, Libya, Syria, etc. However, Trump is so undisciplined and unfocused that he failed to really nail her.

He has some good ideas, but he fails to follow up and get specific on anything. He has this hard core of supporters who think he is great, but he has not captured many moderates or undecided voters.

On top of all of this, the Republican Party is fractured between the GOP Establishment and the GOP Base. The GOP Base strongly supports Trump, the the GOP Establishment is weak at best. Indeed, many of the GOP elite, such as the Bush Family cannot stand him and refuse to support him.

I really cannot see him winning. The math is simply not there. When you consider that African-Americans, Hispanics and educated women are strongly against him, it will be unusually difficult for him to win swing states.

So it looks like President Hillary Clinton.

EarlyBird , says: October 20, 2016 at 12:59 pm
Trump has simply never been serious about this election. Last night only provided the 1,001st piece of evidence of that.

He knew the question about his accepting the outcome of the election should he lose was going to come up, and he know he could only hurt himself by the answer he gave. He intentionally shot himself in the foot, once again.

He has never, ever been interested in responsibility of the presidency. He alluded to that some months ago when he intimated that he may not be inaugurated should he win.

He went into this for attention, adulation and power, mostly attention. He is a deeply sick man, who I honestly feel some pity for.

[Oct 20, 2016] Christopher R Barron: 'Trump stuck to the issues and forced Hillary to talk policy'

Oct 20, 2016 | www.theguardian.com

Christopher Barron
Donald Trump came to this behind in the polls and reeling after weeks of negative media coverage. He needed a big night – and he got one.

For a campaign that prides itself on its mastery of policy, Hillary spent much of the night trying trying to get Trump to take the bait on sideshow issues.

In previous debates, Trump took the bait. Tonight, however, we saw a much more disciplined candidate. Trump stuck to the issues and forced Hillary to talk policy and – quite frankly – she had her worst debate performance.

Unlike previous moderators, Chris Wallace was willing to properly challenge both Trump and Clinton. His line of questioning, particularly when it came to the Clinton Foundation, kept Hillary off balance.
Clinton also found herself on the defensive on foreign policy, where she seemed more like a George W Bush Republican than a Democrat.

As a result, this ended up being Trump's best debate. For far too long, the Republican candidate has let the campaign be about the circus and not about policy. If this race is about the circus then Hillary Clinton wins. If its about policy then Trump has a shot. It's frustrating for me, as a Trump supporter, that it has taken this long for him to focus on where his opponent stands on the issues.

[Oct 20, 2016] Foreign Policy and the Third Presidential Debate The American Conservative

Oct 20, 2016 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Foreign policy has received relatively little attention so far in the debates, but we might hear a bit more about a wider range of these issues tonight. One of the announced topics for the final 2016 presidential debate is "foreign hot spots," which suggests that the candidates will be pressed for their views on various conflicts and flashpoints around the globe. It is almost a given that one question will be on the recently announced Mosul offensive against ISIS, and I assume there will be more of the same leading Syria questions that we heard last time.

Ideally, we should also hear questions about at least two of the following: the ongoing war in Afghanistan, heightened tensions between India and Pakistan following the attack in Uri, the war on Yemen and the U.S. role in it, the supposed firing of missiles at U.S. ships in the Red Sea related to that role, the Russian deployment of Iskander missiles to Kaliningrad, and the public rift between the U.S. and the Philippines under its new president.

All of these involve U.S. policies and relationships in one way or another, and we have not heard much of anything from either candidate about any of them. I doubt that any of these additional topics will come up tonight, but Wallace may surprise me.

Tonight will be Trump's last chance to challenge Clinton on her lackluster foreign policy record. He has mostly failed to do this in the last two debates, and I don't expect him to do any better this time. If he could spell out the dangerous implications of Clinton's Syria policy, that could finally put her on the defensive and possibly put a dent in her support, but to do that he would have to know what he's talking about. Meanwhile, Clinton has been allowed to skate through the entire campaign without facing much scrutiny on foreign policy at all, and there is almost no time left. For all the talk of how this was going to be a foreign policy election, the subject has mostly been ignored for the duration of the general election. Considering that the next president will take office while the U.S. is fighting and/or supporting at least three wars after fifteen years of being at war somewhere in the world, this is a major failure on the part of the candidates and the media. Americans are electing another wartime president, but the candidates have had to answer remarkably few questions about how and why they would continue America's entanglements in foreign conflicts.

P.S. As usual, I will be covering the debate on Twitter ( @DanielLarison ). The debate begins at 9:00 p.m. Eastern.

[Oct 13, 2016] Stockman: I do not think she won the debate. I think the media destroyed Donald Trump as a candidate

Notable quotes:
"... I think the media destroyed Donald Trump as a candidate ..."
"... I have to say I am truly disappointed by this blog post. The election is a clear choice. Hillary has a confirmed track record of war, the death of muslim, laws that incarcerated black people, stumping for banks, stumping for Monsanto, stealing aid money, corruption and slut-shaming raped women. ..."
"... Socialists, Progressives, the Left, HATE corrupt HRC's actions, policies, behavior, and record. Why can't people get the terminology and concepts correct? ..."
"... HRC is the OPPOSITE of progresssive, socialist, leftist. Hillary Clinton is a NeoLiberal NeoCon. She wants reckless regime change, war, trade agreements that decimate US jobs and wages, etc. ..."
"... Mish is acting like some gal looking for the perfect man as a husband. There is no perfect man in either love or politics. Trump is the closest thing to it given what I see of the puppets of politics so far. The central bankers / globalists appear to hate him. That alone should be enough for Mish who has railed against both to vote for Trump. Imagine the heat Trump has already taken? An Mish just blithely jumps ship. And what for? Because of some imagined stampeded because Trump is hetero. ..."
"... Hillary destroyed evidence she was subpoenaed to turn over to criminal investigators. She should lose her law license just as Bill had. Instead, she will become president. ..."
"... I recently registered to vote for the first time in over 15 years. I'm voting for Trump and I've never voted for a Republican before in my life. I'm completely ignoring all the polls, all the talking heads, all of the 'smart' people, alt or otherwise. I'm going to vote for what I see as the only option for not *more of the same*. ..."
"... It is a fraud to reject Trump for his failures to make the best case against Hillary. It really doesn't matter as we have seen just in the last few days that the media is not covering the issues, no matter how much he brings them up. He has massive rallies and goes through all of this, yet NOTHING in the media ..."
"... Sure they will cover his vulgarities while saying NOTHING of Hillary's issues other than to claim the content of her emails is less relevant than a potential Trump/Russia conspiracy. Birther my ass, will they apologize for inferring Trump is a traitor or spy? I doubt it. ..."
"... The corrupt FBI cover-up of Clintons violations of the espionage act has convinced me that Clinton should be in prison. She wants to appoint left-wing ideological Supreme Court justices who further destroy the law and move us down the road to tyranny. She will not repeal the ACA. She will further destabilize the world just as she did Libya. ..."
"... Trump is a very flawed individual who really has no business being President. I disagree with many of his policies, but at this point, we all we have left is damage control. As much as I hate it, I will vote for Trump. ..."
"... Disagree. Voting for the 2 party system is what has got us where we are today. It's people like you, who will always vote for who the oligarchs give you, that has put the country in this position. ..."
"... Trump, even if elected, cannot do anything without an agreeable Congress. ..."
"... Trump may call himself a republican (as Ron Paul did) but in fact he is an independent. ..."
"... The oligarchs most certainly did not give us Trump, the people voted for Trump in spite of the oligarchs continuously trying to destroy him and supporting establishment professional politicians. ..."
"... Likely, if Hillary wins, they will attempt to change the laws and structure of party politics to make sure we NEVER see another Trump like candidacy. ..."
"... Trump is not a nation builder, which is why the neocons are against him. Wake up Mish – any vote against Trump is a vote for Hitlary, AND YOU KNOW IT, and would be a vote for what you despise. ..."
"... Oh please it's hardly over. Polls don't matter when a wikileak, 11 year-old tape, or bad debate performance could potentially swing sentiment overnight from one candidate to another. ..."
"... I conclude no one wants to admit who they support. The only reason anyone would vote for HIllary is to stop Trump. Now, if the polls show an easy win for Hillary, those people may figure their vote is not needed, and since they don't really care for her, not vote at all. By contrast, Trump supporters are more likely to be angry by how the press has treated him, and vote anyway. ..."
"... I expect record low turnout. It's possible that with a record low turnout that Trump might actually win. It's also possible that Johnson might get 15% of the vote and surprise everyone. It's a shame, honestly, that the Libertarians didn't nominate a more qualified nominee this year as this would have been the year for him to be taken seriously. ..."
"... If I put a 'Trump' sticker on my car, it would be vandalized. If I put a Trump sign on my building, it would be vandalized if not outright fire bombed. I live in a very blue district in a very blue state. ..."
"... Trump was not my first choice, but he is the better choice. I have warmed to him a bit seeing how he has upset the party oligarchs.. and not just in the USA ..."
"... It's easy to do. There is no chance in Hell that she will win, and you can set back and watch it all burn down with a clear conscience, right? This is what I love about principles. We pretend our principles are about the greater good…like we are sacrificing ourselves, when in reality, we are simply trying to shield our own delicate sensibilities from any thought of responsibility. ..."
"... The USA is not a nation (at least not in the traditional nation-state sense). It's too fractured and too diverse, it doesn't even have its own language and culture. How can one say "we"? How many of you can find enough people in your area with the same interests to form any organized group? ..."
"... Gary Johnson is the one expressing this "romantic" view, of an America that doesn't exist, never existed, has no chance of existing because it's too diverse and fractured in its social core, and it's against all global plans and policies of all other countries. He can only fracture the republican party even more, until republicans become "the other democrats" on the table. ..."
"... The same happened in Greece with the third party "To Potami", which helped bring Syriza in power after fracturing the center-right. It was a "catalyst" party that played its role and then almost vanished. ..."
"... I read Stockman's article in full, and he gets even more preposterous and unhinged from reality than that sentence you disagree with, Mish. Stockman seems to think the ruination of the USA under Hillary will be a good thing that leads to a Utopian paradise arising out of the financial ashes and radioactive rubble. Bolsheviks in 1917 and more recent Marxists such as Paul Pot in Cambodia have had that same vision of a Utopian society arising from the ashes and killing fields. I think Stockman needs to rethink that part of his narrative. Anyway, the Media did not kill Trump. Rather, the Media Have Made Trump. ..."
"... 40 million or so Trump supporters watching debate number two on TV saw it for themselves, and now more than ever know the falseness of the mainstream media narrative, both in its spin and coverage deletions. The media has been 99% anti-Trump from Day One, and ditto the GOP elite who are touted by the media as now ditching Trump. In that sense, what Trump and Bill Clinton have in common is that they both get stronger when under attack. If the media and GOP elite suddenly embraced Trump, that might confuse Trump's supporters into bolting. ..."
"... The Bush cousin, Billy, and NBC were a month too soon releasing the trash talking tape, and timing counts. People who watched the debate, including the Hillary voters, now have too much time to talk and reconsider. The danger to Hillary is that some of the robotic drones who vote Democratic by rote will agree that Hillary is all talk and empty words and that nothing will be done under her rule to help the black, Latinos and inner city people who robotically vote the Democratic ticket. That is the defection that could hurt Hillary on election day, defections among her own core believing that They Have Nothing to Lose by Voting Trump. The media cannot sustain the Bush family/NBC tape frenzy much longer. It will soon be old news, and something else will emerge to turn the election. ..."
"... My research shows evidence of poll fixing to make hillary look good. My independant polls and questions show trump will win election by a large margin. My guess he will beat Hillary by 6 million votes if not more. Media is so wrong on this. ..."
"... Whatever the media says is a lie, I have no doubt. My prediction is Hilary's team will know that she can't win, so they'll play the poor health card so that Obama will stall the election (with him in power) for another year. ..."
"... They hope that Clinton builds some kind of commanding position in the polls and they convince a significant number of voters that Trump will lose anyway. The problem is that everyone knows that the polls are rigged, and the more people see of Hillary and the more questions are asked, the more the people don't like her. The polls are still too close for comfort. ..."
"... But if there is one thing I have learned about neo-liberals (or whatever these creatures call themselves) over the past decade or so – that is they make and break the rules to suit themselves. Done in Europe all the time. We will see. ..."
"... Hillary will lead the polls but lose the election which will be proclaimed fraudulent due to Russian hacking at the behest of Trump. Its all set up. ..."
"... They keep bringing up all of these leaked and hacked emails, claiming they are all tracked back to Russia, which is impossible to actually verify WHO did it, but none the less, this will be their plan if ballot box stuffing and election fraud are not enough to get her across the finish line. They keep TELLING us that Hillary is the WINNER. They claim its not even close. ..."
"... I am not so sure that Trump will lose. People are so anti-establishment that it is likely the media by defiling Trump almost on a daily basis and their visible bias towards Hillary may be helping Trump along. However I do accept Trump can lose it with his foot-in-mouth disease but even now I do not think it is sure thing. If the anti-establishment crowd land up in droves to vote, it might well be Trump. ..."
"... I like David Stockman and enjoy what he has to say but it looks like he is trying to put some lipstick on the cover of his new book. He hoped that Trump would get to the left of Hillary on Wall Street and ruffle Janet's feathers. ..."
"... Basically David is saying that it will be a good thing that Hillary will be our next President because she will preside over the next recession. He also more or less said up to this point that it would be great if she gets "Trumped". ..."
"... We are ruled by largely a false consensus. Exactly what these polls are about…creating the perception of what the public believes in an effort to direct that perception. ..."
"... Trump has gotten to this point despite a massive push back from Republicans and an almost universal opposition from the mainstream media….and yet we still hear those proclaiming his candidacy is dead. If just a few more people would show a spine instead of running away from each and every Political correct attack, we MIGHT still have a democratic republic rather than a world ruled by powerful elites through political and corporate mouthpieces. ..."
"... I guess like many others, I slapped my forehead when the "tape" was released and initially thought it would be the last we saw of Donald Trump. Over the next few days I re-evaluated and came to the conclusion that it was inevitable that something like this would occur. TPTB will never allow Trump to ascend to the presidency willingly and if it can't be stopped by character assassination, they may well try another way. ..."
"... Personally I hope Donald wins by a good margin and Clinton, who couldn't keep the grin from her face, will be consigned to where she should be. ..."
"... Hillary will get the election simply by how the votes get counted. The character assassinations are a prelude and necessary part of the story as to why Trump lost. The faked vote counts for Hillary will be the reason Trump lost. But that won't be discussed. ..."
"... Hillary was a vote canvasser in Chicago in 1960 and learned a lot about vote fraud (she said so herself). I'm sure that will come in handy, no wonder she switched to the Vote Fraud Party. ..."
"... The way things are heating up between Washington and Russia, there's a lot more than the market to worry about, especially if Hillary is elected because she will not be able to control the Pentagon nor her neocon advisers like Paul Wolfowitz and Mike Morell. Simply put, they will get US into a war with Russia and Russia will defend itself with nukes because, for Russia, the 'conventional' alternative to nuclear war would be far worse. ..."
"... Russia will not likely allow that to happen. As part of the USSR, they lost 20m people during WWII, ejecting the Germans from their own territory while the Germans were fighting on multiple fronts. That represents as much of a "never again" tragedy for Russia as the holocaust represents for Jews. ..."
"... US military planners know this and will try to take out Russia's nukes as soon as the hostilities begin. The Russians know this and that they must launch as quickly as possible. It will be all out and all over, with little chance of negotiating a cease fire. ..."
"... As Lavrov said, we cannot even negotiate anymore. As soon as Kerry and he made their agreement last month, the Pentagon trashed it and attacked a Syrian base – as ISIS was attacking a nearby mountain. The Syrians even claim to have a recording of communications between US forces and ISIS – which 'our' government has yet to deny. We know now from Hillary's emails that the Saudis and Qataris were funding ISIS in 2014. There's surely more than that. ..."
"... I'm still voting for Trump as my big FU to the current way things are done. I still think a Trump presidency will result in something tangible being done to either our infrastructure needs or to causing everyone to re-engage in their local politics. Both positives in my mind. The World will take care of itself without the United States for a few years. ..."
"... Trump is still in the race and come Nov. 9 we will have our own version of Brexit. The dominant ruling minority have overstepped their bounds with the voting majority, who now see through all of the Zioglobalist falsehoods. ..."
"... The best we can hope for is Trump represents a different faction of our masters that realize a leech can't survive on a corpse. ..."
"... In the last debate I think I heard Trump say "oh so it's 3 against one again?" I was thinking the same thing before he said it. ..."
"... Only the MSM seem to be unaware of female sexuality – perhaps they think of them all as saints and mothers. I doubt that Trump has suffered lasting damage by the Bush inc. attack. Normal people are realists. ..."
"... Trump has many flaws and yes he has hurt himself but it is the media that is attempting to destroy him. Even Nixon got treated better then Trump. They cover up for Clinton, they work with Clinton. The media is doing a total hatchet job on Trump. ..."
"... According to my state Secretary of State, the second debate generated a flood of last minute new voter registrations, so it isn't over. ..."
"... I do agree Donald could have done way better in the first debate, and somewhat better in the second although he still won the second debate. We can also still hope the Most Evil Bitch will have a heart attack. If she is elected I am going to build a fallout shelter. ..."
"... And people are going to vote for Gary Johnson? Jesus Christ. Hope you're living on 10 acres of arable land in the middle of nowhere, Mish! ..."
"... The other problem for Bush was a short, mild recession during the election. Slick Willy made a big deal out of it; Bush said "don't worry, it won't amount to anything". Bush was right, but The Weasel won. ..."
"... Mish you are so wrong. I think Trump he will win solidly. The 2nd debate was a master stoke. If the election was over, you wouldn't have OBAMA and his wife, GORE, Sanders, Bill Clinton and assortment of idiotic actors all campaign wildly. ..."
"... Debates are never very memorable, statements are. The one-statement that will stay with everyone is you would be in Jail if I were president. ..."
"... A vote for Gary Johnson now is without a doubt a vote for Hillary, which in turn is a vote for WW3. That is not hyperbole. ..."
"... Political consultant Dick Morris knows the Clintons better than anybody and is vigorous in his support of Trump. He has been lambasting third party voters as Hillary votes and says it's really a wasted vote. ..."
"... Not sure why I would have to say this, but what Trump said into that hot mic was accurate. I lived in Miami for several years. Wealth purchases people and beauty is DEFINITELY purchaseable. They let him do it just the same as all of the athletes and celebs in the VIP sections of the clubs I frequented in SoBe. We used to joke that buying a bottle and getting a table in VIP increased our likelihood of hooking up by ~300%. Groping willing participants is not sexual assault. ..."
"... Don't be silly. If Trump loses this, he will be DONE. He has flown into the face of every power group in America, and if there is one thing we know about progressives, they do not forgive or forget. ..."
"... Personal destruction is their game. ..."
"... People want to think that Trump is just in it for publicity, which to me is to assume he is stupid, which I think is far from true. I think he truly does believe he can make a difference. He is probably wrong, but he is NOT stupid. This is his end. ..."
"... If anyone in the media had a clue about how voters feel, voters wouldn't be disconnecting their overpriced cable TV. 500 channels and they are all crap. ..."
"... Of course Trump will wreck Washington DC. That is the point. Of course Paul Ryan hates voters as much as Nancy Pelosi and Obama and McCain do - our public servants have made their hatred of the public quite clear. ..."
"... Believe it or not, Hillary started out as a conservative republican. At age 13 she canvassed for Nixon in Chicago in the 1960 election and saw vote fraud firsthand (seems to have made an impression!). In '64 she campaigned for Goldwater! Then in '65 she went to college and started drifting to the left. Her senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky. Enrolling at Yale in '69 she met Bill Clinton and joined the Dark Side. ..."
"... Clinton is still the Republican candidate. She is certainly to the right of Nixon or Eisenhower. Pro big business, pro free trade, pro immigration, pro defense spending. The only non-alignment is with the Christian-right. But they were just a play thing for votes by the GOP anyway. ..."
"... Go back and read Eisenhower's Farewell Address again Jon. It's the opposite of Hellary. ..."
"... The thing about Trump is that he hasn't got a plan. Lowering taxes and spending more on defense is not a plan. Saying you will do better deals is not a plan. Voters are just hoping that once he was in he would achieve things but really we don't know what he will do. ..."
"... Trump does not have a plan and it is obvious. But no plan is better than Hillary's bad plan. ..."
"... But he really lost me when he degenerated into pandering to every minority race, religion and special interest group that yelled the loudest… just like all the other politicians. And the most recent revelation about his vulgar views of women didn't help either. Nothing to love there. ..."
"... "Trump was asked several pointed questions. Hillary was asked none." ..."
"... Never mind preparing for a biased moderator, accepting the conditions of such a debate at all makes him look like failed leadership. He could have demanded better conditions, especially if he were slightly ahead as he may have been at the time. ..."
"... One more thing that struck me was that if the election was in the bag why would they release the tape? They might as well be preparing for the coronation. ..."
"... IMO, the establishment is still running scared and thus using all the dirty tricks that they are capable of and which they think will win them the election. The crux of the issue is that they do not want to acknowledge that people might prefer a discredited Trump to the establishment at this stage of the game. Establishment is the problem but they are masquerading as the solution. This is the problem with gaming people. At some point the game is up. ..."
"... Exactly. And why release polls with a so called 11% lead, polls conducted by a company connected to Clinton? That has an overweight in left/democratic voters? ..."
"... Brexit was supposed to be over before the final result came in. How quickly people forget. It is the people vs Wall Street/corrupt politicians. The latter is represented by Clinton. the former by Trump. We will see how angry the U.S. people really are at the current clique of career politicians, bought and paid for by the big companies. ..."
"... Why indeed would they send out Obama only yesterday to wag his finger in dire warning? The powers to be know it's NOT all over. The problem is that each time they send one of these 'asshat extrodinaires' out To preach to the public they simply cause MORE dissent, more mocking, and more retrenchment. ..."
"... Does anyone actually think that Obama, who has done more to divide the nation than anyone can make the blindest bit of difference at this stage? Respectfully, a curious Englishman. ..."
"... PS! It's not as though Obama has anything better to do with his time, is it? Enjoy 18 holes of golf, or go out campaigning for a woman he (allegedly) loathes and despises. Tough call, that one! ..."
"... "We will see how angry the U.S. people really are at the current clique of career politicians, bought and paid for by the big companies." ..."
"... I hope they are angry enough to come and vote for him in such numbers that it assures a Trump victory. Anybody but establishment is all I ask! What is happening is too nauseating to stomach any longer. ..."
"... Unfortunately Gary Johnson will split the anti-establishment vote, helping to elect the Soros and banksters funded candidate. ..."
"... This is not a vote for election. It is a vote against election. ..."
Oct 11, 2016 | mishtalk.com

Stockman: "This election is over. Trump made a game defense of himself, enough to keep him in the race, but it is going to descend deeper into the gutter from here, than ever before in American history. And the people of America are going to be disgusted. And they're not going to come out and vote. And a lot of them now feel free to vote their conscience and their conviction for the third party candidate. So Hillary will have no mandate. And I think that's good. Because she stands for everything that's wrecking this country. We're gonna now have a crisis; there will be a market crash; there will be a recession. She will be a 45 percent politically-crippled mandate-less president, and we are going to finally show the American people that this fantasy that both parties have been projecting has to end. … I do not think she won the debate. I think the media destroyed Donald Trump as a candidate."

General Agreement

There is very little I disagree with, until the final sentence.

It's pretty clear the election is over, but that was clear after the first debate.

I would not go so far as to say the markets will "crash", but that depends on the definition. I actually suspect more like a 40-50% decline over seven to ten years with nothing much worse than a 15-20% decline.

No year may look like a "crash" but the end result for pension plans will be worse.

Hillary certainly is damaged goods, but she will be able to damage the country with help of her Republican neocon friends who would rather see her in the White House than Trump.

All things considered, that's a lot of agreements. But, if a "crash" is coming, however one defines it, Donald Trump would not have stopped it either.

Media Destroyed Trump?

My main disagreement with Stockman is his statement " I think the media destroyed Donald Trump as a candidate ." Certainly the media tried to destroy Trump, but the media failed every step of the way.

Trump Destroyed Trump

It is Trump who destroyed Trump. The man finally imploded.

Heading into the first debate, it was Trump's election to lose, and he lost it with an amazing set of gaffes.

When asked about taxes, he had an easy answer: "I pay may taxes according to the law, just as I presume Hillary does. Warren Buffet complained his secretary pays more in taxes than he does. But does Buffet voluntarily pay extra taxes? Does Hillary? If Hillary does not like the law, why didn't she change it when she was a senator?"

How hard was that?

Why didn't Trump ever bring up the Clinton Foundation? Why didn't he press harder on Libya?

In regards to the "birther" issue, all Trump had to say was "I changed my mind once I saw the birth certificate. Am I not allow to change my mind? Didn't Hillary change her mind on the Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement (TPP)? Of course she did. She now agrees with me. If she can change her, mind why can't I?

Trump was asked several pointed questions. Hillary was asked none. Trump could have and should have, after the third pointed question, gone after the moderator with a comment "Doesn't Hillary get any hard questions? Whose side are you on?" That would have brought lots of laughs.

Such a response to the moderator by Trump would have required some quick thinking, but there is no excuse for Trump flat out not being prepared for the debate.

Ahead of the first debate, Trump was one state away from pulling into the lead, and a moderately good debate would likely have done that. Answers like the above, easily worked out in advance, may have been a knock out blow to Hillary.

Finally, and in regards to all the new sexual allegations, Trump should simply have said something along the lines "I made a mistake. So did Hillary when she married Bill."

The bottom line is the medial did not destroy Trump, his own arrogance, lack of humility, and total lack of preparation for the first debate did.

Barring a medical or other type of disaster, this election is indeed over.

I am voting for Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

thoughts on "Trump Destroyed Trump, Not the Media: "This Election is Over""

michael said:

October 11, 2016 8:44:34 at 8:44 PM Trump has not lost yet, although the mainstream media would suggest otherwise. Of course they also predicted Brexit to fail. It is not over until the votes are counted. It will be a travesty if Hillary is elected.

Gary Johnson believes Wall Street has committed no crimes. Hard rhetoric to stand behind.

Arvind Damarla

October 12, 2016 4:04:38 at 4:04 AM I have to say I am truly disappointed by this blog post. The election is a clear choice. Hillary has a confirmed track record of war, the death of muslim, laws that incarcerated black people, stumping for banks, stumping for Monsanto, stealing aid money, corruption and slut-shaming raped women.

Trump has made fast and loose comments because he is not a slick politician. However I challenge you to tell us what you find so objectionable about the *substance* of his statements (not the media spin) that you would vote to allow Clinton in. Maybe you're in California and your vote doesn't matter, but still … very disappointing.

CJ

October 12, 2016 12:37:29 at 12:37 PM The election "should" be a clear choice, but unfortunately the democrat/liberal/progressive/socialist/fascist/communist fans of Hillary will not view, read or discuss anything that is not favorable to their queen. The new voting block generation Y is grossly uninformed, and being brainwashed by the MSM. Best thing to do is try to educate them.

mg

October 12, 2016 9:28:01 at 9:28 PM @CJ, Socialists, Progressives, the Left, HATE corrupt HRC's actions, policies, behavior, and record. Why can't people get the terminology and concepts correct?

HRC is the OPPOSITE of progresssive, socialist, leftist. Hillary Clinton is a NeoLiberal NeoCon. She wants reckless regime change, war, trade agreements that decimate US jobs and wages, etc.

phxfreddyii

October 13, 2016 7:50:33 at 7:50 AM Mish is acting like some gal looking for the perfect man as a husband. There is no perfect man in either love or politics. Trump is the closest thing to it given what I see of the puppets of politics so far. The central bankers / globalists appear to hate him. That alone should be enough for Mish who has railed against both to vote for Trump. Imagine the heat Trump has already taken? An Mish just blithely jumps ship. And what for? Because of some imagined stampeded because Trump is hetero.

For those of you who think what Trump said is "bad". Well I guess it is considered bad. But it is true. Women like powerful males and they drop their panties quite easily for them. I have experience this. If you have not perhaps you think it is a myth. It is not. Even being relatively fit and tall you would be surprised what a prim and proper lady will do if you intone that you can keep a secret. Reality is those cloths come off quite rapidly.

So let's all stop the Victorian tongue clucking.

Diogenes

October 11, 2016 9:26:23 at 9:26 PM Exactly. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012. It was/is a mistake. He is unable to identify Aleppo as a Syrian city and flashpoint of ISIS terror.

Trump got a ton of free publicity in the primary. Hard to sit there now and gripe over how he got treated.

Hillary destroyed evidence she was subpoenaed to turn over to criminal investigators. She should lose her law license just as Bill had. Instead, she will become president.

The world recoils in horror as President What-Difference-Does-It-Make takes office.

the_gardener

October 11, 2016 8:52:36 at 8:52 PM I recently registered to vote for the first time in over 15 years. I'm voting for Trump and I've never voted for a Republican before in my life. I'm completely ignoring all the polls, all the talking heads, all of the 'smart' people, alt or otherwise. I'm going to vote for what I see as the only option for not *more of the same*.

And I don't discuss it with anyone. I don't get into political arguments or discussions. I don't have a lawn sign or a bumper sticker. I don't go to rally's.

I'm betting there are plenty more people just like me and there is a big surprise awaiting all of the pundits.

madashellowell

October 12, 2016 7:56:30 at 7:56 AM So why do you believe Johnson is superior to Trump? Have you seen the beat-downs he has given people for the use of the term "illegal Alien". Are you good with open borders? Do you think he is anything close to a libertarian in hs views? Do you think there is a chance in hell he can win?

It is a fraud to reject Trump for his failures to make the best case against Hillary. It really doesn't matter as we have seen just in the last few days that the media is not covering the issues, no matter how much he brings them up. He has massive rallies and goes through all of this, yet NOTHING in the media .

Sure they will cover his vulgarities while saying NOTHING of Hillary's issues other than to claim the content of her emails is less relevant than a potential Trump/Russia conspiracy. Birther my ass, will they apologize for inferring Trump is a traitor or spy? I doubt it.

Mish, you are still free and can do as you wish, but you KNOW a vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary. YOU KNOW THINS, so please do us all a favor and not pretend it is some principled stand. You are willing to vote for a loser because you think trump will lose…..ensuring he WILL lose if others follow you path.

Blacklisted

October 12, 2016 7:57:06 at 7:57 AM We are partially in this mess because of people like you that don't take responsibility. Life is full of hard choices – make one. Sorry Mish, a vote for Johnson, who does not have a plan for our biggest financial issue, healthcare spending, is also spineless, or worse, because it helps an even bigger bag of horse sh*t – CROOKED Hitlary.

DesertRat

October 11, 2016 8:58:28 at 8:58 PM When Mike several months ago asked who his readers would vote for, I replied that I could not imagine a universe that could exist in which I would vote for Trump. Well I have found that universe.

The corrupt FBI cover-up of Clintons violations of the espionage act has convinced me that Clinton should be in prison. She wants to appoint left-wing ideological Supreme Court justices who further destroy the law and move us down the road to tyranny. She will not repeal the ACA. She will further destabilize the world just as she did Libya.

Trump is a very flawed individual who really has no business being President. I disagree with many of his policies, but at this point, we all we have left is damage control. As much as I hate it, I will vote for Trump.

Richard

October 11, 2016 9:17:36 at 9:17 PM Gee thanks. After cheerleading for Trump all through the Republican primaries, now you bail. Nothing that's happened wasn't predictable, in fact wasn't predicted. Where were you when something could be done about it?

Richard

mishgea

October 12, 2016 12:33:44 at 12:33 AM Please tell me what could have been done besides nothing. If you say vote Cruz or Rubio I would throw up. The least warmonger will get my vote actually. That may be Stein. I have to look. But it sure aint Cruz or Rubio. They are as bad as Hillary

vooch

October 12, 2016 7:01:37 at 7:01 AM respectfully disagree – Trump is currently winning and slowly extending his lead.

Hillary is unable to hit her numbers in key demographics

madashellowell
October 12, 2016 8:06:58 at 8:06 AM Mish will vote for someone he KNOWS will lose rather than risk his vote for someone who MIGHT lose. If Trump does lose it will be the result of people like Mish. For someone who lives in alternate media, he sure swallows the main stream media's crap whole.
It's sad. It's disappointing, but we live in a world of choices, one that ALWAYS revolves around choosing the lesser of evils. The role of the media is ALWAYS to incentivize us to choose poorly, be it in our consumption or politics. Humans have an inner need to self destruct and media and the commercial interests they ultimately represent seek to push us a long, to buy what we don't need and as ALWAYS lure us with "something for nothing" which is ALWAYS the most expensive "purchase" we could have made.
"Buy" Johnson and get Hillary and all that comes with her.WAR and financial depression in perpetude.
Jon Sellers

October 12, 2016 11:41:14 at 11:41 AM Disagree. Voting for the 2 party system is what has got us where we are today. It's people like you, who will always vote for who the oligarchs give you, that has put the country in this position.

Trump, even if elected, cannot do anything without an agreeable Congress.

Mish is a self-professed Libertarian and is taking the reasonable and responsible stand. He is voting his conscious. Everyone should.

CJ
October 12, 2016 12:56:47 at 12:56 PM And I disagree with you, Jon. Trump may call himself a republican (as Ron Paul did) but in fact he is an independent. Look at all the repubs that won't support "their" candidate. The oligarchs most certainly did not give us Trump, the people voted for Trump in spite of the oligarchs continuously trying to destroy him and supporting establishment professional politicians.
I am fine with Washington getting nothing done. What they do get done usually does more harm than good. Do you want to have Hillary impose her 75% tax plan? Are you happy that Obama brought back the Cold War, and Hillary intends to raise the temperature?
madashellowell
October 12, 2016 1:23:32 at 1:23 PM What CJ said.
What good are your principles if they have no effect on the outcome? A vote for a third party is a vote for Hillary. Are you so deluded to think that Hillary will care, or ANYONE will care, that Johnson got 10% of the vote? What good did it do to vote for Perot? WE got Clinton and what we have today. IT IS THE MEDIA that controls the elections, and the two main parties are in league with them. One reason they hate Trump so much is he has not spent the money Hillary has and his political power is a public demonstration to other potential candidates that maybe they too do not have to suckle at that tit of donors and media buys. This is a MAJOR threat to those running our country. NO donors, OH SHIT!, No advertising, OH HELL NO! Trump is no hero, no savior, but he is PROVING to be the only effective adversary to the powers that be. Only an fool would not see this. Third parties are a waste of effort, always have been. With Trump, even if he loses, it will change the political process for years to come.

Likely, if Hillary wins, they will attempt to change the laws and structure of party politics to make sure we NEVER see another Trump like candidacy. There is SO MUCH riding on this election and people are so caught up with the media shilling and traditional cognitive capture that they just don't realize. The system IS the system and when you are inside of it it is invisible, but when you are on the outside, trying to break in, you realize, be it business or politics, that there are walls built to prevent you from doing so, and typically the only way in is to pay tribute to the system, bend to its will, accept the corruption, fraud and criminality designed specifically to limit access.

Blacklisted

October 12, 2016 8:10:18 at 8:10 AM Trump is not a nation builder, which is why the neocons are against him. Wake up Mish – any vote against Trump is a vote for Hitlary, AND YOU KNOW IT, and would be a vote for what you despise.

Norman
October 12, 2016 8:43:40 at 8:43 AM You could vote for Trump and use your platform here to encourage every 3rd party, undecided and uninterested citizen to also vote for Trump.

Everyone understands he is flawed but the alternative is the end of the United States as we know it…the simple demographics of a Clinton presidency – likely 8 years followed by more Democratic dictatorship will bring in millions of Syrian and other Muslims, tens of millions more illegal aliens and we will become Greece/France/Germany/Sweden.

There are millions of Americans with young children who will be fighting the civil war and bear the brunt of the violence that will occur – and in many places is already occurring but being completely blacked out by the media.

Thanks for nothing pal.

Bayleaf

October 11, 2016 9:18:27 at 9:18 PM Oh please it's hardly over. Polls don't matter when a wikileak, 11 year-old tape, or bad debate performance could potentially swing sentiment overnight from one candidate to another.

Carl R

October 12, 2016 11:39:53 at 11:39 AM Or, maybe polls do matter, but not in the way most think. In the last two weeks I have been keeping a count of yard signs I see for Presidential candidates. There are many for local issues, but for President I have counted 0 for Hillary, 0 for Trump, 5 for Johnson. On bumper stickers I counted 1 for Bernie, and none for anyone else.

I conclude no one wants to admit who they support. The only reason anyone would vote for HIllary is to stop Trump. Now, if the polls show an easy win for Hillary, those people may figure their vote is not needed, and since they don't really care for her, not vote at all. By contrast, Trump supporters are more likely to be angry by how the press has treated him, and vote anyway.

I expect record low turnout. It's possible that with a record low turnout that Trump might actually win. It's also possible that Johnson might get 15% of the vote and surprise everyone. It's a shame, honestly, that the Libertarians didn't nominate a more qualified nominee this year as this would have been the year for him to be taken seriously.

On the whole of politics, I'll make one final comment. Back in the 60's politics was a dirty business, featuring guys like LBJ and Nixon. After Watergate the mood changed, and instead we got nice guys, and who could be nicer than Jimmy Carter or Gerald Ford? It's taken 30 years, but we're right back where we were.

madashellowell
October 12, 2016 1:31:14 at 1:31 PM Not if it is a Johnson Libertarian platform.
Free trade? does he even know what that is? Because none of us do as we haven't had any in our history. We PAY tariffs to just about every country we hope to export to and charge none at all. Free my ass.
Open borders and citizenship for all? Does he understand supply and demand principles, does he not look at the number of people out of the workforce? Does he have even the slightest clue how economics works? He is a Utopian that is completely clueless. I'm sure he is smart enough to run a business, but he has no business running mine. How many illegals did he hire when he had his own business anyway? Here in Texas there are lots of successful businesses profiting from illegal employment. Doesn't make it right.
Hell_Is_Like_Newark

October 12, 2016 3:06:15 at 3:06 PM If I put a 'Trump' sticker on my car, it would be vandalized. If I put a Trump sign on my building, it would be vandalized if not outright fire bombed. I live in a very blue district in a very blue state.

Trump was not my first choice, but he is the better choice. I have warmed to him a bit seeing how he has upset the party oligarchs.. and not just in the USA . H

Robert

October 11, 2016 9:33:34 at 9:33 PM They're trying to set the narrative before anything happens like a soothsayer. Nobody can say with certainty that Trump is finished. He isn't. He's still attracting massive crowds and money.

Blacklisted

October 12, 2016 8:27:48 at 8:27 AM Your young readers, and the older ones suffering from De Niro dementia, may want to take the 'Anonymous' refresher course – http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-11/anonymous-remembers-hillary-clinton-career-criminal .

The captured pollsters are like the credit rating agencies during the financial crisis. They are putting a AAA-rating on a pile of dog crap. Buy it at your own risk.

Just as I have done with Trump, I am not going to judge you Mish on one bad call, but please re-think your position. You are way too smart to come to your conclusion. The other smart people coming to your decision are either 'useful idiots' or are establishment hacks, who benefit some way from selling their soul.

mishgea

October 12, 2016 12:30:44 at 12:30 AM Hillary without a doubt will carry Illinois. I never really looked much beyond Trump. I heard today that Ron Paul said Stein had the best foreign policy. So I will investigate.

madashellowell

October 12, 2016 8:10:20 at 8:10 AM I heard that Jesus had the BEST platform. Maybe we should all vote for HIM.
It will be at least as effective as voting for Stein or Johnson, and if you are going for a principled vote, how can you do better? At least we may have an express lane to heaven when Hillary's policies will have us evaporated in a fireball from Russia.

madashellowell
October 12, 2016 1:47:08 at 1:47 PM

It's easy to do. There is no chance in Hell that she will win, and you can set back and watch it all burn down with a clear conscience, right?
This is what I love about principles. We pretend our principles are about the greater good…like we are sacrificing ourselves, when in reality, we are simply trying to shield our own delicate sensibilities from any thought of responsibility.

***don't look at me, I didn't vote for her/him/undecided***

It is like the way that radical Islamist shoot their rifles. They avoid aiming directly and instead simply point their rifles in the general direction of who they want dead, but by not aiming directly, they can claim that the resultant death was not their fault but Allah's will.

It is the typical progressive stance that they defend themselves from the destruction their policies create by claiming that it was okay because they only had good intentions. People voting for people that they know cannot win are no different. Our every action AND inaction has consequence that only our deluded minds can shield us from. Every vote and non vote counts. Throwing your vote away or not voting is but a delusion from accepting that responsibility, a pretense of "principles".

Real principles require personal sacrifice. You have to give up something for them, not receive something (like absolution). No one is forcing you to vote (yet), but life is nothing else BUT a choice of lesser evils, and to pretend it is not, to believe that simply not participating does anything positive, flies in the face of the notion that all that evil requires to succeed is for good people to do nothing (and voting for a third party is doing NOTHING). Half the country doesn't vote now, and we are in the worst position ever. Voting for a sure loser is no different

Lefteris

October 11, 2016 9:37:50 at 9:37 PM There's a lot of "we" in the end of the video clip. Who's "we"?

The USA is not a nation (at least not in the traditional nation-state sense). It's too fractured and too diverse, it doesn't even have its own language and culture. How can one say "we"? How many of you can find enough people in your area with the same interests to form any organized group?

The Democrats know this very well, and that is why they have been fracturing it further by creating artificial "communities" (such as the "gay community" etc.).
What's over with this election is not Trump (who will go back to his business and find some peace), but the very underlying "romantic" concept of America.

Gary Johnson is the one expressing this "romantic" view, of an America that doesn't exist, never existed, has no chance of existing because it's too diverse and fractured in its social core, and it's against all global plans and policies of all other countries. He can only fracture the republican party even more, until republicans become "the other democrats" on the table.

The same happened in Greece with the third party "To Potami", which helped bring Syriza in power after fracturing the center-right. It was a "catalyst" party that played its role and then almost vanished.

kevinmackay

October 12, 2016 8:24:31 at 8:24 AM My son has a history book that says things like "We went into world war two…", "America wanted to build a better…" and "Americans wanted more equality".

I asked him to define who "We", "America" and "Americans" were. He said he thought the book was boring and repetitive and he only studied to get the grade. I said "good boy, keep the math grade up."

Soon I'll have to explain what nonsense to write to slip under the literature teacher's radar.

Diogenes
October 12, 2016 1:37:24 at 1:37 PM Trump was responsible for Super Bowl sized audiences during the GOP debates. The question is : can he get them to get off their butts and vote?

If he can, this is going to be very interesting indeed.

Atossa
October 12, 2016 1:44:11 at 1:44 PM .

The historic concept of nation… where the people share the same race, religion, culture, language, history and territory… is dying. TPTB want all nations to die to further their evil globalist agenda. If a nation won't die a natural death, it will be given a lethal dose of diversity via massive immigration.

joelg5
October 11, 2016 9:39:26 at 9:39 PM

I read Stockman's article in full, and he gets even more preposterous and unhinged from reality than that sentence you disagree with, Mish. Stockman seems to think the ruination of the USA under Hillary will be a good thing that leads to a Utopian paradise arising out of the financial ashes and radioactive rubble. Bolsheviks in 1917 and more recent Marxists such as Paul Pot in Cambodia have had that same vision of a Utopian society arising from the ashes and killing fields. I think Stockman needs to rethink that part of his narrative. Anyway, the Media did not kill Trump. Rather, the Media Have Made Trump.

40 million or so Trump supporters watching debate number two on TV saw it for themselves, and now more than ever know the falseness of the mainstream media narrative, both in its spin and coverage deletions. The media has been 99% anti-Trump from Day One, and ditto the GOP elite who are touted by the media as now ditching Trump. In that sense, what Trump and Bill Clinton have in common is that they both get stronger when under attack. If the media and GOP elite suddenly embraced Trump, that might confuse Trump's supporters into bolting.

The Bush cousin, Billy, and NBC were a month too soon releasing the trash talking tape, and timing counts. People who watched the debate, including the Hillary voters, now have too much time to talk and reconsider. The danger to Hillary is that some of the robotic drones who vote Democratic by rote will agree that Hillary is all talk and empty words and that nothing will be done under her rule to help the black, Latinos and inner city people who robotically vote the Democratic ticket. That is the defection that could hurt Hillary on election day, defections among her own core believing that They Have Nothing to Lose by Voting Trump. The media cannot sustain the Bush family/NBC tape frenzy much longer. It will soon be old news, and something else will emerge to turn the election.

dan
October 11, 2016 10:38:08 at 10:38 PM My research shows evidence of poll fixing to make hillary look good. My independant polls and questions show trump will win election by a large margin. My guess he will beat Hillary by 6 million votes if not more. Media is so wrong on this.
mattson01
October 12, 2016 5:55:34 at 5:55 AM Whatever the media says is a lie, I have no doubt. My prediction is Hilary's team will know that she can't win, so they'll play the poor health card so that Obama will stall the election (with him in power) for another year.
Roger

October 12, 2016 12:22:39 at 12:22 PM Hmm – nearly right. I've been thinking a lot about this. Either …

A/ They get rid of Trump now and Clinton gets some kind of coronation. That is why they are pulling out all of the stops with the current smear campaign. (Some geezer in the UN is the latest to wag his finger), or

B/ They hope that Clinton builds some kind of commanding position in the polls and they convince a significant number of voters that Trump will lose anyway. The problem is that everyone knows that the polls are rigged, and the more people see of Hillary and the more questions are asked, the more the people don't like her. The polls are still too close for comfort.

Roger
October 12, 2016 1:34:30 at 1:34 PM Well CJ, you are probably right. But if there is one thing I have learned about neo-liberals (or whatever these creatures call themselves) over the past decade or so – that is they make and break the rules to suit themselves. Done in Europe all the time. We will see.
madashellowell
October 12, 2016 1:58:06 at 1:58 PM Hillary will lead the polls but lose the election which will be proclaimed fraudulent due to Russian hacking at the behest of Trump. Its all set up.

They keep bringing up all of these leaked and hacked emails, claiming they are all tracked back to Russia, which is impossible to actually verify WHO did it, but none the less, this will be their plan if ballot box stuffing and election fraud are not enough to get her across the finish line. They keep TELLING us that Hillary is the WINNER. They claim its not even close.

Hillary is laughing at Trump supporters and denigrating them as she believes she is the heir apparent. Look at the polls and see very lopsided democrat/republican sampling as well as other metrics. Look at those running the polling companies who are also on Hillary's payroll. Its blatant and it is sad, but they don't care because they own the media and will spin the story to their ends. Most if not many will see through it, but they don't care, because no one will push back, especially not from rank and file republicans. Only the Deplorables would be so crass. And we know how much respect they get.

KPL
October 11, 2016 9:57:26 at 9:57 PM I am not so sure that Trump will lose. People are so anti-establishment that it is likely the media by defiling Trump almost on a daily basis and their visible bias towards Hillary may be helping Trump along. However I do accept Trump can lose it with his foot-in-mouth disease but even now I do not think it is sure thing. If the anti-establishment crowd land up in droves to vote, it might well be Trump.
akiddy111

October 11, 2016 9:58:13 at 9:58 PM I like David Stockman and enjoy what he has to say but it looks like he is trying to put some lipstick on the cover of his new book. He hoped that Trump would get to the left of Hillary on Wall Street and ruffle Janet's feathers.

Basically David is saying that it will be a good thing that Hillary will be our next President because she will preside over the next recession. He also more or less said up to this point that it would be great if she gets "Trumped".

Enough said…

madashellowell
October 12, 2016 8:18:56 at 8:18 AM Yeah, well I said that about Obama…TWICE, and look at what we have. The dream that this will EVER blow back on progressives is pure delusion as the "public" opinion as created by the media is the rule, not facts or reality. Conservatives have been waiting for progressives to get slapped with the consequences of their actions for a hundred years and still NOTHING. The PROOF is to look at where we are right NOW!

We are ruled by largely a false consensus. Exactly what these polls are about…creating the perception of what the public believes in an effort to direct that perception.

Trump has gotten to this point despite a massive push back from Republicans and an almost universal opposition from the mainstream media….and yet we still hear those proclaiming his candidacy is dead. If just a few more people would show a spine instead of running away from each and every Political correct attack, we MIGHT still have a democratic republic rather than a world ruled by powerful elites through political and corporate mouthpieces.

DCMCM
October 11, 2016 10:00:51 at 10:00 PM While I have no vote in the US election, it doesn't mean I have no interest. On the contrary, I have followed it closely.

I guess like many others, I slapped my forehead when the "tape" was released and initially thought it would be the last we saw of Donald Trump. Over the next few days I re-evaluated and came to the conclusion that it was inevitable that something like this would occur. TPTB will never allow Trump to ascend to the presidency willingly and if it can't be stopped by character assassination, they may well try another way.

What I am not seeing from Trump is humility. If anyone expects him to be a supernatural leader in the event he does win, I suspect they will be very disappointed. He needs to come out with a statement to the effect that he has said and done many silly things in his life and many of them have come back to haunt him, however his love of America is much greater than his personal failings and he will be able to make America GREAT AGAIN. To this end he will need to spell out that he has a great vision of how to do this and that he knows how to find the right people for his team to oversee the various changes that need to be made. He needs to stress that it will not be easy and there will be pain, but that pain is on the way anyway and his plan will make it as soft as possible.
In the event he does make it, the scene is set for undoing him. Maybe those pesky Russians will hack the electronic voting so Obama can call the election a fraud and invalidate it. Personally I hope Donald wins by a good margin and Clinton, who couldn't keep the grin from her face, will be consigned to where she should be.

Jon Sellers
October 12, 2016 11:57:20 at 11:57 AM Hillary will get the election simply by how the votes get counted. The character assassinations are a prelude and necessary part of the story as to why Trump lost. The faked vote counts for Hillary will be the reason Trump lost. But that won't be discussed.
CJ
October 12, 2016 1:18:53 at 1:18 PM Hillary was a vote canvasser in Chicago in 1960 and learned a lot about vote fraud (she said so herself). I'm sure that will come in handy, no wonder she switched to the Vote Fraud Party.
wootendw
October 11, 2016 10:01:05 at 10:01 PM "I would not go so far as to say the markets will "crash"…"

The way things are heating up between Washington and Russia, there's a lot more than the market to worry about, especially if Hillary is elected because she will not be able to control the Pentagon nor her neocon advisers like Paul Wolfowitz and Mike Morell. Simply put, they will get US into a war with Russia and Russia will defend itself with nukes because, for Russia, the 'conventional' alternative to nuclear war would be far worse.

Russia, whose population is 1/6 of NATO's and whose economy is 1/20 of NATO's, has a long and easily penetrable border. In a strictly conventional war, once its air defenses are gone, NATO bombers will have field day, after field day, carpet-bombing Russian cities and towns, laying waste that Chechen and other Muslims will scavenge. It would be far worse than the quick death of nuclear war. They might hold out for a while, and make it costly for US, but they know they would not hold out forever.

Russia will not likely allow that to happen. As part of the USSR, they lost 20m people during WWII, ejecting the Germans from their own territory while the Germans were fighting on multiple fronts. That represents as much of a "never again" tragedy for Russia as the holocaust represents for Jews.

US military planners know this and will try to take out Russia's nukes as soon as the hostilities begin. The Russians know this and that they must launch as quickly as possible. It will be all out and all over, with little chance of negotiating a cease fire.

As Lavrov said, we cannot even negotiate anymore. As soon as Kerry and he made their agreement last month, the Pentagon trashed it and attacked a Syrian base – as ISIS was attacking a nearby mountain. The Syrians even claim to have a recording of communications between US forces and ISIS – which 'our' government has yet to deny. We know now from Hillary's emails that the Saudis and Qataris were funding ISIS in 2014. There's surely more than that.

Each day a new war tidbit is in the news. Today, we hear that Russia is advising government officials to bring home their children who are studying abroad. Yesterday, Gorbachev warned of the growing nuclear threat. But no one is paying attention, except those think the US can win.

So before the election, I shall stock up on needed items, drop my class and head for somewhere safer than Phoenix. I hope I am wrong but this time it really could be doomsday.

kevinmackay
October 12, 2016 5:00:18 at 5:00 PM Somebody state a plausible reason the USA and the USSR go to non-proxy war. Not how. Why.
Taperwood
October 11, 2016 10:20:42 at 10:20 PM I'm still voting for Trump as my big FU to the current way things are done. I still think a Trump presidency will result in something tangible being done to either our infrastructure needs or to causing everyone to re-engage in their local politics. Both positives in my mind. The World will take care of itself without the United States for a few years.
Seychelles
October 11, 2016 10:27:01 at 10:27 PM Trump is still in the race and come Nov. 9 we will have our own version of Brexit. The dominant ruling minority have overstepped their bounds with the voting majority, who now see through all of the Zioglobalist falsehoods.
Stuki Moi
October 11, 2016 11:02:23 at 11:02 PM No politician, least of all a Clinton, will tax their biggest potential donors. "The rich" that stand to get taxed, are small business people and professionals who have more important tings do do with their money than act as "job creators" for Clinton Foundation jobs.
CzarChasm Reigns
October 12, 2016 6:32:15 at 6:32 PM "No politician, least of all a Clinton, will tax their biggest potential donors."

Correct.

But you have to admit, tax RATE plans make for an excellent TALKING point… to the PERCEPTION of the sacrificial Middle Class: a politician feels THEIR pain… but the reality is: the rich protected their asse(t)s with LOOPHOLES long ago.

Stuki Moi
October 12, 2016 8:37:59 at 8:37 PM No doubt that's how it will be done. Straight out of the Pancho Villa playbook: Kill off competent men after stealing all their stuff. Arrange grandiose public spectacles where you publicly toss a small fraction of what you stole from her now deceased husband to the starving, starry eyed, widow. Demonstrating what a "great leader" you are.
daddysteve
October 11, 2016 10:38:31 at 10:38 PM The best we can hope for is Trump represents a different faction of our masters that realize a leech can't survive on a corpse.
prinjon
October 11, 2016 10:41:03 at 10:41 PM I love it to study psychological cases through comments.
People express their reactions and never their cold reasoning
CJ

October 11, 2016 11:20:38 at 11:20 PM In the last debate I think I heard Trump say "oh so it's 3 against one again?" I was thinking the same thing before he said it.

greg
October 12, 2016 12:03:39 at 12:03 AM Yaknow, really, the next debate should be done with swords. Just put the 2 of them out on the stage in separate corners, with Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz on the floor, front stage, tied to chairs and several winds of duct tape over their mouths, a bell rings and they have at it. May the best man win.
Eric Coote
October 12, 2016 8:14:34 at 8:14 PM Yes Paul – I think most women realise that there are quite a few (women) who line up for the attention of alpha males – so male hubris is somewhat encouraged. It has been reported for instance that the lines outside the Beetles (pop group) hotel rooms in Australia anyway, were very long, unruly and overheated to the extent that one Beetle told them all to go and 'get *ucked' to which came the obvious reply.

Only the MSM seem to be unaware of female sexuality – perhaps they think of them all as saints and mothers. I doubt that Trump has suffered lasting damage by the Bush inc. attack. Normal people are realists.

For the record – I do not agree with molestation of women or forgive it. Nor do I agree with men using their power position to enforce female compliance – but we should all be aware that there are fuzzy lines and women are better than men at drawing them.

Genada (@Genada5)

October 11, 2016 11:01:46 at 11:01 PM No one knows who is going to win. The polls are all over the place and they are all different based on who is taking them. We will not know the outcome of this election till election night or maybe even later.

Trump has many flaws and yes he has hurt himself but it is the media that is attempting to destroy him. Even Nixon got treated better then Trump. They cover up for Clinton, they work with Clinton. The media is doing a total hatchet job on Trump.

I think this election is going to have higher turnout numbers then we have seen in a very long time and it's the reason Trump can still win. There is a lot of people that have given up on the system that he's going to bring out to the polls and it can turn this election in his way. It would also be something not counted in polls and would lead to a surprise victory.

Paul Niemi
October 11, 2016 11:13:50 at 11:13 PM According to my state Secretary of State, the second debate generated a flood of last minute new voter registrations, so it isn't over.

The last time the media were so unanimous in depreciating a presidential candidate, I think, was 1968, when Nixon was written off early. He won, and the mainstream press lost.

This telling voters the winner, before the election, can backfire, and I think it will. Voters like to show their independence, and most do not make up their minds until just a few days before the election. People know the polling methodologies are flawed or rigged. Only the exit polls have any real validity, so we won't know the outcome until the election is over. What we do know about polls, is that they consistently predict outcomes that underestimate the closeness of individual races.

CJ
October 11, 2016 11:17:40 at 11:17 PM It ain't over until it's over. I like Mish's blog, but really he is not a great forecaster. I forecast that wikileaks is saving the most damaging exposures until just before the election. All political types know that just before has the greatest effect. The MSM tried to withhold the Trump locker room talk tapes until as close to the election as possible for the most damage, but had to release them now because they found out they were about to get scooped.

I do agree Donald could have done way better in the first debate, and somewhat better in the second although he still won the second debate. We can also still hope the Most Evil Bitch will have a heart attack. If she is elected I am going to build a fallout shelter.

R G
October 11, 2016 11:37:50 at 11:37 PM LOL yep, spot on. People think it's a cute game to "vote your conscience". I remember being naive enough to do that. I did it in 2008 for God's sake. But this election is for all the marbles. This country has no moral compass right now. It's enraged; a race war appears to be shaping up; we're drowning in debt; we're deployed all over the planet; and there's not a single country that's not sick to death of us.

Now, if a Black Friday event can turn Americans into raving loons, think about what a Black Swan would do.

And people are going to vote for Gary Johnson? Jesus Christ. Hope you're living on 10 acres of arable land in the middle of nowhere, Mish!

Anonymous
October 11, 2016 11:22:24 at 11:22 PM Mish, you just lost my respect with your decision on who to vote for. Did you also vote for Perot?
mishgea

October 12, 2016 12:25:14 at 12:25 AM Nope

CJ
October 12, 2016 2:47:20 at 2:47 PM Bush The First would probably have been re-elected in '92 had it not been for his incredibly stupid "Read my lips, no new taxes" and then he raised taxes. Since I am always against more of my earnings being confiscated and wasted, it sure soured me on Bush.

The other problem for Bush was a short, mild recession during the election. Slick Willy made a big deal out of it; Bush said "don't worry, it won't amount to anything". Bush was right, but The Weasel won.

Tony of CA
October 11, 2016 11:24:38 at 11:24 PM Mish you are so wrong. I think Trump he will win solidly. The 2nd debate was a master stoke. If the election was over, you wouldn't have OBAMA and his wife, GORE, Sanders, Bill Clinton and assortment of idiotic actors all campaign wildly.

As for the 1st debate, no one can even remembers it. Debates are never very memorable, statements are. The one-statement that will stay with everyone is you would be in Jail if I were president.

R G
October 11, 2016 11:26:15 at 11:26 PM All I can say is that I truly hope people are prepared for the ramifications of a Hillary presidency if they vote for anyone other than Trump. I have never voted for a Republican POTUS. It's always been third party for me, with the exception of 2000, when my girlfriend and I neutralized each other's votes. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012 and Bob Barr in 2008.

A vote for Gary Johnson now is without a doubt a vote for Hillary, which in turn is a vote for WW3. That is not hyperbole.

R G
October 12, 2016 11:47:31 at 11:47 AM Then you're not thinking this thing through to its conclusion. Throughout American history, which is the political party that ultimately splits the vote, or even splinters? We could discuss political party history in this country but it would be out of place. The Demo-Reps were NOT present-day Democrats. Bull Moose were NOT liberals. Libertarian voters are generally NOT present-day Democrats.

I know this because I've been one of those voters from Perot onwards. This is no time in our nation's history to be rolling the dice on a no-shot. Even if he were the next George Washington (he's far from it), he stands no mathematical shot. Only a vote for one of the two major party candidates does. We do not have a parliamentary system in this country. And even if we did, human beings generally fall into one of two camps: Makers and Takers, or hard money guys (Gold Standard Republicans) versus easy money guys (Silver Democrats).

I'm not trying to convince you to vote for someone else. My wife is debating a vote for Johnson as well. But what I am saying is that not acknowledging the facts is unacceptable to me, and as far as I'm concerned, third party voters in this election will be treated the same as Democrats when we look back 10 years from now.

Diogenes
October 12, 2016 4:10:16 at 4:10 PM Sorry Ash, I gotta go with R G on this one.

Political consultant Dick Morris knows the Clintons better than anybody and is vigorous in his support of Trump. He has been lambasting third party voters as Hillary votes and says it's really a wasted vote.

R G
October 12, 2016 9:32:39 at 9:32 AM Not sure why I would have to say this, but what Trump said into that hot mic was accurate. I lived in Miami for several years. Wealth purchases people and beauty is DEFINITELY purchaseable. They let him do it just the same as all of the athletes and celebs in the VIP sections of the clubs I frequented in SoBe. We used to joke that buying a bottle and getting a table in VIP increased our likelihood of hooking up by ~300%. Groping willing participants is not sexual assault.

This race boils down to all of the marbles. Vote Johnson, a guy who mathematically stands no chance of winning, and you're voting for Hillary. Johnson pulls more support from paleo-cons who are so far right they're left. Been there, done that.

Recessions happen on average every 7-8 years. We're due. Imagine the state of this country during the next recession with 7 years of ZIRP, a race war, and neocons fomenting world war.

Carl R
October 12, 2016 11:54:11 at 11:54 AM Well, first of all, Libertarians are normally isolationists, so it isn't really relevant that he doesn't know Aleppo. In any case, I one voted for a Presidential Candidate that confused Eastern Europe with Western Europe when questioned during a debate. If the matter came up in a discussion were the topic was not taken out of context, I don't think it would be an issue. I personally don't care for Johnson, but the "Aleppo" question would be a stupid reason for deciding whether or not to vote for him.
CJ
October 12, 2016 1:28:31 at 1:28 PM Yes Libertarians tend to be isolationist, but that is not an excuse for not knowing what is going on in the world. Aleppo is only one example. The presidency is half foreign policy and half domestic policy. I wish the libertarians had a better candidate, but then again if they got more votes it would just increase Hellary's chances.
madashellowell
October 12, 2016 2:31:26 at 2:31 PM Don't be silly. If Trump loses this, he will be DONE. He has flown into the face of every power group in America, and if there is one thing we know about progressives, they do not forgive or forget. When you cross a line with progressives, they do not seek to just defeat you, they will DESTROY YOU. Personal destruction is their game.

The youo not debate or argue on policies, they dig up dirt and then try to bury you in it. This is especially true with those they see as traitors, people who were formally aligned with the left, or are from a deomgraphic that they fell they OWN. Look at how they beat Herman Cain…not policy, personal. Look at Bill Cosby who was their hero until he spoke out against black ignorance….does anyone really think that only after decades of silence these women just "decided" to go public? Ben Carson, they went after his history, not his policies. They we smart enough to bow out before any lasting damage was done, but Trump? I believe they have hell waiting for him. Do you think he will get any of his real estate deals done in these big cities. Do you not think they will be digging up everything they can from his past to bedevil him to the grave? I do.

People want to think that Trump is just in it for publicity, which to me is to assume he is stupid, which I think is far from true. I think he truly does believe he can make a difference. He is probably wrong, but he is NOT stupid. This is his end.

Freddie
October 11, 2016 11:54:09 at 11:54 PM If anyone in the media had a clue about how voters feel, voters wouldn't be disconnecting their overpriced cable TV. 500 channels and they are all crap.

If anyone in the media could forecast elections (DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN, AGAIN!) - they have been forecasting the end of Trump's campaign for over a year.

With markets all but disabled from inept central planning, Mish hasn't been able to talk about economics in a long time. Unfortunately, he decided to try his hand at driverless cars (which only work under ideal circumstances, and only when manufacturers "forget" to report accidents). And now Mish is just parroting really bad media nonsense.

Mish's own polling posts show Trump is very much in the race. Hilary is out campaigning and soliciting bribes (campaign contributions isn't fooling anyone) as though her career depends on it - because her crime syndicate knows it is far from over.

No one believes or ever did believe that Trump is a saint. A giant ego, a giant hair pile, a real estate empire that depends on cheap borrowing, two wildly popular TV shows (Miss universe and Celeb Apprentice) that aren't exactly "high society".

Of course Trump will wreck Washington DC. That is the point. Of course Paul Ryan hates voters as much as Nancy Pelosi and Obama and McCain do - our public servants have made their hatred of the public quite clear.

Whether its ObamaCare, obeying illegal searches, lopsided prosecutions, or just plain arrogance and greed - Washington DC doesn't eat its own cooking.

That is why "Trump" will win.

The federal government will be severely cash constrained for decades to come no matter who wins. Anyone who can read the GAO reports on Medicare and Obamacare knows that.

Only a fool believes a parasite (government) can grow faster than its host (the tax base).

CJ
October 11, 2016 11:57:45 at 11:57 PM Believe it or not, Hillary started out as a conservative republican. At age 13 she canvassed for Nixon in Chicago in the 1960 election and saw vote fraud firsthand (seems to have made an impression!). In '64 she campaigned for Goldwater! Then in '65 she went to college and started drifting to the left. Her senior thesis was about Saul Alinsky. Enrolling at Yale in '69 she met Bill Clinton and joined the Dark Side.
Jon Sellers
October 12, 2016 12:16:21 at 12:16 PM Clinton is still the Republican candidate. She is certainly to the right of Nixon or Eisenhower. Pro big business, pro free trade, pro immigration, pro defense spending. The only non-alignment is with the Christian-right. But they were just a play thing for votes by the GOP anyway.
CJ
October 12, 2016 1:31:10 at 1:31 PM Go back and read Eisenhower's Farewell Address again Jon. It's the opposite of Hellary.
RH
October 12, 2016 12:52:08 at 12:52 AM The thing about Trump is that he hasn't got a plan. Lowering taxes and spending more on defense is not a plan. Saying you will do better deals is not a plan.
Voters are just hoping that once he was in he would achieve things but really we don't know what he will do.

Clinton is conservative and will retain the status quo. Hope she proves me wrong.

mishgea
October 12, 2016 1:18:12 at 1:18 AM Trump does not have a plan and it is obvious. But no plan is better than Hillary's bad plan.
Mish
Atossa

October 12, 2016 3:02:44 at 3:02 AM ,

I voted for Trump in the GOP primary. Since then, he has said and done too much [or too little] and lost my vote in the general election. He was terrible in the first debate. His Arizona immigration speech was great. But he really lost me when he degenerated into pandering to every minority race, religion and special interest group that yelled the loudest… just like all the other politicians. And the most recent revelation about his vulgar views of women didn't help either. Nothing to love there.

Diogenes
October 12, 2016 3:17:23 at 3:17 AM "Trump was asked several pointed questions. Hillary was asked none."

Yet you say the media didn't destroy him? His lack of preparation for the first debate destroyed him?

Never mind preparing for a biased moderator, accepting the conditions of such a debate at all makes him look like failed leadership. He could have demanded better conditions, especially if he were slightly ahead as he may have been at the time.

KPL
October 12, 2016 3:17:24 at 3:17 AM From… https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/am-i-biased-for-trump/

"This battle is really the PEOPLE v CAPITOL HILL. It is a shame it has to be Trump leading the charge." – But then someone is leading.
"This is also the end of the press. They have lost all credibility." – I am sure by now the bias is obvious to anyone. This should also aid Trump IMHO.
"About 99% of donations to Trump come from small people" – These small people are definitely going to vote for him. Also there could be equal number who did not donate but will be voting for him.

I am not sure whether he will win but this is one election where people are likely to try and land a good punch on the establishment's face and this definitely should work in his favor.

KPL
October 12, 2016 3:34:50 at 3:34 AM One more thing that struck me was that if the election was in the bag why would they release the tape? They might as well be preparing for the coronation.

IMO, the establishment is still running scared and thus using all the dirty tricks that they are capable of and which they think will win them the election. The crux of the issue is that they do not want to acknowledge that people might prefer a discredited Trump to the establishment at this stage of the game. Establishment is the problem but they are masquerading as the solution. This is the problem with gaming people. At some point the game is up. (Like interest rates.. you cannot ram it beyond a point)

Stockmarket
October 12, 2016 6:00:40 at 6:00 AM "One more thing that struck me was that if the election was in the bag why would they release the tape?"

Exactly. And why release polls with a so called 11% lead, polls conducted by a company connected to Clinton? That has an overweight in left/democratic voters?

Brexit was supposed to be over before the final result came in. How quickly people forget. It is the people vs Wall Street/corrupt politicians. The latter is represented by Clinton. the former by Trump. We will see how angry the U.S. people really are at the current clique of career politicians, bought and paid for by the big companies.

Roger
October 12, 2016 6:11:52 at 6:11 AM Why indeed would they send out Obama only yesterday to wag his finger in dire warning? The powers to be know it's NOT all over. The problem is that each time they send one of these 'asshat extrodinaires' out To preach to the public they simply cause MORE dissent, more mocking, and more retrenchment.

Does anyone actually think that Obama, who has done more to divide the nation than anyone can make the blindest bit of difference at this stage? Respectfully, a curious Englishman.

Roger
October 12, 2016 6:24:24 at 6:24 AM PS! It's not as though Obama has anything better to do with his time, is it? Enjoy 18 holes of golf, or go out campaigning for a woman he (allegedly) loathes and despises. Tough call, that one!
KPL
October 12, 2016 7:33:51 at 7:33 AM "We will see how angry the U.S. people really are at the current clique of career politicians, bought and paid for by the big companies."

I hope they are angry enough to come and vote for him in such numbers that it assures a Trump victory. Anybody but establishment is all I ask! What is happening is too nauseating to stomach any longer.

CJ
October 12, 2016 10:48:49 at 10:48 AM Unfortunately Gary Johnson will split the anti-establishment vote, helping to elect the Soros and banksters funded candidate.
JP
October 12, 2016 5:39:33 at 5:39 AM The problem with "voting your conscious" (Libertarian, etc.) is you'll put Crooked Hillary in the Whitehouse. How bad could that be for the country? Watch the video:

'Anonymous' Remembers "Hillary Clinton, Career Criminal" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-11/anonymous-remembers-hillary-clinton-career-criminal

If Rotten Clinton is elected it's time to move to Italy or another Banana Republic. At least the food is good and the citizens less ignorant.

Stockmarket
October 12, 2016 5:50:45 at 5:50 AM "I would not go so far as to say the markets will "crash", but that depends on the definition. I actually suspect more like a 40-50% decline over seven to ten years with nothing much worse than a 15-20% decline."

So you expect that rates on government bonds will drop to, let's say minus 3%? Minus 5%? Minus 10%? Why don't you show a historical graph of bonds vs stocks? Then you will see that stocks have never been cheaper relative to bonds since….. WWII! The crash will be in bonds, not stocks. Furthermore, capital from Europe will flow to the dollar, adding to a RISE in the stock market.

You make the crucial mistake to view the stock market in isolation. If big capital has to make a decision to go for negative rates in bonds, or 3%-5% on blue chip stocks, what will they choose? It is the bond market that is reaching the limit of 0% interest rates, after which there is only one possibility for bonds to go: down.

Hence we will get a run up for the stock market first, with Dow at least 22,000-23,000. If we exceed that, 30,000 – 35,000 becomes possible. Only THEN do we have a bubble and a crash. Big money all over the world will scramble to buy the dollar and U.S. assets. A capital flow you also don't see coming, because you only look at the domestic picture.

EVERYBODY is negative about stocks. And the majority is running to bonds. It is clear where the bubble is going to be first. The majority is ALWAYS wrong.

Stockmarket
October 12, 2016 5:55:39 at 5:55 AM I don't think it is over yet. Just as with Brexit. The polls giving Clinton a 11% lead, are seriously flawed. You can read it over here:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-11/first-post-debate-poll-gives-hillary-significant-lead-and-familiar-problem-emerges

Thus what the media are telling you, is that there is a 11% lead. But those polls were held by a company that is actually helping Clinton to get elected:

Zerohedge is correct: this is a mind game to make you think it is all over.

Tuberville
October 12, 2016 5:57:23 at 5:57 AM We had the same comments during Brexit, I waited for the price to get upto 6/1 and took the price and I will do the same with Trump. Never forget the global trends
Garry Gentry
October 12, 2016 6:07:38 at 6:07 AM Mish. hopefully after the election you can go back to writing about economics instead of cheer-leading for Trump and Republicans in general. Reading your economic writings is why I started reading your blog and I will be glad when this one is over for a while and the Republicans can get on with obstructing everything and keep the gridlock going until people are so feed-up they rebel.
Felix
October 12, 2016 6:17:24 at 6:17 AM Did anyone else get the feeling the 2nd debate was "Brought to you by Facebook, the leading social network?" Lots of band plugs. Rather like modern news articles filled with images of Tweets.
Robert
October 12, 2016 6:33:44 at 6:33 AM Everyone I know is voting for Trump. So am I.
Gary who ?
jc
October 12, 2016 6:42:45 at 6:42 AM Trump was grossly unprepared for the first debate, "I'm a great negotiator" isn't the correct answer to every question.

Instead of becoming more presidential as the campaign progressed he became more reality TV. The digression into Trump vs Clinton pussy scores was lethal.

Hillary has a ton of political flaws and Trump didn't do his homework to inform the voters.

There is a huge disconnect between the RNC and Repub voters, the RNC acts like they're entitled to veto power over the people's choice, once the unwashed masses chose Trump the RNC needed to support him completely. If there's a congressional blowout they deserve it.

The silver lining is that Hillary isn't healthy enough for two terms, maybe not even one. The bad news is that she'll probably continue/accelerate the pattern of Bush/Obama neo colonial wars.

PS The wildcard is a major mohammedan attack prior to the election. The Russians always had General Winter to aid them, Trump has General Isis

R G
October 12, 2016 10:06:54 at 10:06 AM In all fairness, I don't think a terror attack will change Americans' minds for more than a week. Look at Clinton…even one vote for her shows you how grossly lost America is. She has overtly committed more crimes than any high level politician in American history. Nixon, Grant, and Harding look like Marcus Aurelius when compared to her.

The most recent Wikileaks show you she wants no more America based on her views of borders and markets…if you have open borders and markets, you have no nation-state. Her views of "irredeemables" and her spokesman's views of Catholics are just more examples. I could write a book on this witch.

And yet people would vote for her. The unfortunate circumstance of that is that if she gets in, it won't be just them glowing green.

CJ
October 12, 2016 11:09:16 at 11:09 AM I have found that many Generation Y types (born '77-'94) have no clues about all the Clinton's lies and scandals. They weren't watching politics when much of it happened. They are being misled by the MSM propaganda. When you have a chance, please educate them, they are a big voting block now.
As for Hillary's health, keep in mind that Wilson and FDR were incapable of carrying out the duties of president before their terms ended. In FDR's case, he was severely disabled even during his last campaign in '44. They used the war as an excuse for not campaigning. However these issues were kept secret from the public, and spouses and aides pretty much ran the country. I could see the same thing happening with Hillary. It may have already begun.
teapartydoc
October 12, 2016 6:51:31 at 6:51 AM You are a handy source of information that many of us otherwise would not have easy access to. If someone else did the job as well, you would be disposable. I will continue to visit this site, but I think you are a political idiot.
Brian E Considine (@e_considine)
October 12, 2016 8:49:10 at 8:49 AM Trump did indeed lose the election but not because he failed to come up with snappy responses in the debates. He lost the election because he captured one group of voters, those who have drunk the Hillary is the sum of all evil kool-aide. Instead of backing down from that and moving into the space where he could accumulate voters who have not geeked out on Obama/Clinton conspiracy trivia, he choose to double down.

And he did so because his character weakness is obvious to almost everyone who watches him for an extended period of time. His absurdly inflated ego will not accept any criticism, any change, and openness to collect facts and evaluate what should be done rather than deciding what should be done and then making up the facts that support that.

Bashing Hillary over her marriage isn't flying now and wouldn't have flown better in the debates. To those not in the conspiracy geek band wagon, what does that look like? "You're a bad person for having a husband who had affairs, so voters should support me since I have affairs" Yea that really worked well. 'Doubling down' just looks pathetic, like an aging rock star releasing new songs that are just variations on the old hit song the guy had in the 80's.

Bill Fawell

October 12, 2016 8:51:03 at 8:51 AM You fucked up Mish on this one…. Gary Johnson? Really?? When did he become a Libertarian???

Tony Bennett
October 12, 2016 8:51:08 at 8:51 AM "Barring a medical or other type of disaster, this election is indeed over."

The polls are already tightening (again).

And if you read the methodology the polls are done on a rolling basis of some sort. With the latest polls including data PRIOR to second debate.

When the smoke clears (with data only from post debate) I expect polls to tighten further.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Blacklisted
October 12, 2016 8:54:47 at 8:54 AM Your young readers, and the older ones suffering from De Niro dementia, may want to take the 'Anonymous' refresher course – http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-11/anonymous-remembers-hillary-clinton-career-criminal .

The captured pollsters are like the credit rating agencies during the financial crisis. They are putting a AAA-rating on a pile of dog crap. Buy it at your own risk.

Just as I have done with Trump, I am not going to judge you Mish on one bad call, but please re-think your position. You are way too smart to come to your conclusion. The other smart people coming to your decision are either 'useful idiots' or are establishment hacks, who benefit some way from selling their soul.

I don't know about people like Stockman, Jim Rickards, Paul Craig Roberts, Jim Sinclair, and other seamingly well intention fellows, who accurately descibe the problems, but get the solution and markets reaction wrong. Are they just US-centric in their analysis, disregarding the overwhelming influence of global capital flows, or is it as simple as them being gold bugs, who always say " buy, buy, buy", say good by to your hard earned money?

Tony Bennett
October 12, 2016 9:21:01 at 9:21 AM Virginia's last governor's race (2013) was between Ken Cuccinelli (wayy right social conservative) and Clintons' best bud Terry McAuliffe .

Virginia used to be red and has turned blue the past 10 to 12 years. Well, Cuccinelli way behind in the polls all along. So much so that RNC wasted no money (yeah yeah social conservative … but off year election and not much else going on … and if you can score a win helps Republicans going into 2014 election season) on him. Guess what? Cuccinnelli lost by only 2.5 points … and McAuliffe got less than 50% of the vote. ANY sort of help from national party and KC might have won.

Just don't trust polls. Just another data point to be goal seeked by TPTB (see the embarrassing methodology on the nbc/wsj poll post second debate).

Tony Bennett
October 12, 2016 1:16:08 at 1:16 PM Found a Huffington post on final polls before that election

had McAuliffe winning by almost 7 points.

45.2 to 38.3

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/04/virginia-governor-polls_n_4212084.html

Brian E Considine (@e_considine)
October 12, 2016 12:20:50 at 12:20 PM "The captured pollsters are like the credit rating agencies during the financial crisis. They are putting a AAA-rating on a pile of dog crap. Buy it at your own risk."

Only internet commentators are more protected from bad calls than rating agencies.

Let's recall it wasn't too long ago a certain chap around here was hawking a theory that Hillary is in late stage Parkinson's disease. No doubt when Trump loses the election, those here telling us the polls are rigged will disappear from accountability until the next big election rolls around.

Ron J
October 12, 2016 9:39:22 at 9:39 AM Trump has not destroyed Trump.

When did the democratic party ever denounce John Kennedy?
When did the democratic party ever denounce Bill Clinton?

Joy Bahar just called one of Bill's victims a tramp, on The View.

Democrats have a double standard.

Polls are over sampling democrats, to skew the data. Polling fraud.
Why is there any need for polling fraud, if people have actually changed their vote?

They have all been out to get Trump, from the beginning. The government, the media, even the republican party elitists.

My vote has not changed.

ChuckInLarkspur@q.com
October 12, 2016 9:45:18 at 9:45 AM Mish,

Hardly any one in the media is talking about Venezuela. Given all of the other issues that you touch on, would you keep us up to date on how things are evolving in Venezuela. Thanks,

Chuck

CJ
October 12, 2016 11:23:01 at 11:23 AM Here is some Venezuela news for you, Chuck: Socialist paradise has the world's highest crime rate:
https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp
Brian E Considine (@e_considine)
October 12, 2016 12:29:52 at 12:29 PM I'd be happy to supporting Trump flying south and running for President of Venezuela.
Atossa
October 12, 2016 1:03:51 at 1:03 PM .

Wouldn't that be a hoot.

Trump makes Venezuela great again and it becomes the next world power.

Seenitallbefore
October 12, 2016 10:56:40 at 10:56 AM This is not a vote for election. It is a vote against election. Any vote other than trump is a vote for Hillary. Now I know how hitler got into power, he run against a failed establishment. Luckily we have trump instead of hitler. If we don't turn this around in a few elections, a hitler type will rise to power in America. Remember this is a country who rounded up,and jailed an entire race of people at the start of WWII. It could happen again when the final dictator emerges who crushes the constitution once and for all.
R G
October 12, 2016 11:32:45 at 11:32 AM Marty Armstrong as usual sums it up well.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/am-i-biased-for-trump/

mishgea
October 12, 2016 11:57:13 at 11:57 AM This is not a vote for election. It is a vote against election.

That is a very reasonable point of view. Is Trump more of an anti-establishment candidate than Johnson?

CJ
October 12, 2016 1:42:09 at 1:42 PM "Is Trump more of an anti-establishment candidate than Johnson?" If you rate the answer to that interesting question by how many establishment people are bashing Johnson or Trump, Donald wins the anti-establishment rating by a landslide.
Blacklisted
October 12, 2016 2:32:41 at 2:32 PM Yes
CzarChasm Reigns
October 12, 2016 11:03:18 at 11:03 AM This will work itself out if Trump supporters would just listen to what he actually says:

"'Make sure you get out and vote,' Trump told supporters on Tuesday at rally in Florida. 'November 28th.'"

Quote from "Trump tells supporters to go vote on 'November 28th'"
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-tells-supporters-to-go-vote-on-november-28th/ar-BBxjl3n?ocid=ansmsnnews11

The self-proclaimed "genius" has spoken.

R G
October 12, 2016 11:12:03 at 11:12 AM Slip-ups happen. You don't really think Obama thought there were 57 states, do you? When you're campaigning 20 hours a day, it's bound to happen.
madashellowell
October 12, 2016 8:03:20 at 8:03 PM One of your strongest arguments yet.
Dave
October 12, 2016 11:17:27 at 11:17 AM '… all Trump had to say was "I changed my mind once I saw the birth certificate.'

Well that would have been another obvious lie, since he was on the record multiple times saying he didn't believe it was genuine.

Trump tweeted in August 2012 that "An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that Barack Obama's birth certificate is a fraud." In September of that year, Trump shared via Twitter an article claiming the birth certificate was fake. In a June 2014 tweet, Trump boasted, "I was the one who got Obama to release his birth certificate, or whatever that was!" And in 2013 he retweeted someone who alleged the long-form birth certificate was "a computer generated forgery."

mishgea
October 12, 2016 11:55:00 at 11:55 AM OK – I changed my mind once I was convinced the birth certificate was real.
There are easy alternatives to not look like a fool.
Bobby Hill
October 12, 2016 1:07:57 at 1:07 PM "How amazing, the State Health Director who verified copies of Obama's "birth certificate" died in plane crash today. All others lived"

- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2013

Trump should have simply leveled with us by quoting Goebbels,"It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle."

Mike
October 12, 2016 11:56:28 at 11:56 AM Doesn't matter which of the two wins if the bank's war on the majority and pension plans continues regardless. Perhaps the libertarians will protect us.
Jon Sellers
October 12, 2016 12:26:09 at 12:26 PM Yah, I'm sure the Libertarians will get right on that!
Jon Sellers
October 12, 2016 12:29:07 at 12:29 PM Mish,

Gutsy call on coming out with your personal vote. You'll probably lose half of your readership. People have become so wildly caught up with the day to day b.s. of the federal government that their entire world-view and personal self-esteem are on the line. It's a tragedy.

Anyhow, my neighborhood now has 3 Trump signs, 2 Johnson signs, and 0 Clinton signs.

Atossa
October 12, 2016 12:34:50 at 12:34 PM .

For those who might have a Biblical prophecy perspective… Trump may symbolize the "last trump" that occurs when the power of the holy people is totally broken [Daniel 12:7] and heralds the resurrection of the dead [1 Corinthians 15:52.]

Bobby Hill
October 12, 2016 12:39:24 at 12:39 PM "Heading into the first debate, it was Trump's election to lose … ." I disagree. It has always been HRC's election to lose. Trump was never ahead. Sure, he was gaining on her, but to say that he could actually have overtaken her but for this mistake or that miscalculation is hyper-speculative. Clinton had not and has not even unleashed her GOTV ops.

Trump has a ceiling of support, not much greater than his share of the primary electorate. Peak Trump was right before the debate. Peak Hillary hasn't arrived. Her final assault armada hasn't even landed.

Johnson is the best candidate. But he gets my vote only if the polls show HRC is 100% safe. Trump is worse than Johnson is good. I'd consider writing-in Mish or Rand Paul, but again, only if there is zero chance of Trump. NeverTrump

Bobby Hill
October 12, 2016 12:50:28 at 12:50 PM "Heading into the first debate, it was Trump's election to lose … ." I disagree. It has always been HRC's election to lose. Trump was never ahead. Sure, he was gaining on her, but to say that he could actually have overtaken her but for this mistake or that miscalculation is hyper-speculative.

Trump has a ceiling of support, not much greater than his share of the Republican primary electorate. Peak Trump was right before the debate. Peak Hillary hasn't arrived. Her final assault armada (GOTV operations) hasn't even landed.

I agree that Johnson is the best candidate. But he gets my vote only if the polls show HRC is 100% safe. Trump is worse than Johnson is good. I'd consider writing-in Mish or Rand Paul, but again, only if there is zero chance of Trump. Mish is better than Paul on war and peace. Main reservation on Mish for President is immigration, and refugees.
NeverTrump

Blacklisted
October 12, 2016 2:26:10 at 2:26 PM …then never peace or prosperity.
Winston
October 12, 2016 2:20:48 at 2:20 PM Bill Clinton, serial philanderer and alleged rapist. Impeached as prez, but not removed from office ("Bad president! Bad!") during his last term. Trump makes locker room talk, it's the end of the world. Policy specifics don't matter. The entire series of Clinton scandals, no problem at all. Teflon.

US voters get the results they deserve, simple as that.

Tuberville
October 12, 2016 2:33:42 at 2:33 PM

Time to stand up for what you believe in

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 12:43:58 at 12:43 AM Nigel Farage is a very intelligent and dynamic man. No teleprompter needed for him! Quite an orator for sure. And quite a fighter. If we had a handful of Nigel Farage's in the US Congress we could turn the corner and restore America back to the beautiful, vigorous and envy of the world we once were. But I can't name even one Nigel Farage that walks the hall of the Nation's Capital Building. We only have puppets driven by power and money. And that's why we continue in decline mode – sliding down the slippery slope. What a travesty for our younger and unborn generations.
CJ
October 13, 2016 11:32:38 at 11:32 AM Rand Paul comes pretty close to Nigel.
CJ
October 12, 2016 2:57:09 at 2:57 PM ~ and stand up against evil! (Hellary)
LouisM
October 12, 2016 3:26:47 at 3:26 PM I agree with you that Hillary is going to be a disaster. Its going to be 1 scandal after another. Hillary has more enemies than the republicans…and she has accumulated them over years.
Trump would not have been a utopia either. The same forces against him in his campaign would be with him causing scandal for his entire administration.

However, we got more racial, gender, religious, sexual orientation, etc hatred while Obama / Clinton have been in office than ever in our history. Obama and Clinton have been using govt law and victimization for democratic vote farming. People were pleading for Trump to win because there were large segments of society that have been blamed, demeaned and targeted with massive vitriol by the left simply for not being a member of their victimized minority (aka non-union, white, religious, married, mother/father, husband/wife, straight, single gender, etc). Trump speak was cutting right thru the straight jacket of political correctness, trigger warnings, safe spaces, cultural Marxism, etc. People called Trump every name in the book and it amounted to nothing. Trump was like Toto pulling the curtain back and exposing the wizard as a charlatan. Many people hooked their star to Trump for that single reason.

Hillary said that if Trump wins, that she would use her political office to undermine him into a failed presidency. I would be very very surprised if Trump goes away and doesn't do the exact same thing to Hillary. The Trump-Rosie feud lasted what a decade. I think Trump now has a vendetta against the republican establishment and a vendetta with Hillary. If true, expect the new GOP to be much much more aggressive…worse than fascist radical democratic leftists. No matter who wins or loses…its going to stay mean for a decade. Bill Clinton has already lost his legacy by Hillary running for President…and before its all thru…I think there is going to be a lot more destroyed on the Clinton side. Chelsea is no Hillary and no Bill Clinton BUT Trump has 3 children and any one of those 3 could be a presidential contender. You know what happens when a dam cant hold the water back any longer. what do you think will happen when the Clintons don't have the money or power to deflect their crimes. do you think they will fade away into retirement or do you think the wolves will circle. Before Trump, they would have faded into retirement. Now, I think the wolves will circle them.

DFC
October 12, 2016 3:28:36 at 3:28 PM Hi Mish,
Our knowledge of what's happening in the electorate is imperfect. We can't make easy judgments about this election based on available data. BUT, we do now know that the " elitist establishment' has taken over large swaths of our government, media and popular culture for its own narrow and largely selfish benefits. Our best bet is to vote for an anti-establishment candidate that has a shot at making changes and providing a future where the electorate's influence can grow, not shrink. That is still Donald Trump and, yes, there is still some doubt about how anti-establishment he is. It's not a perfect world and we often have to make choices that are far from optimal or certain. This election is one such example.
I urge you to reconsider.
Dave
mishgea

October 12, 2016 11:15:35 at 11:15 PM I may indeed reconsider
But it will not matter. My personal vote is meaningless.
I was very upset at Trump following the first debate. It is clear he did not bother to prepare for it.
Nadda. Not at all.
He could have won this thing. Easily. All he had to do was act presidential for 90 minutes, and prepare for some obvious questions.
He did neither. Now it is all but over.
While we do not "know" what will happen, Hillary could have a massive medical attack for example. But I do think for the first time all in 18 months Silver has the odds about right. They stand today at 13% or so.
Yes, I am bitter over this. It was only at the last second I wrote I was voting for Johnson. I do not remember precisely, but I may have even done it as an edit after I made the post.
Note to self, do not write when you are angry.
Mish

DFC
October 13, 2016 11:35:43 at 11:35 AM Thanks Mish – we are all frustrated. And I suspect that will only get worse after 11/8 no matter who wins. But nothing gets us more frustrated than witnessing the array of forces lines up against Trump. Particularly the media which has long been held up as a centerpiece of liberty in America. No longer, their ethics have been laid bare for all to see….. I for one believe that this race is much closer than the establishment would have us believe – yes, even with Trump's warts and foibles. In large measure this is a reaction to the overplayed hand in the media. Americans are fundamentally a fair people who love the underdog – even more so if he is bullied. On that basis alone Trump enjoys widespread support IMHO. And it may be growing. We won't know for sure until 11/9 as there is so little public trust left in the American media. Pravda must be proud.
Dave
LFOldTimer
October 12, 2016 3:38:10 at 3:38 PM This blog really changed my opinion of Mish.

Mish always seem like a down-to-earth, sensible and logical communicator of the news.

Then he wrote this.

The media has treated Hillary and Bill with kid gloves and lambasted Trump for the smallest of things from the very start. The media is tremendously influential over public opinion. This election was fixed by the establishment. And the media are card carrying members of the establishment. For Mish not to see that is willful blindness.

Then to add insult to injury – he says he's going to vote for Gary Johnson, the GOP retread who endorses illegal immigration and told us no crimes were committed on Wall Street.

Sorry, Mish. I can't take you seriously anymore, sir. You've stepped over the line.

CJ
October 12, 2016 4:20:56 at 4:20 PM Sometimes you can get both sides of the news from one MSM source, which is why most liberals I know will not look at anything at Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/12/fbi-doj-roiled-by-comey-lynch-decision-to-let-clinton-slide-by-on-emails-says-insider.html#.V_6ea4XLMpE.email
LFOldTimer
October 12, 2016 4:38:56 at 4:38 PM They're all in on it, CJ.

There's no possible way that Trump can fight all of them off.

The entire thing was fixed, start to finish.

Apparently Mish can't see that.

Now I've lost faith in him too.

CJ
October 12, 2016 4:45:21 at 4:45 PM Don't give up on Mish just yet LF, he hasn't voted yet and I don't think he is firmly committed to his (this week's) position.
;Winston
October 12, 2016 6:42:29 at 6:42 PM As pointed out elsewhere, there were some big names who communicated with her via emails to and from her unauthorized, unsecured server. One of them was the POTUS. There be why there was no prosecution or even what was claimed as the unanimous FBI and lawyer opinion according to that Fox article that her security clearance be pulled, something which would have made her ineligible to serve at any decent level in government.
David
October 12, 2016 5:06:24 at 5:06 PM Mish, I've followed your blog for many years. Did I or any of your blg followers ever say. "Hey. Mish was wrong about calling the top or the bottom in anything. So therefore I will no longer follow him." You are too smart to see the obvious, have you been at the rallies of Trump and compated them to Hillary's? Well, there's something an analyst geek can't measure. it's called. PASSION! Go Trump!
Carl R
October 12, 2016 7:35:34 at 7:35 PM Going back to the primary, Mish predicted that Trump was the only Republican who could win. I predicted that Trump could lose badly enough to cost both the House and Senate as well as a number of states. I hope I'm wrong. I don't fear a Hillary presidency so long as she doesn't control Congress, too.
Blacklisted
October 12, 2016 7:57:13 at 7:57 PM You really don't get it, do you? Hillary is the the establishment and CONgress is too. Look how much damage Obama did with a Republican Congress. It's the establishment (D's, R's, the mainstream media, the military and healthcare industrial complexes, etc.), versus the rest of us.
madashellowell
October 12, 2016 8:08:37 at 8:08 PM Not to mention decades and possibly permanent damage by SCOTUS.
Sheep do not lament their lost freedoms as long a feeding time is reliable.
LFOldTimer
October 12, 2016 9:35:16 at 9:35 PM You're forgetting the fact that the next President will likely appoint 4 Supreme Court Justices. We know SCJ's vote down ideological lines. The law be damned. And those appointments could live another 20-30 years. It will be an overwhelmingly LIBERAL SCOTUS.

If that happens all of us and our kids are screwed, blued and tattooed.

And if that happens you won't recognize this country in 20 years. We'll be a socialist hellhole full of indigent illiterates from 3rd world nations.

Anybody with any aspirations in life will have an albatross tied around their necks. For every dollar you earn the government will get 70 cents of it.

What you are watching is the continued DECLINE of an empire. And Hillary will only accelerate that DECLINE.

Sorry, Carl R. Your theory is greatly flawed.

Carl R
October 13, 2016 12:36:12 at 12:36 PM My "best possible outcome" for this election is a Hillary win, along with Republicans continuing to hold congress. Yes, there are problems with that outcome, the the other possible outcomes are much worse. As far as the Supreme Court, Hillary would make it more liberal, but her choices would be tempered by the need to get them by a Republican Senate. If Hillary wins, and also wins the Senate, just think then how liberal her appointees will be? Just think how many more crazy things she can get pushed through than Obama ever was able to. Yes, the Republican Congress sucked, and didn't limit him as much as they should have, but they did limit him.

The worst alternative is for Trump to completely divide and destroy the Republican party, which I think is his true agenda. The result will be a repeat of the 30s and 40s, with Republicans being irrelevant.

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 2:39:10 at 2:39 PM Thank you for your response, Carl R.

But you've missed an obvious weakness in your argument.

We have a Republican majority House and Senate now. Have they protected us from Obama? The answer to that is "no". Obama got all his budget increases, debt ceiling increases, no realistic pushback on Obamacare (when the Republicans had that opportunity), illegals continue to pour over the border forcing innocent American to pay for them, the top Republicans support Obama's push for TPP sending millions of more US jobs to the third world and allowing more foreigners to come to America to steal ours, etc….

So if Hillary is elected it will be another replay. Every time the budget issue comes up the GOP will use the excuse that we can't shut down the government because it will hurt the reputations of the conservatives. So we can't win for losing, Carl R.

With Trump in the oval office we would have a veto vote. And he would NOT hesitate to use it and his executive orders to start enforcing the damn laws again!!!

So while I appreciate your articulate response – I don't agree with it. If Hillary makes it into the White House this nation is done. It is the end of America as we've know it. More government control. Less for the ordinary citizens. More for the pigs who run the show.

No doubt you love your sons. And I'm sure that they are productive and valued citizens. Hillary in the White House would ruin their lives prematurely. Please keep that in mind.

Carl R
October 13, 2016 12:52:55 at 12:52 PM Re: "What you are watching is the continued DECLINE of an empire. And Hillary will only accelerate that DECLINE. "

Of course. We all know that the US is in decline, and can not be saved. Once the limitations on the Federal Government were removed (1913 – Enactment of 16th Amendment, 1913 – Creation of the Federal Reserve, 1937 – FDR Court Packing plan), the end of the US has been inescapable. That's proven by history. Nevertheless, the decline will be much faster with Hillary in power, and with a Democratic Congress along with her. Just remember the irreparable damage that FDR and LBJ (Great Society) were able to do, and contrast that with the 90's under Bill Clinton.

Obama, unfortunately, only had to deal with the feckless Boehner, rather that Newt Gingrich, and was able to do more things than he should have been able to, but even a Boehner led Congress slowed him down quite a bit. With all the other limitations gone (the Federal Government now has the power to tax, spend, and print money), the separation of powers is all that's left, and it is only a delaying tactic, slowly the inevitable collapse somewhat.

I have told my sons since they were born that they will live to see the end of the United States as we know it, and that I may very well live long enough, too. I'm 62. I have predicted that we will get through this economic downturn, but not the next one. Thus I expect the end in 2037 or so, which I may live to see. If the US makes it one more cycle after that, I'll be gone, however.

Lest we think that the end of the US is some great tragedy, yes, it is sad for those that follow us, but it is unavoidable. Even our founding fathers knew that a Republic was only a temporary form of government. We should consider ourselves lucky that we lived in such a wonderful time.

I don't begrudge those who dream that they can stop the inevitable. It's a noble goal, and I admire you for your goal. To me, however, it's as futile as tilting at windmills.

Atossa
October 13, 2016 1:21:23 at 1:21 PM .

The rabbit hole goes even deeper and darker. T Roosevelt and Taft administrations teamed up with Russian revolutionaries to undermine Russia's Tsar. In his April 1917 war speech to congress, Wilson said the Russian revolutionaries [who weeks before had forced the Tsar to abdicate and destroyed the Russian empire] were America's "partner." A few months later the Bolsheviks continued the revolution to its horrific end.

Art Izagud
October 12, 2016 7:54:34 at 7:54 PM I find this post to be very disappointing. It is worth watching the PBS Frontline episode that aired yesterday http://www.pbs.org/video/2365861606/ that shows just how inept this administration has been in the Middle East. Now you want to vote for someone who doesn't even know what Aleppo is, over a wise and decisive leader.

Mish, your post is typical of the Boomer mentality that knows what is right, yet is weak enough not to choose it. You'd rather carry on about the end of the world than do anything to really change things. I once regarded you as a source of wisdom, yet now can't help but see an old crank.

Grow a pair!

Respectfully.

Blacklisted
October 12, 2016 8:07:56 at 8:07 PM Mish – I do want to thank you for your tolerance. There are MANY sites that "moderate" comments, giving the host the opportunity to not post comments they don't like. Other sites actually ban people that have a point of view and evidence that conflicts with their beliefs and biases.
Eric Coote
October 12, 2016 9:36:51 at 9:36 PM Blacklist I support your comment. Also this site is reasonably restrained and has not degenerated into rank abuse like happens on zero hedge sometimes. Mish does a good job of bringing facts to attention of all even if we don't all agree with him
LFOldTimer
October 12, 2016 10:53:56 at 10:53 PM The primaries and this presidential runoff should have taught an observer with working neurological synapses that your vote has been discounted and devalued down to virtually nothing.

There's a small group of power brokers in the back room pulling the strings and deciding where your vote will go.

The trick was to get you so disgusted with Trump that you would change your mind and waste your vote on some goofball who didn't even know what "Allepo" is. And they've been successful in many cases.

Trump was the first (and likely the last) candidate in many decades who wasn't formed and molded by the corrupted establishment to ensure the status quo is strictly followed. And they've stepped on the accelerator with a huge push for centralized globalization that is the main ingredient for the New World Order and One-World Government.

Trump never had a chance from the beginning. Until you realize that you've missed the entire point.

If you look around at the events occurring around the world and can't see what's coming get your vision checked. It's as obvious as the nose on your face.

Trump was not in that plan. So he's been eliminated.

Hillary was selected President well over 2 years ago. You're just finding that out now.

CJ
October 12, 2016 11:06:18 at 11:06 PM I am just adding this comment because I want it to be comment number 200.
LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 12:00:08 at 12:00 AM Rumors are being floated that Wikileaks has the 33,000 emails as the Trump card – so to speak.

If those get released it's a game changer.

Sure, they'll blame the Russians for it even without a scintilla of evidence.and it'll cause an international incident. Maybe even halt the elections. Who knows?

Putin's the kind of guy who'll say "bring it on".

I don't think Obama has the nads – to be quite honest.

This could get interesting.

Don't leave the theater quite yet.

Sam Stovall
October 13, 2016 12:48:24 at 12:48 AM if you vote Johnson, in effect you are voting for crooked and corrupt Hillary. If you do not understand that, you are dumber than my Lhasa Apso.
mishgea
October 13, 2016 12:51:28 at 12:51 AM Don't be delusional. A vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson because the election is effectively over.
The only question left at this point is: Which is the bigger protest vote?
Mish
R G
October 13, 2016 8:27:11 at 8:27 AM Mish, it sounds like you're climbing a wall of worry. Buy low, sell high. I agree that it appears there is nothing Trump can do to get elected in this system. It doesn't matter what he would or would not have said. There is too much at stake for the establishment to allow it. If it wasn't the latest nonsense which is so clearly a hatchet job, it would have been something else.

But that doesn't mean you just capitulate.

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 1:33:53 at 1:33 AM I agree, Sam.

A vote diverted away from Trump is effectively a vote for Hillary.

This isn't over until the fat lady sings.

Anything could happen between now and Nov 08. Particularly with all those bleached emails floating around somewhere in cyberspace.

With all due respect, Mish….I believe claiming it's effectively over on Oct 12 is delusional.

If Johnson wasn't such an assclown I would halfway comprehend your position.

I simply don't understand your reasoning, Sir.

I have to be honest.

JayTe
October 13, 2016 4:47:41 at 4:47 AM Mish, You're not even close to correct. The establishment is panicked. The locker room talk is a minor issue. You seem to have a short memory because I remember another candidate who was accused of cheating on his wife (who is now running for president) during the campaign who still won the election. And now you're saying that a candidate caught talking trash in private about women cannot win the election?!?

Since the establishment know that there will be a steady stream of disclosures on Hilary up to election day, there are looking high and low on anything that they can find to compromise Trump. They even descended to putting out overtly biased polls saying Hilary now has a wide lead by a Clinton operative who works for a Clinton Superpac where the selection processed was already biased towards Democrats by 7% before the question of who they were voting for was even asked! And it's given a veneer of acceptability by NBC and the Wall Street Journal. What you fail to grasp is that large parts of the population are not going to come out and say anything in public about who they really support. But you will discover who they really support (Trump) on election day. That's why the establishment (Democrats and Republicans, the media, the intelligence services who issue completely bogus statements about Russia being behind the hacks when they know very well from the tools NSA talked about by Edward Snowden, etc) is going full tilt to get him to drop out. Because otherwise they will be forced to stoop to open rigging of the election in order to get Clinton into power. And if that happens, you will see open revolt.

Finally as concerns David Stockman, I respect him but is from time to time completely off in terms of his opinions. A couple of weeks ago, he made the statement that the US infrastructure was absolutely fine despite the fact that the American Society of Civil Engineers had given a D grade about the USA's Infrastructure.

R G
October 13, 2016 8:10:39 at 8:10 AM Certain Russian politicians, no matter how bombastic they are, are hinting toward what to expect in that Hillary may be our last POTUS if she were elected. My caveats would be:

– Hillary would be the last woman POTUS just as Obama was likely the last black POTUS, fortunate or unfortunate as that may be. Both Obama and Clinton have permanently tarnished even the consideration of a future woman or minority POTUS for at least a generation. They would have been by far the worst two POTUSes in American history. And that is saying something, because Twiggy was horrific. Demographic trend won't make my caveat any less likely, because…
– Clinton as POTUS will either foment nuclear war, secession, or both. It should be obvious to any discerning viewer that America like all "diverse" nations is ungovernable. Nation-states survive and thrive based on conformity, common language, and common culture. When you have entire states (CA) whose culture and language are not the foundational culture and language, regardless of official language status, you have problems. It's like the Tower of Babel.

Such is the nature of history. It's cyclical like any good historian will attest to.

R G
October 13, 2016 8:14:34 at 8:14 AM P.S.

The more I think about it, I'm torn. In a warped way I am hoping for a Clinton Presidency. Anything she does will be ultimately rendered null and void if my reasoning above pans out. And, given the macroeconomic indicators, we shall know pretty doggone soon. We could get it over with in a couple of years.

But on the flipside, what would fill that power vacuum? History teaches us that a Washington is much, much less likely than a Napolean. That scares me.

CJ
October 13, 2016 9:55:20 at 9:55 AM I saw a study that found that if only women voted, Clinton would win in a landslide. But if only men voted, Trump would win in a landslide. The women may get what they want – the first woman president, but they may come to regret what they wished for. Clinton being Clinton, it will be 4 years of scandals and investigations, and she will be blamed for the inevitable economic failure. Add to that her dismal record of foreign policy failure. Hillary will be the worst thing that ever happened to the Women's Movement.
LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 11:18:44 at 11:18 AM Women tend to think with their hearts and not with their minds.

When you think with your heart in politics you foment disaster.

Many would probably vote for the wicked witch of the west just to put a woman in the White House.

I have NOTHING against a female President. Give me someone like a Thatcher and I would voter for her in a heartbeat.

Women who are honest and think with their minds would agree with me.

I refuse to be politically correct at my age.

CJ
October 13, 2016 11:29:59 at 11:29 AM I am proud to say I have been politically incorrect since before there was political correctness.
;Atossa
October 13, 2016 1:54:15 at 1:54 PM .

I would never vote for a woman president. In the Bible, women rulers are a form of national punishment. I prefer going back in time when only White male landowners could vote. Now that is really un-PC, considering I am a woman.

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 2:15:49 at 2:15 PM I have no idea whether you're being serious or just sacastic, Atossa.

But your comment makes me look like a dyed in the wool liberal socialist to the left of Bill Ayers.

Let me guess…you're not in favor of equal pay for women in the workplace either. Right?

I respect your political incorrectness. But honestly, if you ran for President I probably wouldn't vote for you.

Atossa
October 13, 2016 2:55:17 at 2:55 PM .

I am totally serious. If you think I would run for president, you missed my point.

From an historical perspective, women voting is a recent travesty as are the majority of women who have sacrificed family [allowing institutions to raise their children] to be in the workplace. Many of these women prefer to be homemakers and be at home with their babies. But they are forced to work because TPTB have destroyed society and the economy.

STEPHANE CAUSSADE
October 13, 2016 10:40:01 at 10:40 AM THE BEST PRESIDENT FOR THE USA WOULD BE MIKE SHEDLOCK AKA MISH

AS HE IS A FAMOUS INVESTMENT ADVISOR HE HAS A LONG EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE OF THE FINANCIAL MARKETS SO HE COULD IMPLEMENT GOOD APPROPRIATE ECONOMIC REFORMS IN ORDER TO BOOST AMERICAN GROWTH AND THE STXX MARKETS

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 11:20:27 at 11:20 AM I would agree with you up until Oct 11 when this article was published, Stephane.

When the facts change – my opinion follows.

Atossa
October 13, 2016 12:47:37 at 12:47 PM .

Trump is giving a great speech right now.

Why can't he be this great all the time ?

Why is it that sometimes he can speak well and other times he acts goofy ?

Atossa
October 13, 2016 1:09:38 at 1:09 PM .

Trump did a great job attacking Hillary in his West Palm Beach, Florida speech today… it is well worth watching.

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 2:21:05 at 2:21 PM Now the women are coming out of the woodwork accusing Trump of sexually assaulting them 20-30 years ago. The NY Times is having a field day.

Isn't it strange that none of these women apparently filed police reports?

If I were a woman and some guy started grabbing my breasts and trying to put his hand up my skirt I wouldn't be able to call 911 fast enough – whether it happened today or in 1975.

Just the fact that these stories get legs should tell anyone with any intelligence that the media is crooked and trying to throw the election.

They are maliciously interfering with the electoral process by floating these stories. IMO there should be a law against it. It damages whatever sanctity remains in the electoral system – which is supposed to be above reproach.

economicsjunkie
October 13, 2016 3:11:05 at 3:11 PM Trump's already threatened to sue them. He'll come out confident and honest and the media as the usual crooked lying pieces of trash they are. It'll only help him.
economicsjunkie
October 13, 2016 3:11:56 at 3:11 PM Landslide in sight.
Atossa
October 13, 2016 4:38:42 at 4:38 PM .

Below is a link to a video and transcript of Trump's great speech today in West Palm Beach, Florida. I thought I remember hearing him also say the word, cabal… but maybe that was just wishful thinking.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/10/13/donald-trump-speech-the-coordinated-clintonian-politics-of-personal-destruction/

Atossa
October 13, 2016 5:30:08 at 5:30 PM .

Liberal globalists are having a hissy-fit over Trump's speech.. they are using the words "bizarre & frightening". One journalist said "Trump has gone nuts", that he has gone "full Breitbart."

Pi314
October 13, 2016 2:29:56 at 2:29 PM Mish, you may be jumping the gun in this case. I have mostly ignored all polls except the USC tracking poll for obvious reasons. The USC tracking poll showed Trump leading by 3.9% pre 1st debate. As of today, Trump leads by 0.1%. So Trump has lost 'merely' 3.8% after the debates and the tape. The poll appears to be trending up in Trump's favor now. I believe we have seen the worst for Trump. If the rumored release of 33,000 emails is true, it will have an impact on the poll.

This is a ridiculous election. We are electing president based on one locker room tape over national issues.

LFOldTimer
October 13, 2016 2:43:09 at 2:43 PM It's not just ridiculous, Pi314.

IT'S ORCHESTRATED AT THE VERY TOP!!!!

That's what's scary.

Intelligent people can see this.

Deceitful people see it but won't say it.

Essentially, we've lost our country.

RH
October 13, 2016 6:42:27 at 6:42 PM The obvious reason you ignore all the other polls is that they don't give the result you want.
This is going to be a massive loss, worse than the one that got Obama elected. If Trump had a bit more depth (developed policies) and wasn't so lazy (prepared for debates) he could have won but he is the wrong guy at the right spot in history, Clinton must be the luckiest politician in US history. Unfortunately. I find all these media blaming a bit pathetic.Mish is right.

Check out this link, very funny take (Clarke and Dawe who Mish has previously published) from the Australian viewpoint of this election. They are both hopeless candidates.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-1 …ace-is/7929574

Chris
October 13, 2016 4:36:04 at 4:36 PM Trump lost with his mouth. End of story.
Michael Griffith
October 13, 2016 5:34:29 at 5:34 PM The MSM has given 15x as much coverage to Trump's 10 yr old Locker Room remarks than to emails that prove Hilary is bought and paid for by the people who crashed our economy.

Shame on the voters if they vote the way teh MSM tells them too. It's no wonder Millenials have zero trust for the MSM,

[Oct 13, 2016] Debate Wrapup

Notable quotes:
"... +A large part of the uproar over the Trump tapes is driven not by the fact that Trump's comments are shocking but because they are so familiar. We've heard similar, perhaps even more rancid, things from our fathers, uncles, brothers, coaches, teachers, pastors, teammates, and friends. Perhaps we've even made similar comments ourselves. Now the public wants to project its own shame onto Trump. His humiliation serves as a kind catharsis for the nation's own systemic sexism. Perhaps NOW will give him a medal one day for his "sacrifice"… ..."
Oct 13, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Until a second Hunter Thompson comes along, the appropriately jaded Jeffrey St. Clair will have to do [ Counterpunch ].

+A large part of the uproar over the Trump tapes is driven not by the fact that Trump's comments are shocking but because they are so familiar. We've heard similar, perhaps even more rancid, things from our fathers, uncles, brothers, coaches, teachers, pastors, teammates, and friends. Perhaps we've even made similar comments ourselves. Now the public wants to project its own shame onto Trump. His humiliation serves as a kind catharsis for the nation's own systemic sexism. Perhaps NOW will give him a medal one day for his "sacrifice"…

Cf. Luke 18:11 .

[Oct 10, 2016] She made millions using the power of her office. Why dont you put some of your own money into your campaign? Just curious

Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:30 pm

TRUMP She made millions using the power of her office. Why don't you put some of your own money into your campaign? Just curious

optimader October 9, 2016 at 10:32 pm

smile (grimace)

Titus Pullo October 9, 2016 at 10:55 pm

That was probably the best attack of the night, and Clinton looked completely flummoxed, almost like she couldn't believe he went there with her. And then she jumped up so quick to re-direct.

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 11:05 pm

I lost most of that exchange because the damn video cut out.

> She made millions using the power of her office

Teachout's operational definition of corruption. I imagine we'd see plenty of crony capitalism under Trump (thinking back to Halliburton, et al, under Bush II). I don't know whether that would be more or less corrosive than Clinton's style of corruption.

[Oct 10, 2016] Trump for all Americans even those who are deplorables in the eyes of Wall street banksters

Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
MyLessThanPrimeBeef October 9, 2016 at 10:16 pm

Trump for all Americans?

Even those Deplorables? He says he is for them.

John October 9, 2016 at 10:16 pm

Clinton knows he is wounding her.
You can see it in her face.

Sammy Maudlin October 9, 2016 at 11:23 pm

The most telling moment in that regard for me was when he brought up Sidney Blumenthal. She looked, "anticipatory?" When he said he was a "bad guy" her eyes opened wide, got a visible lump in her throat and had to swallow the nervous energy. That relationship is a weak point for her.

JohnnyGL October 10, 2016 at 1:10 am

You might be right. That makes some sense. I believe the original Guccifer hack was on Sidney Blumenthal's email address and he found out about Clintonemail by reading Sid's emails back and forth with her.

Also, keep in mind Sidney Blumenthal's son Max is involved in the BDS movement (I think) or at least speaks out against Israeli apartheid (using that term) and does do some interesting reporting.

With Clinton openly courting Netanyahu, might be a sore point.

[Oct 10, 2016] Question to Radditz: Do you know there is a humanitarian crisis in Libya

Notable quotes:
"... Cooper consistently tried to cross-examine Trump with follow up questions and "so your saying" statement characterizations. Trump generally wouldn't let him. I saw nary an example of said behavior with HRC. ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

fresno dan October 9, 2016 at 10:12 pm

Question to Radditz: Do you know there is a humanitarian crisis in Libya????????????
How do you think that happened?????
If not,your a disgrace.
If you do, your biased ..
Why don't you ask about libya

Its not the questions asked, its the ones not asked

optimader October 9, 2016 at 10:12 pm

alleppo is already rubble
http://www.boredpanda.com/before-after-war-photos-aleppo-syria/

Sammy Maudlin October 9, 2016 at 11:11 pm

Cooper consistently tried to cross-examine Trump with follow up questions and "so your saying" statement characterizations. Trump generally wouldn't let him. I saw nary an example of said behavior with HRC.

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:19 pm

[outage]

RADDATZ Quotes Pence, we should be prepared to use military force.

TRUMP We haven't spoken and I disagree.

[That's actually reasonably clear].

[Oct 10, 2016] O thank God – finally, finally Trump makes an intelligent, irrefutable point -- our policy of supporting rebels in Syria is stupid.

Notable quotes:
"... I've also seen an interview where Hersh praised Obama for not going through with the planned airstrikes (which were apparently going to be massive as drawn up). But he also criticized Obama for not coming clean with the public and saying "we're not attacking Assad because the rebels launched the gas attack, not Assad." ..."
"... Did you use the loophole? ..."
"... Of course. Just like her friends. I understand the tax code better than anyone. Hillary has friends that want all these provisions. Hillary is leaving carried interest. I used it. As did Buffet, Soros . I love depreciation. ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:15 pm

Q Images out of Aleppo. State Dept calls for war crimes investigation

FB If you were President, what about Aleppo. Isn't it like the Holocaust?

CLINTON We need leverage with the Russians because they won't come to the table w no leverage. Work more closely with partners and allies on the ground.

Issue is ambition and aggressiveness of Russia. They've decided who they want to be President, and its not me. I did cooperate, which is how we got the nuke treaty. But I do support a war crimes investigation.

TRUMP The so-called line in the sand.

CLINTON I was gone

TRUMP Obama draws the line in the sand, laughed at. She talks tough but our nuclear program is old and tired [!!!]. Bad thing. Every time we take rebels we're arming people. And they end up being worse! Almost everything she's done has been a disaster ..

A treaty with Russia, look at the deal, Iran and Russia are against us. I don't like Assad at all. But he's killing ISIS. As is Russian and

RADDATZ What would you do? Pence: Provocations by Russian need to be met. Should be prepared to use force.

TRUMP He and I haven't spoken and I disagree (!!)

TRUMP I believe we have to get ISIS.

RADDATZ What happen if Aleppo falls?

TRUMP Already has. Look at Mosul. We telegraphed our attack and all the leaders left!

RADDATZ Some times there are reasons military does things [drips contempt]

TRUMP Why would we tell them? All I say is this: Patton and MacArthur are spinning in their graves

RADDATZ You want Assad to go, arming rebels, too late for Aleppo, would you introduce force?

CLINTON Not American ground forces. Our troops should not hold territory. Use special forces. Use enablers and trainers.

RADDATZ What would you do different?

CLINTON I hope we will have pushed ISIS out of Iraq. A lot of planning going on. To signal Sunnis and Peshmerga they need to be involved. I would target Bagdadi. Let's arm the Kurds. Kurdish and Arab fighters on the ground.

JohnnyGL October 10, 2016 at 12:53 am

Can we call in Sy Hersh for a "fact check" on Obama's "red line"? http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

I've also seen an interview where Hersh praised Obama for not going through with the planned airstrikes (which were apparently going to be massive as drawn up). But he also criticized Obama for not coming clean with the public and saying "we're not attacking Assad because the rebels launched the gas attack, not Assad."

none October 9, 2016 at 10:26 pm

This one never gets old: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc

Jeremy Grimm October 9, 2016 at 10:55 pm

Sorry - I still won't vote for Hillary even if she did kill the terrorist with her personal weapon. Can she disassemble and and reassemble that weapon wearing a blindfold!?

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:04 pm

COOPER Did you use the loophole?

TRUMP Of course. Just like her friends. I understand the tax code better than anyone. Hillary has friends that want all these provisions. Hillary is leaving carried interest. I used it. As did Buffet, Soros . I love depreciation.

If she has a problem, for thirty years she hasn't been doing anything. It's all talk. Again, Bernie Sanders, bad judgment. Her and Obama, the vacuum they left, that formed ISIS. Congratulations.

CLINTON Here we go again. In favor of getting rid of 30 years.

TRUMP If you were an effective Senator you could have gotten it done.

CLINTON Under our constitution we have a thing called veto power [drips contempt].

CLINTON CHIP, 10 millino kids. Adoption. First responder help after 9/11. Kids medicine (dosage?). As SoS go around the world advocate. Negotiated Russian nuke treaty. 400 pieces of legislation have my name on ias sponsor or co-sponsor.

[Oct 10, 2016] Oh those Democrats, always searching for moderates such as moderate republicans, moderate syrian rebels .

Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
jonf October 9, 2016 at 10:28 pm

Scalia was a great justice. Trump will select more like him. Oh goody, That seals my vote.

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:45 pm

Ugh. Scalia. Of course, Obama nominated a moderate Republican

JohnnyGL October 10, 2016 at 1:17 am

Oh those Democrats, always searching for 'moderates' .moderate republicans, moderate syrian rebels .

RUKidding October 9, 2016 at 10:28 pm

Trump: Scalia was a great judge. Ugh.
2d Amendment is under siege

jaaaaayceeeee October 9, 2016 at 10:29 pm

Hillary Clinton praises about not raising taxes on those who make $250,000, about cutting deficits, surpluses, the USA getting Russia and Syria prosecuted for war crimes, and I think didn't mention the public option for ACA.

Trump is pathetic and Clinton is scary.

[Oct 10, 2016] . Looks like the political class has made up its mind on Aleppo.

Notable quotes:
"... Clinton stated "no fly zone" in Syria. Could no one prepare Trump for this so he could make the simple point that a NFZ means shooting down Russian planes? Then he could have asked Americans: "do you want Clinton as President and gamble she won't start a nuclear war?" ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
reslez October 9, 2016 at 10:25 pm

And what's the deal with the female moderator debating Trump on Syria? That seemed really out of line.

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:29 pm

Yes, Raddatz became a participant there. Looks like the political class has made up its mind on Aleppo.

EoinW October 9, 2016 at 10:43 pm

Clinton stated "no fly zone" in Syria. Could no one prepare Trump for this so he could make the simple point that a NFZ means shooting down Russian planes? Then he could have asked Americans: "do you want Clinton as President and gamble she won't start a nuclear war?"

Trump did well on the supreme court question – someone who will follow the Constitution. Such an old fashion sentiment.

[Oct 10, 2016] Where were the questions to Hillary?

Notable quotes:
"... Chekov said something like: "If you show a gun in Act One, make sure it goes off in Act Three." So, Act One was bringing in Bill Clinton's accusers. But then nothing. Odd. ..."
"... * Interesting comment from the analyst after, something like: "I was talking to Trump voters in Ohio. They say they know exactly who he is" (and from the analyst's tone, that wasn't positive with respect to his character. I think a lot of voters, across the spectrum, are appalled by the choices, which is what the trust/likeability numbers are telling us) ..."
"... In retrospect, all the media questioning whether or not Trump would be effective in this kind of venue seems silly. Of course Trump can work a room. ..."
"... When Trump says he will put Hillary in jail, what do you think his kids and wife see regarding a Clinton presidency? Will she go after her enemies? ..."
"... Media going blatantly in the tank prob boosts turnout for trump. Cnn concedes trump did pretty well. Fox seems contented with him. Glad to see him break with pence on russia. Glad to see him say get isis, not assad. Aleo enjoyed him zinging clinton. ..."
"... With all the Russian efforts to undermine our democracy I can only hope we return to paper ballots hand counted in front of skeptical witnesses to the process. ..."
"... No mention of any laws broken by any previous presidents. No concerns about droning us citizens, no sweating any wars of opportunity. ..."
"... Trump absolutely dominated this debate. Hillary was on the ropes all night. The moderation was pretty good too. ..."
"... CNN directs us dweebs that this was a "contentious, nasty debate". It was contentious but aren't most debates like that? Nasty? Not that much. Sometimes but not as much as I thought it could be. ..."
"... HuffPo headline: "Don in Flames" I think, all things considered, he did fine. Neither one is offering any serious or meaningful solutions to anything we need. ..."
"... On the other had, HRC kept treating the debate like the white-shoe lawyer she is. "Refer to my website" = "I filed a brief on this." No one reads either. Too much relying on subtle distinctions. Worst of all, most of the time she speaks with no passion or genuineness. This is death to a lawyer speaking to a jury. ..."
"... She wants the debate to be like a federal class action case with multiple motions and lengthy affidavits and briefs that the Judge's top-of-their-law-school-class clerks will dissect and recommend a decision upon. ..."
"... The genius of this is that Trump is the device through which all of the real arguments against Clinton, the ones relating to criminal conduct and atrocious policy, are symbolically cleansed, ritually bled out. Trump as the public's cry for contrition and oh, how she has suffered for her vanity! Yet she is redeemed through him. She has crossed the pit of burning hard drives and she is sorry for her sins, but after all, America is nothing if not a forgiving nation. ..."
"... Once again we see America will get the president it deserves. The world? Not so much. ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

John October 9, 2016 at 10:40 pm

Where were the questions about the 30 million illegals?
About the H-1B sand Greencard foreigners taking our jobs?
About health care we can't afford?
About corporations paying no taxes?
About people killing themselves with heroin because they have no hope,
no way out of poverty?

Kurt Sperry October 9, 2016 at 10:42 pm

Trump did better than the first debate, where I thought he was destroyed. I'm not sure who won, both were pretty repulsive. I really, really dislike the both of them, whether on policies or on personality.

RUKidding October 9, 2016 at 10:44 pm

Agree. Both are liars. Trump handled himself better than expected.

justanotherprogressive October 9, 2016 at 10:45 pm

It doesn't matter who won. The pundits will spend several days telling you who won and that your eyes and ears are lying again….
Frankly, from the comments above, it is pretty obvious America was embarrased again……glad I didn't watch it……

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 10:48 pm

No contrition from Trump, either, even though that's what the establishment wants (not that any amount of contrition would work).

Which makes sense: 1) His base doesn't care 2) Backing down would be worse than gutting it out, because backing down would make him look weak, destroying his brand.*

Chekov said something like: "If you show a gun in Act One, make sure it goes off in Act Three." So, Act One was bringing in Bill Clinton's accusers. But then nothing. Odd.

* Interesting comment from the analyst after, something like: "I was talking to Trump voters in Ohio. They say they know exactly who he is" (and from the analyst's tone, that wasn't positive with respect to his character. I think a lot of voters, across the spectrum, are appalled by the choices, which is what the trust/likeability numbers are telling us).

John October 9, 2016 at 10:50 pm

It was to rattle Hillary. And she did look uncomfortable, uneasy, all night. Didn't help her.

relstprof October 9, 2016 at 10:58 pm

Once the crowd reacted positively to his "33K emails" attacks, he calmed down. I got the sense he decided he didn't have to go low, since there were some in the room still on his side.

In retrospect, all the media questioning whether or not Trump would be effective in this kind of venue seems silly. Of course Trump can work a room.

I'd score it a tie, though.

MyLessThanPrimeBeef October 9, 2016 at 11:45 pm

When Trump says he will put Hillary in jail, what do you think his kids and wife see regarding a Clinton presidency? Will she go after her enemies?

Is that kabuki or profile in courage?

Kim Kaufman October 9, 2016 at 10:50 pm

NPR doing "fact check." They hate Trump.

johnnygl October 9, 2016 at 10:51 pm

Media going blatantly in the tank prob boosts turnout for trump. Cnn concedes trump did pretty well. Fox seems contented with him. Glad to see him break with pence on russia. Glad to see him say get isis, not assad. Aleo enjoyed him zinging clinton.

He's still an idiot and has terrible policy ideas.

Jeremy Grimm October 9, 2016 at 11:30 pm

With all the Russian efforts to undermine our democracy I can only hope we return to paper ballots hand counted in front of skeptical witnesses to the process.

crittermom October 10, 2016 at 12:34 am

With all the talk about 'the Russians did it", I'm tempted to write in Putin just to p*ss off the Dems! (but I won't) Both candidates suck worse than a tornado.

johnnygl October 9, 2016 at 11:10 pm

Cnn people very much on edge. Dana bash breathless at trump saying he'd put her in jail. Said that's what makes us different than African dictators, stalin and hitler. I'm not kidding.

No mention of any laws broken by any previous presidents. No concerns about droning us citizens, no sweating any wars of opportunity.

RUKidding October 9, 2016 at 11:17 pm

You expected truth from CNN? Good effen luck w that.

Roger Smith October 9, 2016 at 11:10 pm

Trump absolutely dominated this debate. Hillary was on the ropes all night. The moderation was pretty good too.

RUKidding October 9, 2016 at 11:20 pm

CNN directs us dweebs that this was a "contentious, nasty debate". It was contentious but aren't most debates like that? Nasty? Not that much. Sometimes but not as much as I thought it could be.

megamike48 October 9, 2016 at 11:24 pm

The clearest indication of character is what people find laughable. J.W. von Goethe

Kim Kaufman October 9, 2016 at 11:36 pm

HuffPo headline: "Don in Flames" I think, all things considered, he did fine. Neither one is offering any serious or meaningful solutions to anything we need. It was, unfortunately, just some lame entertainment and both remain equally unlikable and untrustworthy and unhelpful.

Sammy Maudlin October 10, 2016 at 12:02 am

Watching this I kept thinking that Trump has been working with trial lawyers to prepare.

He used a lot of tricks trial lawyers use to influence juries. One, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story (i.e. Why didn't you as one of 100 senators change the tax code? Answer: "if she was an effective senator she could have"). Another is make the jury think the judge is biased against you. The main one is put the black hat on your opponent and keep it there. Jury trials are pretty simple affairs that way, the big thing is to make the other side the bad guy.

On the other had, HRC kept treating the debate like the white-shoe lawyer she is. "Refer to my website" = "I filed a brief on this." No one reads either. Too much relying on subtle distinctions. Worst of all, most of the time she speaks with no passion or genuineness. This is death to a lawyer speaking to a jury.

She wants the debate to be like a federal class action case with multiple motions and lengthy affidavits and briefs that the Judge's top-of-their-law-school-class clerks will dissect and recommend a decision upon.

But it's not. It's an afternoon trial in front of a bunch of bored people sitting in a jury box in a hot county courthouse. "Smart" lawyers get creamed by savvy ones in that situation all the time. That's what I saw tonight.

Fiver October 10, 2016 at 12:26 am

Some low-watt bulb writing tomorrow is going to say 'This is how America does politics, does democracy. We let it all hang out. A big old barn burner. A national catharsis, a venting of pent-up emotion and frustration at some things in America and the world that just haven't worked out for everybody, no matter how hard we try. This is good for America, even necessary, in fact it's what makes us Americans. We deal with things and move on. Let all that poison out. And we move on. I'm inclined to think the third debate will be a much more civil affair.'

The genius of this is that Trump is the device through which all of the real arguments against Clinton, the ones relating to criminal conduct and atrocious policy, are symbolically cleansed, ritually bled out. Trump as the public's cry for contrition and oh, how she has suffered for her vanity! Yet she is redeemed through him. She has crossed the pit of burning hard drives and she is sorry for her sins, but after all, America is nothing if not a forgiving nation.

Raise your right hand, Mrs. Clinton, and repeat after me….no, your right hand, please…

Tertium Squid October 10, 2016 at 1:17 am

Once again we see America will get the president it deserves. The world? Not so much.

[Oct 10, 2016] Debate Post-Mortem Trump Crushes Clinton - You Should Be In Jail

Notable quotes:
"... As a college educated white, I'm not thrilled with Trump; however I will vote for him as the last chance to prevent WW3 (that would begin almost immediately), thousands of Waco's and Ruby Ridge's, and the final clamp down by the American Stasi. As will my asian, latino, black, american indian, and other ethnic co-workers...college degree or not. ..."
"... Hillary is the embodiment of the establishment evil. WE, my co-workers and I, want to kill it...by any means possible. ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.zerohedge.com
Brief Transcript:

TRUMP: "Bernie Sanders and between super delegates and Debra Wassermann Schultz and I was surprised to see him sign on with the devil. The thing that you should be apologizing for are the 33,000 e-mails that you deleted and you acid washed and the two boxes of e-mails and other things last week that were taken from an office are are now missing. I didn't knowledge I would say this, but I'm going to and I hate to say it. If I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation. There has never been so many lies, so much exception. There has never been anything like it. We will have a special prosecutor. I go out and speak and the people of this country are furious. The long time workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this with e-mails. You get a subpoena and after getting the subpoena you delete 33,000 e-mails and acid watch them or bleach them. An expensive process . We will get a special prosecutor and look into it. You know what, people have been -- their lives have been destroyed for doing 1/5 of what you have done. You should be a shamed."

COOPER: "Secretary Clinton, I will let you respond."

CLINTON: "Everything he said is absolutely false . It would be impossible to be fact checking Donald all the time. I would never get to talk and make lives better for people. Once again, go to Hillary clinton.com. You can fact check trump in realtime. Last time at the first debate we had millions of people fact checking and we will have millions more fact checking. It's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country."

TRUMP: "Because you would be in jail."

COOPER: " We want to remind the audience to please not talk out loud. Do not applaud. You are wasting time. "

markmotive Pladizow Oct 9, 2016 11:24 PM

Christine Hughes: Confidence in the establishment is eroding

http://www.planbeconomics.com/2016/10/confidence-in-establishment-erodin...

HedgeJunkie TheLooza Oct 10, 2016 12:39 AM

As a college educated white, I'm not thrilled with Trump; however I will vote for him as the last chance to prevent WW3 (that would begin almost immediately), thousands of Waco's and Ruby Ridge's, and the final clamp down by the American Stasi. As will my asian, latino, black, american indian, and other ethnic co-workers...college degree or not.

Hillary is the embodiment of the establishment evil. WE, my co-workers and I, want to kill it...by any means possible.

[Oct 10, 2016] Hillary represents corrupt and half-competent status quo

Notable quotes:
"... I'll admit, as a woman, I was disgusted by the tapes, but I turned on the debate just in time for the question on Syria, and his answer won me back. Pence's foreign policy had me worried, but Trump was willing to disagree with him and once again be the only person talking any sense about this situation. The contrast of his Supreme Court answer to hers ("real world experience" can only be code for social justice activist judges) was icing on the cake. I think John Gruskos' theory may be right. Next debate, Trump needs to point out that Clinton has all the neocon war hawk endorsements, and that tells you all you need to know on foreign policy. ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.theamericanconservative.com
Anand , says: October 10, 2016 at 12:31 am
Rod,

I like the phrase corrupt and half-competent status quo . It captures the real problem we have- society has good reason for not trusting those of us in the elite, but in a real sense the very survival of society depends on experts… (how long would most of the country last if our systems for distributing food, water, power and money crashed?).

-Anand

CJ , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:16 pm
Trump certainly won tonight. I don't know that it changes the trajectory of the race (he was losing before GEBTP) but it changes the speed. Hillary is counting on oppo dumps and ground game to see her through.
Charles Cosimano , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:25 pm
The answer to why Hillary did not deliver a knockout blow is simple. She doesn't have one. There is nothing Hillary could bring up that could end it for Trump.

Or is anyone really stupid enough to think that tape matters to the voters? People have real things to worry about.

John Gruskos , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:38 pm
The establishment wants a war with Syria and Russia.

They would prefer Hillary as their tool, but they they want to be 100% sure.

So they tried to bluff Trump into dropping out, right after Pence announced his support for their planned war.

But Trump can't be bluffed. He's holding a winning hand – his America First platform.

Skeptic , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:39 pm
One thing is clear: all networks should fire their political commentators and hire Scott Adams. And perhaps less clear, but is Trump delivering a death blow to political correctness with his bizarre persona and performance-art campaign? (Not to excuse him for being a grotesque human being.)
Alex , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:44 pm
I am not sure Trump won. He survived tonight. We have two liars: one is an idiot and another one is the most corrupted politician in the US history. Any other Democrat would have destroyed Trump. Any other Republican would have destroyed Hillary. What a nightmare.
David B , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:48 pm
Brit Hume tweeted something about Trump's performance making the lewd tape controversy "fade" and he got hammered by anti-Trumpers for saying so, but I think he's right. That's just the nature of our times–both the acceptance of coarseness, and the short memory of TV/Internet culture. Remember how people speculated that if Bill Clinton had been eligible to run for a third term he very well might have been elected? Heck his approval ratings were sky-high after the impeachment hearings aired all the sordid details out for public view!

The main way Trump won was just by moving the debate forward from the tape stuff everyone was expecting. We were back to Muslim vetting, and fossil fuel energy, and the email scandals…. It really makes it feel like it's all just business as usual again.

Rebecca , says: October 9, 2016 at 11:59 pm
I'll admit, as a woman, I was disgusted by the tapes, but I turned on the debate just in time for the question on Syria, and his answer won me back. Pence's foreign policy had me worried, but Trump was willing to disagree with him and once again be the only person talking any sense about this situation. The contrast of his Supreme Court answer to hers ("real world experience" can only be code for social justice activist judges) was icing on the cake. I think John Gruskos' theory may be right. Next debate, Trump needs to point out that Clinton has all the neocon war hawk endorsements, and that tells you all you need to know on foreign policy.

[Oct 10, 2016] Trump is the first non-establishment presidential candidate to get this far, and he landed lots of painful punches on Hillary during this debate.

Notable quotes:
"... He hit on her every issue he wanted to. Repeatedly and strongly. ..."
"... On that, his taking on one of the hardest gigs in the business/political world tonight after the last few days, and dealing with it, and winning, he may have convinced a swathe of undecideds that he has what it takes. ..."
"... Sad for all Trump haters, but he demolished the incredibly boring HRC. Trump says it how it is, even if he mixes in fibs and exaggerations. ..."
"... The Guardian's view of the debate is a predictable one, considering the complete lack of objectivity in covering the election. ..."
"... There has been no questioning of the fact that Hillary has received millions of dollars, for "speeches" given to Wall st banks. And of course, no questioning of the millions spent by the Clintons as "hush money" to women, in order that they keep quiet about Bill's sexual proclivities. Yep, no objectivity and little attempt at unbiased reporting here. ..."
"... Do you want to know why Trump won tonight? It's because all Hillary has to offer is the same pre-canned answers over and over again. She comes off as less genuine than any other candidate in history and it's dispicable. ..."
"... Saddam Hussein was a leader who did not have WMDs and whose orchestrated removal and subsequent murder opened the door to the biggest infestation of mass-murderers and islamic terrorism in the history of the world; Gadaffi was a popular leader who had turned Libya into the most prosperous and the only truly independent Arab nation in Africa, and Putin is the democratically elected leader of his country with a wide national mandate. Neither of the three can hold the candle to the menagerie of tyrannical and maniacal baboons and banana republic chipmonks who paraded and goose-stepped through Obama White House over the past eight years. ..."
"... I'm no fan of the United States since their criminal actions around the globe post '9-11' but I actually feel some pity for it at this point. ..."
"... Many of us are sickened more than you may realize. The unfortunate part is the entire system in the US is rigged against its own people. ..."
"... Hillary Clinton in favour of a no-fly zone in Syria, which basically means a hot war with Russia. Now, rebels are armed by Saudi Arabia amongst others. And Saudi Arabia is one of the biggest donors Clinton Foundation. Coincidence? ..."
"... This is terrifying. Hillary might put sons and husbands of American women in harm's way on behalf of interests of Saudi Arabia. ..."
"... hillary's biggest weakness in my opinion is that she is the "goldman sachs candidate" ..."
"... Then the debate switched to other topics and Trump landed blow after punishing blow. Hillary's non-answer to the question about whether she had public positions and private ones was (for her) uncharacteristically bizarre and rambling. Trump's Honest Abe retort was gold. ..."
"... On tax issues he noted she had 30 years to do something about the tax code and did nothing. Why? Because all of her billionaire donors use the same tax loopholes she accuses Trump of using, which is also why it won't change if she is elected. ..."
"... Trump is the first non-establishment presidential candidate to get this far, and he landed lots of painful punches on Hillary during this debate. ..."
"... The current administration has repeatedly taken unrealistic positions based on ideology and clung to them until the reality on the ground made them utterly untenable to hold onto. As exhibit one, does anyone remember Obama's big speech to the nation when he announced his plan to arm moderate Syrian rebels? That turned out to be one of the most ineffective flops in history, a complete waste of time, money, and resources. ..."
"... Instead of a debate that was focused on Trump's vulgar comments, the debate was focused on policy issues, and despite all of Clinton's "preparation" when it came to the nuts and bolts of policy, Trump managed to not only go toe-to-toe with Clinton, he often got the best of her. ..."
"... Finally, finally someone actually asked the question that had to be asked on Syria, despite all the pointless hand wringing. Those rebels, what do we actually know about them, that we are willing to go to war for them? Are they islamists? How will they govern? Do they have any popular support of any kind? ..."
"... And its not even the whole of Alleppo we are talking about. 2/3rds is already in govt control, Sorry but there is the bitter truth about civil wars. IF they cant come to an agreement, then the best thing that can happen is if one part wins and the fighting stops. ..."
"... Not many people could face off against a highly skilled politician like Hillary, and win - especially when all the media and grandees have extrapolated from a "locker room" recording to woman-hater/sex pervert. ..."
"... Trump showed up HRC as unexciting and mediocre. DT could still win. ..."
"... I fear the Presidency of Hillary Clinton as I believe that she is VERY capable of initiating a nuclear war with Russia. I truly believe that for Donald Trump, this would be a last alternative and that he would insist upon speaking, rather than acting, as HRC would. ..."
"... I just can not believe a word she utters. She has proven me correct with her "one position for public, and one position for private" quote. Two-faced liar. On the other hand is Trump. There are many laws or positions he endorses which would NEVER survive the two houses of Congress needed to implement them. ..."
"... You may like or loathe Trump, but it's impressive what he achieved tonight. They had him on the ropes, it was the middle of this fight and he knocked his opponent out tonight. ..."
"... Here's why. her record! She boasts of so many sponsored bills as senator, yet when you actually look at what she ACHIEVED - 3 meaningless bills - named a museum, a road and a post office! As for her SOS "achievements" are there any? The only things we can say for certain she did, ultimately she has admitted they were mistakes - experience is meaningless if you have poor judgement, and she has prove to have terrible judgement. ..."
"... And ultimately at the end of the day, IF the will is there, Trump can be prevented from causing ANY damage. Clinton on the other hand has openly stated that she will cooperate with the republicans, thus only right wing conservative bills will get passed! ..."
"... So she has proven poor judgement, a proven record of incompetence, and is desperate to raise the stakes with the Russians! Can anyone explain to me how she is better in any way. Remember Trump is disgusting, but she is a war criminal - her actions should have put her in the hague yet alone the whitehouse! ..."
"... Hillary's tough talk against Russia and regime change in Syria scare the crap out of me. She's talking nuclear war, and she and the media lie about Russia. ..."
"... Modern politics is all about have media houses in your pocket to promote your side of the story. For the life of me i cannot believe the presidential race is still so close even though there is a clear bias against trump. ..."
"... It's been rather stunning as to how far the Guardian has gone to blanket it's news with pro-hilly propaganda. The most shameful moments came when Bernie was running in the primary. ..."
"... of the two, Hillary represents the most acute, immediate threat to humanity with her calling for a no fly zone over Syria and her neo-McCarthy Russia bashing, demonizing Putin. ..."
"... The the recent events in Syria witness this threat, with the US openly protecting (supplying) the misogynist, stoneage Al Nusra in Eastern Alleppo, bombing Syrian soldiers who are actively engaged in combat against ISIS, and now bombing bridges leading to the ISIS capital of Raqqa thus preventing the advancing Syrian army from attacking ISIS. ..."
"... She is backed by the debt slavery banksters, the planet destroying fossil fuel parasites, the fascist military industrial security prison complex and the whole corporate fascist shadow state, not to mention the MSM (including this journal). At least Trump has said this, which is much saner than any of HIlliary's comments regarding Syria, (not to mention Lybia): ..."
"... Assad is killing ISIS. Russia is killing ISIS. Iran is killing ISIS. And those three have now lined up together because of our weak policy," he said. ..."
Oct 10, 2016 | www.theguardian.com
newyorkred , 10 Oct 2016 04:45)>
Terrible summary by Tom McCarthy of the debate completely omits the main event, namely Trump promising to prosecute Clinton should he become President. WTF.

There's a job waiting for him at the NYT, the number 1 newspaper for anyone who wants to miss what's actually going on in this election.

BlueberryCompote , 10 Oct 2016 04:48)>
Trump won this debate because Clinton wanted to make the issue personal and the fact is that even though Trump is disgusting, she hasn't got a great record to defend. It's shameful that the Democrats chose her and the Republicans chose him.
Uncle Putin -> jrakoske001 , 10 Oct 2016 05:35)>
I agree with you to a point, but to be entirely honest, I don't think any of the politicians have more than a surface level knowledge of any of these issues. They rely on experts and advisors to come up with solutions to complex problems and then they make decisions after weighing the options presented. Politicians who have been in the game a long time know all the generic buzzwords and slogans to use, whereas Trump doesn't have the lingo down. It's actually part of his charm. Obama had almost no real world experience with any of this stuff and especially when it comes to foreign policy it would be hard to argue that anyone could do much worse (and Hillary was part of his administration).
samuraiblue , 10 Oct 2016 04:51)>
Success of debates can only be based on their effectiveness or otherwise in improving a candidate's position. Trump`s position was almost untenable before the debate. He`s now in an election. By any standards that is a massive win for him.

Given that the only relevant audience are undecideds (and consider the politics of people as yet undecided about voting for Trump), Trump played a blinder. He hit on her every issue he wanted to. Repeatedly and strongly.

On that, his taking on one of the hardest gigs in the business/political world tonight after the last few days, and dealing with it, and winning, he may have convinced a swathe of undecideds that he has what it takes.

I am non-partisan. But I can`t see how anybody can conclude he didn`t win that big time. His position now V before the debate? Answers itself.

Still don`t see an electoral path to victory for him. That was monumental television. Ugly America. But it is ugly, that`s the reality.

DomesticExtremist , 10 Oct 2016 04:54)>
She should be in jail.
finalcurtain , 10 Oct 2016 04:58)>
Sad for all Trump haters, but he demolished the incredibly boring HRC. Trump says it how it is, even if he mixes in fibs and exaggerations.

Unless evidence comes to light of rape or attempted rape by Trump, I can definitely accept the "locker room" dismissal by DT.

Go Trump --

MustafaFart , 10 Oct 2016 04:58)>
The Guardian's view of the debate is a predictable one, considering the complete lack of objectivity in covering the election. Much has been made of Trump's sexist comments, yet not even a raised eyebrow at the Clinton foundation receiving tens of millions in "donations" from Saudi Arabia, a nation that bans women from driving, voting or having human freedoms.

There has been no questioning of the fact that Hillary has received millions of dollars, for "speeches" given to Wall st banks. And of course, no questioning of the millions spent by the Clintons as "hush money" to women, in order that they keep quiet about Bill's sexual proclivities. Yep, no objectivity and little attempt at unbiased reporting here.

SNAFU5001 -> BG Davis , 10 Oct 2016 05:05)>
Not everyone is a political junky and not everyone lives in a black and white world.

Telling people they are not qualified to vote because they haven't made up their minds yet is an elitist statement. One of the main reasons I refuse to vote for Hillary or Bernie is because of all the elitist people who like to demean others simply because they disagree with the progressive or neo-liberal talking points.

BehindBlurredLines , 10 Oct 2016 04:59)>
Do you want to know why Trump won tonight? It's because all Hillary has to offer is the same pre-canned answers over and over again. She comes off as less genuine than any other candidate in history and it's dispicable. It was bad in the Democratic debates and it is atrocious in the presidential debates. Is it really so hard to just speak what she is actually thinking that she just robots out the same rhetoric over and over again? It seems so.

I was going to vote for her but after this debate, the level of disgust with her is too much. Be a damn person for a change instead of this thing that makes me shudder when she opens her mouth. I just can't do it, Bernie, sorry. Trump repulses me to think of voting for but she makes me physically sick to think about voting for. They say I will be throwing my vote away to vote for a third party candidate but I just don't care. To throw it away is better than to cast it for someone I would forever regret voting for the rest of my like. That goes for the both of them.

HerrPrincip -> Stetson Meyers , 10 Oct 2016 07:59)>
Saddam Hussein was a leader who did not have WMDs and whose orchestrated removal and subsequent murder opened the door to the biggest infestation of mass-murderers and islamic terrorism in the history of the world; Gadaffi was a popular leader who had turned Libya into the most prosperous and the only truly independent Arab nation in Africa, and Putin is the democratically elected leader of his country with a wide national mandate. Neither of the three can hold the candle to the menagerie of tyrannical and maniacal baboons and banana republic chipmonks who paraded and goose-stepped through Obama White House over the past eight years.

Stay on topic. This thread is about alleged Trump's camaraderie with dictators which is now totally and permanently debunked.

RickyBastardo , 10 Oct 2016 05:17)>
It was an awful display from any conceivable point of view. There were no winners; none at all.

I'm no fan of the United States since their criminal actions around the globe post '9-11' but I actually feel some pity for it at this point. The fact that most Americans appear not to be completely sickened and ashamed by their farce of an election speaks volumes about how far their country as fallen on so very many fronts.

A very sad night for the world, but none more so than for the United States and their people.

Rich LD -> RickyBastardo , 10 Oct 2016 05:27)>
Many of us are sickened more than you may realize. The unfortunate part is the entire system in the US is rigged against its own people. We're fucked, we know it, if we try to do anything, they shit all over us with lies and propaganda and wave their corruption in our faces like a damn battle flag. It won't be long before the people finally stand up to this. Trouble is, it may already be too late...
mike_johnston , 10 Oct 2016 05:21)>
Hillary Clinton in favour of a no-fly zone in Syria, which basically means a hot war with Russia. Now, rebels are armed by Saudi Arabia amongst others. And Saudi Arabia is one of the biggest donors Clinton Foundation. Coincidence?

This is terrifying. Hillary might put sons and husbands of American women in harm's way on behalf of interests of Saudi Arabia.

This is terrifying.

merle2006 , 10 Oct 2016 05:22)>
hillary's biggest weakness in my opinion is that she is the "goldman sachs candidate". and trump was able to exploit that. trump said that he was only taking advantage of the same tax laws that hillary's campaign-financing friends take advantage of. and he said that it had been within hillary's powers to change those laws but she wouldn't because of her friends. all hillary has to do is declare that she will stop big tax avoidance and claw bag these avoided taxes and she would have the bernie sanders'
Uncle Putin , 10 Oct 2016 05:22)>
Christopher R Barron is not too far off the mark in scoring this one. Trump started the debate with the same awkward and uncomfortable manner as he finished the last one. Hillary's line of attack about Trump being unfit to be president was delivered with maximum skill and effectiveness, and Donald's rebuttal was a bit flat and floundering. Things were looking gloomy in Trumpville.

Then the debate switched to other topics and Trump landed blow after punishing blow. Hillary's non-answer to the question about whether she had public positions and private ones was (for her) uncharacteristically bizarre and rambling. Trump's Honest Abe retort was gold. He killed her on Obamacare, a real sore spot with middle class voters, pointing out that the premiums and deductibles are so high you have to get hit by a Mack truck before it actually pays off. Foreign policy, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria--all he had to do was point to 8 years of Obama and her own tenure as Secretary of State leading to the present unmitigated disaster. Our friends don't trust us and our enemies don't fear us.

On tax issues he noted she had 30 years to do something about the tax code and did nothing. Why? Because all of her billionaire donors use the same tax loopholes she accuses Trump of using, which is also why it won't change if she is elected. You can argue pro or con on everything Trump said, but there is no question that this was a much stronger debate performance from him than the first and the final question in which he complimented Hillary actually helped soften his image quite a bit and ended the night on a perfect note.

wing and some credibility truly back on her side.

finalcurtain 10h ago
Trump is the first non-establishment presidential candidate to get this far, and he landed lots of painful punches on Hillary during this debate.

Hillary hardly touched Trump.

If no more serious revelations come to light, don't be surprised if he gets a Brexit victory in one month: Americans are sick of polished elite politicians like the Clintons and Bush's.

tangibletruth 10h ago
I disagree with everyone here, every poll I've seen has had Trump on top in that debate by a majority. I'd like to see links to other polls, always welcome! I have read the CNN poll was a majority Democrat demographic, which many have stated render that poll biased. I don't know if this is still the case?

The key thing is - IS TRUMP a lesser of two evils?

Simply, in my view, YES. Because I believe a less aggressive US foreign policy is essential for global well-being in general The current war party in the white house, whose views Clinton clearly espoused tonight in her accusations, denigration and aggressive stance toward Russia, can only lead one way. It is archaic, medieval and dangerous.

If there can possibly be a turnaround in attitude from the barbaric, 1980s-style foreign policy hysterically issuing forth from US Military officials atm I would very much recommend we encourage it.

Trump did not fudge his words regarding the middle east and ISIS. He praised Russian and Syrian combat of ISIS, he stated he did not hate Russia, unlike his rival. His message was altogether one of more solidarity.

I am not a Trump butt-monkey, Putinbot or an idiot. But Clinton and her War Party are openly arming moderate rebels in Syria, fighting a two-faced phoney war in order to unseat Assad - causing a massive humanitarian disaster out there. The moderate rebels and, at one time, ISIS (I get the impression they've gone out of control now) are nothing more than mercenaries, paid for and armed out of US coffers. Can we wake up to the implications of this? Russia threatened to shoot down US aircraft in Syrian airspace the other day! Are you not alarmed by Clintons gung-ho attitude in this climate?

This is not a perspective much agreed on in the MSM, but I happen to believe it is the single most important thing in the world today.

Uncle Putin -> 123Anderson 9h ago
"He also obviously has no idea what is going on in Syria."

He said Allepo is probably already lost. There is a reality check for you.

The current administration has repeatedly taken unrealistic positions based on ideology and clung to them until the reality on the ground made them utterly untenable to hold onto. As exhibit one, does anyone remember Obama's big speech to the nation when he announced his plan to arm moderate Syrian rebels? That turned out to be one of the most ineffective flops in history, a complete waste of time, money, and resources.

The sad thing is that I remember numerous military commentators in the media who immediately predicted it would be an utter failure and they were right.

Commentator6 9h ago

Instead of a debate that was focused on Trump's vulgar comments, the debate was focused on policy issues, and despite all of Clinton's "preparation" when it came to the nuts and bolts of policy, Trump managed to not only go toe-to-toe with Clinton, he often got the best of her.

Trump needed to win tonight to stay alive. Clinton did not. Trump won, and he lives to fight another day. This race is far from over.

An accurate analysis.

The CNN Democrat commentators were shell-shocked after the debate and were trying to convince themselves and the viewers that it was a tie.

StrategyKing 9h ago
Neither Richard nor Jessica have actually given an analysis of who one the debate. Both are just rehashing their own personal opinions about Trump, and Jessica, as she usually does, threw in some complaints about men in general. Terrible journalism.

Hillary won on temperament but Trump won on the issues. He is an awful candidate, and it sucks that such a terrible candidate is the message bearer but that is what it is.

Finally, finally someone actually asked the question that had to be asked on Syria, despite all the pointless hand wringing. Those rebels, what do we actually know about them, that we are willing to go to war for them? Are they islamists? How will they govern? Do they have any popular support of any kind?

He should have also shouted out loudly when asked what are the consequences of Alleppo falling. The answer is none! There is nothing in Alleppo that is worth a single American life. If anything there might be good consequences. The civil war will end, people will go back to work and rebuilding will begin. Alleppo falling could be the best thing that happens to Syria.

And its not even the whole of Alleppo we are talking about. 2/3rds is already in govt control, Sorry but there is the bitter truth about civil wars. IF they cant come to an agreement, then the best thing that can happen is if one part wins and the fighting stops.

Trump is a desperately poor candidate, but you lot on the left are not making it easy to defeat him.
And he should have shouted

finalcurtain 10h ago
Not many people could face off against a highly skilled politician like Hillary, and win - especially when all the media and grandees have extrapolated from a "locker room" recording to woman-hater/sex pervert.

Trump showed up HRC as unexciting and mediocre. DT could still win.

Timothy Everton 10h ago
This was actually a reasonably decent debate, as far as these two candidates are concerned. Trump maintained his composure, Clinton came close to losing hers. And yes, I DID watch it.

I fear the Presidency of Hillary Clinton as I believe that she is VERY capable of initiating a nuclear war with Russia. I truly believe that for Donald Trump, this would be a last alternative and that he would insist upon speaking, rather than acting, as HRC would.

I just can not believe a word she utters. She has proven me correct with her "one position for public, and one position for private" quote. Two-faced liar.
On the other hand is Trump. There are many laws or positions he endorses which would NEVER survive the two houses of Congress needed to implement them.

HRC, on the other hand, has the "connections" which would give her the ability to do so. That scares me. She is someone. two-faced, who can not be trusted.

Puro 10h ago
You may like or loathe Trump, but it's impressive what he achieved tonight. They had him on the ropes, it was the middle of this fight and he knocked his opponent out tonight.

It was the "rumble in the jungle" all over again - Trump absorbed all kinds of punishment, he absorbed it all and then ended up in triumph. "Trump bomaye! Trump bomaye! :-)

Paul Marston 10h ago
What I found amusing was her line about keeping the high ground - immediately after making several low blows and saying he was unqualified! She claimed she never says that about other candidates, yet said it about both Obama and Sanders - and no doubt every other opponent she has faced!

This is the fundamental problem with Clinton. Because so many people despise her, she has always campaigned negatively, and apart from the virtually uncontested NY senate positions (bought by her wall street donors), she has lost each time! Now you can sling all the charges at Trump, and I will not disagree with any other them. Trump is indeed unfit to be president. However Clinton is infinitely less qualified.

Here's why. her record! She boasts of so many sponsored bills as senator, yet when you actually look at what she ACHIEVED - 3 meaningless bills - named a museum, a road and a post office! As for her SOS "achievements" are there any? The only things we can say for certain she did, ultimately she has admitted they were mistakes - experience is meaningless if you have poor judgement, and she has prove to have terrible judgement.

And ultimately at the end of the day, IF the will is there, Trump can be prevented from causing ANY damage. Clinton on the other hand has openly stated that she will cooperate with the republicans, thus only right wing conservative bills will get passed!

And as for SCOTUS picks, Obama has proven there is no guarantee of progressive picks, and AGAIN if Trump picks an awful SCOTUS judge he CAN be blocked!

So she has proven poor judgement, a proven record of incompetence, and is desperate to raise the stakes with the Russians! Can anyone explain to me how she is better in any way. Remember Trump is disgusting, but she is a war criminal - her actions should have put her in the hague yet alone the whitehouse!

But this is all moot as Clinton shills simply refuse to be honest with themselves and refuse to look at her record. I have asked elsewhere dozens of times to Clinton supporters to name a crime / charge against Trump that cannot be said against Clinton - STILL waiting.

Frankly it matters not who you vote for as they are both ubfit, but Clinton has a proven record of incompetence and war crimes whereas Trump has not. Personally it is way over time to stuff the 2 party nonsense and vote 3rd party - if they get 5% they get funding next time. Personally I

Eric Batt 10h ago
Trump today had to show that he, not the GOP leadership, was master of his base. And his base is by far the largest component of Republican voters so he is master of the party in the month before an election. He is not going to drop out and if the party wants to push that fight, Donald is going to decisively win it. His base wanted Hillary's blood and he gave it to them. In that sense he won. But winning undecideds, no. In that sense he lost.

Hillary was addressing mainly women voters according to a statistical demographic profile. Don't confront too much, stay calm and collected, and let him have it on his 2005 tape. She saw the debate as a means to finally move women, maybe especially white women, to her side. She absolutely did not need to nail down her actual base, and was out to decisively pick up undecided voters. She probably succeeded. In that sense she won. And it is by far the bigger victory. And mostly because it was already mission accomplished in the 48 hours before the debate.

In a week we will see the polling for the tape and for the debate. Hillary is going to increase her lead by 2 points if not more. And that includes the battlegrounds. And Trump will very definitely still be the candidate.

DJoandark 10h ago
Hillary's tough talk against Russia and regime change in Syria scare the crap out of me. She's talking nuclear war, and she and the media lie about Russia.

Trump was correct to point out that if the US really wanted to knock out ISIS, they'd have to join forces with Russia. That was the most intelligent thing he said all night. I will not vote for either of them. Because as much as Trump is offensive, she has a sh*t eating grin which makes me sick. I think I'll write in Vladimir Putin, as he is 'currently' along with Xi in China working to make their countries true super-powers with science and technology.

juascar 9h ago
A "pearl" from Hilarious : "Russia (when not) is hacking our mails". Then again, she kill the messenger, but don't say 'what' was the contents of those e-mails. Especially those of the pre-campaign against Sanders.
HindsightMe 9h ago
Modern politics is all about have media houses in your pocket to promote your side of the story. For the life of me i cannot believe the presidential race is still so close even though there is a clear bias against trump. As an observer i am curious to know why?
joeblow9999 9h ago
It's been rather stunning as to how far the Guardian has gone to blanket it's news with pro-hilly propaganda. The most shameful moments came when Bernie was running in the primary.

Guardian bias is bordering on the bizarre. There are few news sites reporting that Hillary won. So Trump won this debate and didn't take Anderson Coopers bate..... big deal.

I think an article on how this late comeback won't help Trump at this late stage in the election would be more interesting.

LitlBludot 9h ago
They are both disgusting human beings. Though, of the two, Hillary represents the most acute, immediate threat to humanity with her calling for a no fly zone over Syria and her neo-McCarthy Russia bashing, demonizing Putin.

The the recent events in Syria witness this threat, with the US openly protecting (supplying) the misogynist, stoneage Al Nusra in Eastern Alleppo, bombing Syrian soldiers who are actively engaged in combat against ISIS, and now bombing bridges leading to the ISIS capital of Raqqa thus preventing the advancing Syrian army from attacking ISIS.

Then you have her history -to name just a few of her callous, inhumane, and cruel in the name of the 1%- of starving hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children to death, her admiration of Henry Kissinger, her recent coup of a progressive, honest and legitimate president in Honduras and its replacement with corporate controlled puppets using death squads to kill environmentalists, journalists, etc.

She is backed by the debt slavery banksters, the planet destroying fossil fuel parasites, the fascist military industrial security prison complex and the whole corporate fascist shadow state, not to mention the MSM (including this journal). At least Trump has said this, which is much saner than any of HIlliary's comments regarding Syria, (not to mention Lybia):

""Assad is killing ISIS. Russia is killing ISIS. Iran is killing ISIS. And those three have now lined up together because of our weak policy," he said.

"I think it would be great if we got along with Russia. We could fight ISIS together," Trump had said earlier in the evening."

https://www.rt.com/usa/362184-trump-pence-syria-disagree

[Oct 10, 2016] Trump just neutralized his tape scandal and has made Hillary's emails an issue again

Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Titus Pullo October 9, 2016 at 10:49 pm

Trump just neutralized his tape scandal and has made Hillary's emails an issue again. His talking about the inner city isn't about getting the black vote, but keeping it home on election day. The 30 years bit is effective, which even for someone like me, an unrepentant leftist, made me smile and think so true.

Clinton could have sunk the knife tonight, but instead, she comes out of this more wounded than him, I believe.

[Oct 10, 2016] Hillary scrubs sexual assault pledge after allegations against Bill resurface

Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Kim Kaufman October 9, 2016 at 10:22 pm

She definitely had a weasel word response ready for the deplorable comment she made. Did they give Trump some meds to keep his temper in line?

Hillary scrubs sexual assault pledge after allegations against Bill resurface

http://nypost.com/2016/08/15/hillarys-site-edits-sexual-assault-pledge-after-rape-claims-against-bill-resurface/

[Oct 10, 2016] Is it OK for politicians to be two-faced

Oct 10, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Lambert Strether Post author October 9, 2016 at 9:54 pm

RADDATZ On Wikikeasl, you need both a public and a private position. Is it OK for politicians to be two-faced

CLINTON As I said, it was about Lincoln getting Congress getting the 13th Amendment approved. It was principled and strategic.

CLINTON But lets talk about what's really going on. It's Russian hacking. We don't know if its accurate. We have never been in a situation where an adversary is working so hard to infuence the election. They're not doing it to elect me. We deserve answers. Clinton should release tax returns.

TRUMP Caught in a lie. She lied. Now she's blaming the lie on Honest Abe. I think it would be great if we got along with Russians. We could fight ISIS together. I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia, no loans from Russia. Segues into the glories of his balance sheet [!!!]. I have no loans from the Russians, got govt work. Many of our friends took bigger deductions: Soros, Buffet, take massive deductions. I pay 100s of millions. When audit released…

[Oct 04, 2016] Hillary Clinton Willie-Hortoned Donald Trump by using Alicia Machado

The question was an obvious trap and looks like selected by Huma Abedin. Trump could decimate Hillary responding with the questin about her defence of 12 years old girl rapist, but shoose not to.
Notable quotes:
"... I've been writing here for years about the question "What makes large parts of the white working class vote for the GOP?" and my main answer is that people who are a step up from the bottom will do a lot to preserve their sense that they have someone to look down on, which racism functions socially to preserve. Social wages of whiteness, etc. ..."
"... Believe it or not, many strands of conservatism are / were critical of capitalism. If you view conservatism as wanting to preserve or reinstate a kind of aristocracy, it's pretty easy to see why. Aristocracies like hereditary lands, preserving them, etc. Conservatism has been captured by pro-capitalists for, again, historically path-dependent reasons. ..."
Oct 04, 2016 | crookedtimber.org

Rich Puchalsky 10.02.16 at 11:22 am 323

In the U.S., at least, perceived threats to social status obviously have something to do with it. I've been writing here for years about the question "What makes large parts of the white working class vote for the GOP?" and my main answer is that people who are a step up from the bottom will do a lot to preserve their sense that they have someone to look down on, which racism functions socially to preserve. Social wages of whiteness, etc.

Since you can't really do much about educating people out of racism that hasn't already been done, maybe you can do something about the "step up from the bottom" part by making society less precarious.

But whenever people here wrote something like this around the election, they were told that they only wrote this because they were white, that they only cared about white people, and that they supported white supremacy. That is the intellectual heritage that the HRC supporters here will leave behind. It's tremendously stupid and they've added nothing.

merian: "Overall, though, you need to be at least to some degree critical of capitalism to mount a coherent ecological political theory, I think."

Believe it or not, many strands of conservatism are / were critical of capitalism. If you view conservatism as wanting to preserve or reinstate a kind of aristocracy, it's pretty easy to see why. Aristocracies like hereditary lands, preserving them, etc. Conservatism has been captured by pro-capitalists for, again, historically path-dependent reasons.

[Oct 02, 2016] The First Presidential Debate

Notable quotes:
"... If the goal for both candidates was to avoid self-inflicted wounds , Clinton certainly had the better showing. Trump showed how easily he could be baited and distracted by criticism ..."
"... the only attack on Clinton that really landed was when he hit her on her cynical maneuvering on TPP, and that attack worked because it happened to be true and reminded voters why Clinton isn't trustworthy, but the vast majority of Americans don't know or care about TPP and so the effect of this attack will likely be minimal. ..."
"... Remarkably, Trump mostly failed to use Clinton's foreign policy record against her, and he spent more of his time having to clarify or defend his own "positions" with little success. ..."
"... He mentioned the Libyan war only in passing, but never even tried to explain why Clinton was responsible for any of it. Clinton was able to deflect this by pointing out that Trump backed intervention in Libya, and that was the end of it. Foreign policy is one of Clinton's biggest liabilities and one of the most obvious ways to question her judgment, but Trump isn't prepared enough to talk about policy to use it against her. ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | The American Conservative

Ross Douthat's assessment of last night's debate makes sense:

So she won the debate on points, and probably won it in the court of public opinion, and in the process eased liberal anxiety and pushed the race back toward its "Hillary by four" equilibrium.

What she didn't do, however, was goad Trump into a true meltdown or knock him out with a truly devastating attack.

If the goal for both candidates was to avoid self-inflicted wounds, Clinton certainly had the better showing. Trump showed how easily he could be baited and distracted by criticism, and even when he was gesturing in the direction of talking about policy he fell back on many of his worst arguments (e.g., "take the oil," inane complaints about the nuclear deal, etc.). As I recall, the only attack on Clinton that really landed was when he hit her on her cynical maneuvering on TPP, and that attack worked because it happened to be true and reminded voters why Clinton isn't trustworthy, but the vast majority of Americans don't know or care about TPP and so the effect of this attack will likely be minimal.

Remarkably, Trump mostly failed to use Clinton's foreign policy record against her, and he spent more of his time having to clarify or defend his own "positions" with little success.

He mentioned the Libyan war only in passing, but never even tried to explain why Clinton was responsible for any of it. Clinton was able to deflect this by pointing out that Trump backed intervention in Libya, and that was the end of it. Foreign policy is one of Clinton's biggest liabilities and one of the most obvious ways to question her judgment, but Trump isn't prepared enough to talk about policy to use it against her.

Clinton also avoided having to say very much about her position on what should be done in Syria. The candidates were never asked about it, and she mentioned the country briefly as part of an answer about the war on ISIS. Overall, the foreign policy section of the debate touched on only a handful of issues, most of which were related to U.S. policies in the Near East. If anyone wanted to know about something other than the candidates' views on Iran and Russia, last night's debate wouldn't have provided many answers.

[Oct 01, 2016] "They had somebody modulating the microphone, so when I was speaking, the mike would go up and down," Mr. Trump said. "I spent 50 percent of my thought process working the mike."

Oct 01, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com

Fred C. Dobbs : September 30, 2016 at 05:36 PM

(Aha!)

Actually, a Malfunction Did Affect Donald Trump's
Voice at the Debate http://nyti.ms/2cGN1m8
NYT - NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and PATRICK HEALY - SEPT. 30

The Commission on Presidential Debates said Friday that the first debate on Monday was marred by an unspecified technical malfunction that affected the volume of Mr. Trump's voice in the debate hall.

Mr. Trump complained after the debate that the event's organizers had given him a "defective mike," contributing to his widely panned performance against Hillary Clinton. Mrs. Clinton lampooned Mr. Trump's claim, telling reporters on her campaign plane, "Anybody who complains about the microphone is not having a good night."

Mr. Trump was clearly audible to the television audience. And there is no evidence of sabotage. But it turns out he was on to something.

"Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," the commission said in its statement.

The commission, a nonprofit organization that sponsors the presidential debates, released no other information about the malfunction, including how it was discovered, which equipment was to blame, or why the problem was admitted to only on Friday, four days after the debate.

Reached by phone, a member of the commission's media staff said she was not authorized to speak about the matter.

Some members of the audience, held at Hofstra University in New York, recalled in interviews that the amplification of Mr. Trump's voice was at times significantly lower than that for Mrs. Clinton. And at times Mr. Trump appeared to be hunching down to get his face closer to his microphone.

Zeke Miller, a reporter for Time Magazine who attended the debate, mentioned the difference on Monday in a report to the traveling press pool for Mr. Trump. From his vantage point, Mr. Miller wrote, Mr. Trump was sometimes "a little quieter" than Mrs. Clinton.

In an interview, Mr. Trump said he had tested out the audio system two hours before the event and found it "flawless." Only during the debate did he notice the problem, Mr. Trump said, and he tried to compensate by leaning down more closely to the microphone. He complained that the changing volume had distracted him and alleged again that someone had created the problem deliberately.

"They had somebody modulating the microphone, so when I was speaking, the mike would go up and down," Mr. Trump said. "I spent 50 percent of my thought process working the mike." ...

[Oct 01, 2016] Donald is at least pointing out the problem and proposing tax and tariff measures to partially restore manufacturing jobs to the Rust Belt. Hillary offers platitudes

Notable quotes:
"... Clinton was told over eight years ago that a huge number of Americans are in pain with good reason. See John Edwards' Two Americas… She was ignoring it then, she planned on ignoring it again. Unfortunately Trump came along and recognized the pain. Sanders felt it. Clinton doesn't feel diddly except her own personal greed, ambition, entitlement, and anger at anyone who thinks her being a public servant means actually working in the public interest not her own. ..."
"... Yeah but Donald is at least pointing out the problem and proposing tax and tariff measures to partially restore manufacturing jobs to the Rust Belt. Hillary offers platitudes and attacks on Donald as her solution to the Dispossessed Americans. ..."
"... The Republican party is almost a monolith on core doctrine. Let's see Congressional Republicans move to upend the current trade regime or, indeed, give any indication. ..."
"... These 2 utterly wretched candidates do not cancel out each others' flaws at all. They both stink like rotten meat. The Trump-cheerleading that now typifies this comments section is as pitiable as the slavish Hillary boosting crap that tars the pages of the New York Times. ..."
"... It's not cheerleading. It's the reasonable assessment that Trump MIGHT be a disaster, but Clinton WILL be a disaster. ..."
"... OK. You're comparing a heel to a known mass murderer who took petty bribes to destroy entire countries. I don't really understand how you arrived at your conclusion, but ok. ..."
www.nakedcapitalism.com

Pat October 1, 2016 at 12:08 pm

Clinton was told over eight years ago that a huge number of Americans are in pain with good reason. See John Edwards' Two Americas… She was ignoring it then, she planned on ignoring it again. Unfortunately Trump came along and recognized the pain. Sanders felt it. Clinton doesn't feel diddly except her own personal greed, ambition, entitlement, and anger at anyone who thinks her being a public servant means actually working in the public interest not her own.

For that alone she needs to be dropped kicked into obscurity and a future where she and Bill really do find out what being broke and looking forward to the Social Security Check is like.

nycTerrierist October 1, 2016 at 3:20 pm

Amen

Dave October 1, 2016 at 12:19 pm

Yeah but Donald is at least pointing out the problem and proposing tax and tariff measures to partially restore manufacturing jobs to the Rust Belt. Hillary offers platitudes and attacks on Donald as her solution to the Dispossessed Americans.

Science Officer Smirnoff October 1, 2016 at 3:05 pm

He proposes, but who disposes?

If we had journalism instead of Poodledom there would be first a laying out of what are presidential powers-given the limited possibilities of who controls the other branches of government. And secondly, a replay of recent history of the two parties' actions on the major issues affecting the common good (which admittedly doesn't exist for libertarians and Thatcherites).

The Republican party is almost a monolith on core doctrine. Let's see Congressional Republicans move to upend the current trade regime or, indeed, give any indication.

FluffytheObeseCat October 1, 2016 at 4:48 pm

Donald Trump is not a "much better candidate" than Clinton. More's the pity. The Donald is a heel; a frivolous egotist who has screwed up many times over the decades. His money and showman's cunning allowed him to prosper despite all the screw overs and screw ups. He's been a heel for decades and there is no likelihood he'll improve if he attains high office. Hillary Clinton - by contrast, not - is a supercilious elitist with more baggage than the cargo compartment of a fully loaded 747.

These 2 utterly wretched candidates do not cancel out each others' flaws at all. They both stink like rotten meat. The Trump-cheerleading that now typifies this comments section is as pitiable as the slavish Hillary boosting crap that tars the pages of the New York Times.

Plenue October 1, 2016 at 5:01 pm

It's not cheerleading. It's the reasonable assessment that Trump MIGHT be a disaster, but Clinton WILL be a disaster.

jgordon October 1, 2016 at 5:07 pm

OK. You're comparing a heel to a known mass murderer who took petty bribes to destroy entire countries. I don't really understand how you arrived at your conclusion, but ok.

[Sep 30, 2016] Neoliberal media are just stenographers for the White House and the Clinton campaign

Notable quotes:
"... This means the "default position" of the Clinton campaign and her friendly media is, "if there's something wrong in the world, criticize George W. Bush." ..."
"... "Why not? It worked for Obama. Maybe it will work for her as well," Bolton said. "And I think the fact that the media are aiding and abetting this approach shouldn't surprise anybody. I think no matter who the Republican nominee was this year, the media were going to be – as the Wall Street Journal has so aptly called them – stenographers for the White House and the Clinton campaign. And that's exactly what they're doing." ..."
"... Most people watching 90 minutes of a debate like that don't score it on this debating point, or that debating point. They look at the entire thing. They want to know about the character of the people. And I think the fact that Trump was there for 90 minutes and held his own, or more than, in a format that Hillary Clinton has been familiar with since she was in law school, accomplished what he needed to accomplish. ..."
Sep 30, 2016 | www.breitbart.com
"I think it's entirely understandable that what Clinton will try to do is avoid criticizing Obama, because she desperately needs to recreate the Obama coalition on November the 8th," said Bolton. "She has gone out of her way, including in her 600-page-long tedious memoir about her days at the State Department, failing to distance herself from Obama."

This means the "default position" of the Clinton campaign and her friendly media is, "if there's something wrong in the world, criticize George W. Bush."

"Why not? It worked for Obama. Maybe it will work for her as well," Bolton said. "And I think the fact that the media are aiding and abetting this approach shouldn't surprise anybody. I think no matter who the Republican nominee was this year, the media were going to be – as the Wall Street Journal has so aptly called them – stenographers for the White House and the Clinton campaign. And that's exactly what they're doing."

Bolton thought Trump "did what he needed to do" at the first presidential debate:

Most people watching 90 minutes of a debate like that don't score it on this debating point, or that debating point. They look at the entire thing. They want to know about the character of the people. And I think the fact that Trump was there for 90 minutes and held his own, or more than, in a format that Hillary Clinton has been familiar with since she was in law school, accomplished what he needed to accomplish.

My critique of his performance would be that he missed opportunities. For example, you mentioned the foreign policy section, when they were asked about cyber warfare, and the dangers to the United States of hacking, and that gave Clinton a chance to give a little college-type lecture on Russia – by the way, omitting China, Iran, North Korea, and others – I thought at that point Trump could have talked about her email homebrew server for his entire time, and just drilled that point home.

But, you know, people at home aren't sitting there grading on that basis. I think the second debate, and the third debate, will be very different, and those – particularly in the media – who now confidently predict the outcome of the election, based on their take of this debate, are smoking something.

...Listen to the full audio of Bolton's interview above.

[Sep 28, 2016] Hillary Clinton's immoral, illegal, stupid enthusiasm for wars to effectuate regime change by Bruce Fein

Notable quotes:
"... As secretary of state in 2011, Mrs. Clinton vocally supported the war against Libya to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi on the heels of his abandonment of weapons of mass destruction. She boasted with the dripping arrogance of Julius Caesar after Gaddafi's death: "We came, we saw, he died." She insisted that regime change in Libya was for humanitarian purposes. She agreed with President Barack Obama that to be faithful to "who we are," we must overthrow governments that are oppressing their citizens by force and violence. ..."
"... Like the French Bourbons who forgot nothing and learned nothing, Mrs. Clinton eagerness to initiate wars for regime change was undiminished by the Iraq and Libya debacles. She urged war against Syria to oust President Bashar al-Assad. She confidently insinuated that we could transform Syria into a flourishing democracy sans James Madisons, George Washingtons or Thomas Jeffersons because of our unique nation-building genius. ..."
"... Wars for regime change are immoral. We have not been tasked by a Supreme Being to appraise foreign nations like a schoolmarm and to invade those to whom we have superciliously assigned a failing grade. ..."
"... Wars for regime change also violate international law. Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter generally prohibits "the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state…." Article 51 creates a narrow exception for wars in self-defense "if an armed attack occurs…." Regime change wars do not fit that narrow exception. ..."
"... Mrs. Clinton underscores in her memoir that she would rather be "caught trying" something kinetic than to try masterly inactivity like Fabius Maximus. She would rather be criticized for fighting too many wars for regime change than too few. She is the war hawks' dream candidate. ..."
Sep 19, 2016 | Washington Times

Democratic nominee is war hawks' dream candidate

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton champions wars to effectuate regime change. Their immorality, illegality and stupidity do not diminish Mrs. Clinton's enthusiasm for treating independent nations as serfs of the United States.

As first aady, she warmly supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which made it the policy of the Unites States to overthrow Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. As United States Senator, she invoked the 1998 policy in voting for the 2002 Authorization to Use Military Force Against Iraq. Saddam's successors proved a cure worse than the disease. Shiite dominated governments allied with Iran, oppressed Sunnis, Kurds, and Turkmen, and created a power vacuum that gave birth to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Our national security has been weakened.

As secretary of state in 2011, Mrs. Clinton vocally supported the war against Libya to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi on the heels of his abandonment of weapons of mass destruction. She boasted with the dripping arrogance of Julius Caesar after Gaddafi's death: "We came, we saw, he died." She insisted that regime change in Libya was for humanitarian purposes. She agreed with President Barack Obama that to be faithful to "who we are," we must overthrow governments that are oppressing their citizens by force and violence.

Libya predictably descended into dystopia after Gaddafi's murder. (It had no democratic cultural, historical, or philosophical credentials.) Tribal militias proliferated. Competing governments emerged. ISIS entered into the power vacuum in Sirte, which has required the return of United States military forces in Libya. Terrorists murdered our Ambassador and three other Americans in Benghazi. Gaddafi's conventional weapons were looted and spread throughout the Middle East. Hundreds of thousands of refugees have fled and are continuing to flee Libyan shores for Europe. North Korea and Iran hardened their nuclear ambitions to avoid Gaddafi's grisly fate. Our national security has been weakened.

Like the French Bourbons who forgot nothing and learned nothing, Mrs. Clinton eagerness to initiate wars for regime change was undiminished by the Iraq and Libya debacles. She urged war against Syria to oust President Bashar al-Assad. She confidently insinuated that we could transform Syria into a flourishing democracy sans James Madisons, George Washingtons or Thomas Jeffersons because of our unique nation-building genius.

She forgot South Sudan. We midwifed its independence in 2011. Despite our hopes and prayers, the new nation descended into a gruesome ongoing civil war including child soldiers between the Dinka led by President Salva Kiir and the Nuer led by former Vice President Riek Machar. More than 50,000 have died, more than 2.2 million have been displaced, and a harrowing number have been murdered, tortured or raped. South Sudan epitomizes our nation-building incompetence.

Wars for regime change are immoral. We have not been tasked by a Supreme Being to appraise foreign nations like a schoolmarm and to invade those to whom we have superciliously assigned a failing grade. As Jesus sermonized in Matthew 7: 1-3:

"Judge not, that ye be not judged.

"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?"

Thus, Thomas Jefferson wrote to President James Monroe in 1823: "The presumption of dictating to an independent nation the form of its government is so arrogant, so atrocious, that indignation as well as moral sentiment enlists all our partialities and prayers in favor of one and our equal execrations against the other."

Wars for regime change also violate international law. Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter generally prohibits "the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state…." Article 51 creates a narrow exception for wars in self-defense "if an armed attack occurs…." Regime change wars do not fit that narrow exception.

They are also stupid, like playing Russian roulette. We lack the wisdom necessary to insure that successor regimes will strengthen rather than weaken our national security taking into account, among other things, the staggering military and financial costs of propping up corrupt, incompetent, and unpopular governments.

Mrs. Clinton underscores in her memoir that she would rather be "caught trying" something kinetic than to try masterly inactivity like Fabius Maximus. She would rather be criticized for fighting too many wars for regime change than too few. She is the war hawks' dream candidate.

[Sep 27, 2016] Clinton-Trump debate shows emptiness, vapidity of US political election cycle

Notable quotes:
"... "They have a few pro-Trump voices, but pretty much the CNN as a network is for Clinton – just like Fox is for Trump. They are not really media outlets; they are echo chambers for the respective political campaign," ..."
"... "The debate showed how vapid, how sensationalized, how empty the American political election cycle is – very expensive, but very long, and very empty. Both of them tried to outdo each other to show who had more support from the generals and admirals. It is not a good harbinger of where things are going in terms of American politics," ..."
"... "unwitting agent" ..."
"... "US national security." ..."
"... "The attack on Russia, the attempt to blame Russia for all things, including for the hack of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] files that showed the DNC was violating its own rules and trying to tilt the election for Clinton, which happened on the first day of the Democratic national convention. Russia became a convenient punching bag, so that the Democratic Party could divert attention from its own wrongdoing. But it's manifested itself into something more than just a diversion," ..."
"... "Clinton has the support of all of the neoconservatives: Robert Kagan, husband of Victoria Nuland; a hundred of Republican foreign policy elites. I think they represent the mainstream Washington consensus, which is the consensus of the military industrial complex, which wants to incentivize American public opposition or even hatred toward Russia as a pretext for building up the military armaments business. The expansion or escalation of tension with Russia is very good for the arms business, very good for the military industrial complex. So it is not just electoral politics. I think this is the Hillary Clinton presidency we see in the making. If she is elected, I think this bodes very badly for US- Russian relations," ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | www.rt.com

RT Op-Edge

The debate has shown how sensationalized, vapid and empty the US election cycle is, said Brian Becker, from the anti-war Answer Coalition, adding that the candidates' attempts to outdo each other on military support is not a good harbinger for US politics.

A CNN/ORC poll shows that majority of voters feel Hillary Clinton won Monday night's debate over Donald Trump.

According to Brian Becker of the anti-war Answer Coalition, one cannot judge who won by CNN polls as it has been actively campaigning for Clinton.

"They have a few pro-Trump voices, but pretty much the CNN as a network is for Clinton – just like Fox is for Trump. They are not really media outlets; they are echo chambers for the respective political campaign," he told RT.

"The debate showed how vapid, how sensationalized, how empty the American political election cycle is – very expensive, but very long, and very empty. Both of them tried to outdo each other to show who had more support from the generals and admirals. It is not a good harbinger of where things are going in terms of American politics," Becker said.

Ahead of the election, Clinton and her supporters have been repeatedly using anti-Russia rhetoric and accusing Trump of being "unwitting agent" of President Putin and posing a threat to "US national security." On Monday, Clinton played her Russian card again to attack her opponent.

In Becker's view, it's an attempt to divert public attention from the party's own wrongdoing and, also, the escalation of tensions with Moscow will only benefit the US military industrial complex who supports Clinton.

"The attack on Russia, the attempt to blame Russia for all things, including for the hack of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] files that showed the DNC was violating its own rules and trying to tilt the election for Clinton, which happened on the first day of the Democratic national convention. Russia became a convenient punching bag, so that the Democratic Party could divert attention from its own wrongdoing. But it's manifested itself into something more than just a diversion," he said.

"Clinton has the support of all of the neoconservatives: Robert Kagan, husband of Victoria Nuland; a hundred of Republican foreign policy elites. I think they represent the mainstream Washington consensus, which is the consensus of the military industrial complex, which wants to incentivize American public opposition or even hatred toward Russia as a pretext for building up the military armaments business. The expansion or escalation of tension with Russia is very good for the arms business, very good for the military industrial complex. So it is not just electoral politics. I think this is the Hillary Clinton presidency we see in the making. If she is elected, I think this bodes very badly for US- Russian relations," Becker added.

.... .... ...

[Sep 27, 2016] Presidential Debate Part 1 Achieving prosperity in the U.S. economy - YouTube

Sep 27, 2016 | www.youtube.com
Jim Bob 4 hours ago
I hate how shes smiling and at one part almost laughed at something serious like this is a game. she never directly responds to what lester or trump asks, but you see trump directly answering or responding to what she asks. One thing i want to know is, but will never know, does she want to destroy this country or is she so ignorant that she will destroy it by trying to help. Her views are wrong on economy, there may be somethings that i will agree with her but when it comes to economy she will wreck this country.
somuchkooleronline. 30 minutes ago
If Hillary is in the White House then we may as well has the Islamic flag above it instead of the stars & stripes. Craigslist has ads for protesters to be paid to show where there's a Trump rally to harass. In the paper a few months back a man woke to find windows of his car bashed in. The car had a Trump sticker. The anti Trump climate in networks NBC & MSNBC & CNN & Morning CBS. On YouTube Hillary is bringing 65K rufugees to US next year.
dag let 7 hours ago
This debate sealed it. I'm voting trump. Hillary just came across as an emotionless conniving snake. Trump at least looked somewhat human.

[Sep 27, 2016] I don't think Trump was vastly different in the R primary debates (he was unfocused and narcissistic then as well), but I always suspected somehow that he would play softball rather than hardball when it came to the REAL showdown with Clinton

Notable quotes:
"... Yes, people kept saying how they wish Trump would win the R primaries because it would be so exciting when he took his attack to Hillary and gave her what she may very well deserve. And I was always "I'll believe it when I see it, not until then". ..."
"... May be… He could easily bury her, but preferred not to. He was definitely unprepared. Also he might be afraid of Clinton clan. ..."
"... He's 70 years old and can be knocked off balance defending !insults! about a beauty queen. ..."
www.nakedcapitalism.com

jrs

Yes, people kept saying how they wish Trump would win the R primaries because it would be so exciting when he took his attack to Hillary and gave her what she may very well deserve. And I was always "I'll believe it when I see it, not until then".

I don't think Trump was vastly different in the R primary debates (he was unfocused and narcissistic then as well), but I always suspected somehow that he would play softball rather than hardball when it came to the REAL showdown with Clinton (no "little Rubio" here). Well I told ya so. Although there are 3 more debates so I guess I could still be proved wrong. But it's looking like I told you so.

What so great or even fun and entertaining about Trump again? These circuses are completely boring!!! Well he's not Clinton I suppose there is always that.

----

I guess the 10% think they got there by doing well on tests and not sheer luck and choosing the right parents. Hmm well screw em.

likbez

"I have seen people say he is saving it….?dry powder?"

May be… He could easily bury her, but preferred not to. He was definitely unprepared. Also he might be afraid of Clinton clan.

"A lot of people check out after the first 30 minutes of one debate and never come back."

True -- It was pretty disgusting performance on both sides.

ChiGal in Carolina

Just had my first in-person encounter with an apparent Trump supporter, 40ish lifeguard at the community pool down here. He was very pleased with last night's debate, thought Trump showed he has self-control and was generally presidential (!).

All my friends and family thought Clinton "won" but it's not gonna matter.

charles leseau

He's 70 years old and can be knocked off balance defending !insults! about a beauty queen.

Amen. It takes very little wit to point out immediately how irrelevant such a thing is to a presidential debate, but instead he walked right into it like a rattled kid who doesn't think half a second before responding.

[Sep 27, 2016] Hillary enters, as the Woman in Red. The stains of Iraq, Libya, Honduras, Syria and Yemen.

Sep 27, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Carolinian September 27, 2016 at 7:12 pm

Here's St. Clair's liveblog of the big debate. Sampler

+ Lester Holt needs to be extremely cautious tonight. Lots of police and armed security in the debate hall. No sudden movements. Holt must keep his hands firmly on the podium at all times.

+ Bill and Melania shake hands at center stage. Bill whispers something in her ear. I think it was: "Text me."

+ No national anthem. Kaepernick wins!

+ Hillary enters, as the Woman in Red. The stains of Iraq, Libya, Honduras, Syria and Yemen.

Etc.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/27/idiot-winds-at-hofstra/

[Sep 27, 2016] I have seen people say he is saving it for later

www.nakedcapitalism.com

fresno dan September 27, 2016 at 4:07 pm

"After a shaky start, Clinton was mostly prepared, disciplined, and methodical in her attacks. By contrast, after landing some early blows on trade, Trump was mostly winging it" [NBC]. That's how it felt to me. Of course, 10%-ers like preparation. Preparation leads to passing your test! But in this case, they are right to do so.

====================================================
Trump could have brought up:

I have seen people say he is saving it….?dry powder? A lot of people check out after the first 30 minutes of one debate and never come back.
And I'm really into it – and I doubt I will waste my time again. Even though I am a big believer in judging people/politicians by what they do and not what they say, Trump's immaturity has frayed my last nerve. He's 70 years old and can be knocked off balance defending !insults! about a beauty queen.

[Sep 27, 2016] No chief executive at the nation's 100 largest companies had donated to Republican Donald Trump's presidential campaign through August,

Notable quotes:
"... Should Trump succeed in renegotiating US trade deals, corporations - currently at their most indebted level in history - will be deprived of revenues to service their debts. Some will default. ..."
"... Meanwhile, realizing whatever benefits accrue from more domestic production takes time and capital to construct plants. That's a problem, when corporate leverage already is too high. ..."
"... Most likely, the Business Roundtable will sit down for The Talk with Trump, and his wacky promises to restructure the global trade system will quickly be forgotten. ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
Jim Haygood September 27, 2016 at 3:47 pm

It's unanimous:

No chief executive at the nation's 100 largest companies had donated to Republican Donald Trump's presidential campaign through August, a sharp reversal from 2012, when nearly a third of Fortune 100 CEOs supported Mitt Romney.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/no-fortune-100-ceos-back-republican-donald-trump-1474671842

One executive is quoted taking offense at Trump's ethnic slurs. But that doesn't explain the complete unanimity. What does explain it: overseas sales account for a third of large companies' revenues. Chart:

http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/559eac5969bedd0d06679458-1200-900/cotd-sp500-foreign-revenue.png

Should Trump succeed in renegotiating US trade deals, corporations - currently at their most indebted level in history - will be deprived of revenues to service their debts. Some will default.

Meanwhile, realizing whatever benefits accrue from more domestic production takes time and capital to construct plants. That's a problem, when corporate leverage already is too high.

Most likely, the Business Roundtable will sit down for The Talk with Trump, and his wacky promises to restructure the global trade system will quickly be forgotten.

If Donnie's serious, then he's Herbert Hoover II, and the long-suffering Dr Hussman becomes a billionaire after the Crash Heard Round the World.

[Sep 27, 2016] Trump supporters will not be converted

Notable quotes:
"... This is an impossible task. She is a war criminal, a stanch neoliberal (like her husband, who sold Democratic Party to Wall Street) and unrepentant neocon. ..."
"... My feel is that Democrats lost the support of rank and file union members in this election cycle. Serial betrays starting from Bill Clinton "triangulation" and "third way" scams finally got under the skin of workers and they do not any longer consider Democratic Party as a political entity representing their interests. And financial oligarchy and professional classes voters are not numerous enough to secure the victory. ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | economistsview.typepad.com

Chris G : September 27, 2016 at 07:59 AM

Trump supporters will not be converted. What we need to do is 1) get people who lean Clinton to show up and vote for her and 2) convince fence-sitters that she's the better choice and to show up and vote for her. Towards that end, we need to establish what's important to them: policy positions, nice clothes, likes dogs? Find out what appeals to THEM, not necessarily you, and if Clinton has those traits even a little bit then make the pitch for her based on those traits. Engage those voters. Don't just speculate on what might or should appeal to them. Ask them what is important to them and ASK FOR THEIR VOTE!
RC AKA Darryl, Ron said in reply to Chris G ... , September 27, 2016 at 12:52 PM
I have come across a few Trump supporters in my travels and what they all have in common is what they have to say about Hillary, while about Trump they are mostly mute.
Chris G -> RC AKA Darryl, Ron... , September 27, 2016 at 01:55 PM
Hillary hate is strong.* It's not as widespread in eastern MA as it is in other parts of the country but where it exists it looks like it's just as intense.

*There's no intellectual consistency to it. It's visceral.

likbez -> Chris G ... , -1
"convince fence-sitters that she's the better choice and to show up and vote for her"

This is an impossible task. She is a war criminal, a stanch neoliberal (like her husband, who sold Democratic Party to Wall Street) and unrepentant neocon.

Trump might be a crook and as bad as she is, but in a larger scale of things he did not committed the crimes she committed. Yet. And at least on the surface he is against neoliberal globalization.

My feel is that Democrats lost the support of rank and file union members in this election cycle. Serial betrays starting from Bill Clinton "triangulation" and "third way" scams finally got under the skin of workers and they do not any longer consider Democratic Party as a political entity representing their interests. And financial oligarchy and professional classes voters are not numerous enough to secure the victory.

And that might well spells doom for Demorats.

On the other hand Trump could bury Clinton but choose do not even touch her most vulnerable points (Iraq war vote, emailgate, Libya, Clinton Foundation scam. health issues, Bill Clinton "legacy"). Is he afraid of something or just saving the shots ? Also he looked completely unprepared. Clinton relied on notes and pre-defined gambits, while Trump relied on intuition. It did not play well for him.

[Sep 27, 2016] Personally, I came out of this feeling more sympathetic to Trump as a person, believe it or not.

Notable quotes:
"... Personally, I came out of this feeling more sympathetic to Trump as a person, believe it or not. I think he genuinely sees the infrastructural decay and it frosts him. ..."
"... Same with "you had 30 years to solve it." Undeniably true; Clinton's whole "let's build on our success" schtick is such a steaming lot of 10%-er-ness. But if Trump wants to make this election a referendum on the political class, he's going to have to do a lot better than this ..."
"... Hillary gave no indication she is going to change the course we are on now; in fact, reading between the lines, she thinks things are going great and there is no reason to change anything. ..."
"... I think there is a better chance that Trump will actually try to fix things, but tax policy and several other things did not give me great hope that he has any idea how to fix things, or will learn & adapt quickly enough. On the plus side, some people talk better than they deliver; some people deliver better than they talk. At least there's a chance he's one of the latter. ..."
"... I can't find where he would refuse "trade deals", only ones "These Morons running things" have negotiated. I'm betting he would push them with minor changes, as will HRC. ISDS is a foregone conclusion, with either. Jesus, one of his advisors is Larry f'n Kudlow. If the regulars here are not appalled by the guys he has surrounded himself with, I sure am. I can see it coming… ..."
"... I think Trump's probably serious about trade. But if I understand the structural issues correctly, it doesn't really matter whether he is serious or not. Apparently the Republican base is now strongly opposed to free trade. ..."
"... If my assessment is correct, TPP dies with a Trump win. There isn't an option to reopen negotiations, is there? A brand new "Trump style" treaty would take years to negotiate, and he has "one term" written all over him. This also would kill TISA, right? Is it technically contingent on TPP passing first? ..."
"... The Democrats in opposition will be just as feckless as the Republicans have been effective. ..."
"... One particular provision of TISA is as bad as anything in TPP (bar ISDS) and that is the prohibition on remunicipalization of privatized public resources. Governments would not be allowed to take back things such as British Rail that have been sold off to the private sector, and would be prohibited from nationalizing any other public good now in private hands. It's another hit to national sovereignty. ..."
"... HRC, you knew from the beginning, who she was tied to/advised by/paid for by. She is a "known known". We are all seeking to know what or who DT represents, as he is harder to pin down. ..."
"... I don't think Clinton won every category just most. I think Trump won on "there is no evidence Russia hacked the DNC". ..."
"... How are we gonna survive 4 years with either of them at the helm? ..."
"... That was my take exactly. Since I don't honestly think Stein is going to win, and I think Johnson might be worse than either of these, I was hoping one of them would give me a reason to feel optimistic that they would do a decent job. They … both failed horribly. ..."
"... What universe are they living in? Half of these people used to be Bernie supporters. Are people that easily manipulated? Did I used to be that easily manipulated? Or have I gone completely insane now. This was some kind of masterful performance? She mouthed a lot of decent sounding platitudes with no specifics re: policy (while everyone praises her for specifics, and I think she championed the ideas of specifics themselves) while doing a decent but not great job of hitting Trump on some areas where he's very vulnerable. ..."
"... He did a great job finding areas where she's vulnerable, but a terrible job of hitting her on them. ..."
"... "Are people that easily manipulated?" Yes. Was I that easily manipulated? Probably. Don't feel bad though most of us were naïve enough to believe the BS for at least some period of time. ..."
"... Uh it's scripted reality TV. The "debates" are vetted and agreed upon by the two parties who sponsored the darn thing via their little pretend front group. Anyone, at this point, who thinks these things matter is fooling themselves. It's a 90 minute infomercial, so if you find infomercials masterful then I guess. ..."
"... Thank you for pointing out that as usual, the unconstitutional and illegitimate two-party duopoly has excluded other candidates who will be on the ballot. Who exactly gave them this privilege of exclusion? ..."
"... Private enterprise, Jim. You can always put up the money for third party candidates to debate on prime time. Thought that was how the market "works". ..."
"... I disagree strongly that Trump is incoherent; I saw him in Bangor. What he is, is discursive and improvisational. He has his main points that he always ..."
"... However, that style doesn't work for him in this debate. He doesn't get to determine the structure, there's no time in a two minute answer to do the kind of excursions he likes to do, and the crowd was told not to react. ..."
"... The format works very much against Trump, and very much for Clinton. Delivering bullet points successfully is a marker that a candidate is president-y. Considering what PowerPoint has done to the Pentagon, that might not be such a great idea, but it is what it is and we are where we are. ..."
"... I'm surprised that no one mentioned the one best line to the non political junkie. They HATE political commercials. He nailed her on spending Millions attacking him and he came across gentlemanly saying he wouldn't / hasn't done that to her. ..."
"... Honestly, I've seen 5 years olds who could resist the bait better than Trump… ..."
"... I don't know why this is surprising, Trump is the narcissist he is regardless of what people want to project on him. Of course none of that makes Clinton any better. Whether it's effective, eh who knows, if it's authoritarians voting for him maybe that is what they like, but I don't think there are enough of them for him to win on that alone. If people are just casting random angry votes for anything but the status quo then maybe. ..."
"... I disagree. I think both candidates are isolated within elite bubbles, leading to behaviors we consider narcissistic (armchair diagnosis, when you think about it. I mean, "I'm with her….") ..."
"... So which one is the Grandiose and the other an Insecure type ..."
"... ….Did anyone else notice how consistently Hillary looked down at the podium? I believe she was being fed "Cliff Notes" ON AN IPAD by her staff re every topic that was bought up….she was ALWAYS looking down and, I assume she was being fed CUES AND WORDS OR PHRASES that she should use….she not only looked down a lot before the time she was supposed to speak but also looked down a lot during her responses…… ..."
"... OTOH, Trump was "winging it" and "shooting from the hip"…..Hillary won because the notes kept her on track….If trump had done any serious prep and could take advice, he could have destroyed her…But, he doesn't do prep, so he can't effectively respond……. ..."
"... Hillary's closing comments were stronger, but by then I don't think their were many left watching who were "Persuadables"….those of us left were "political junkies" hoping for a last lap NASCAR worthy Candidate Crash….. ..."
"... I think Trump had the opportunity to win the debate handed to him on a silver platter by Hillary, but his failure to Prepare and Do the Little Things that would have helped him be ready for her totally expected responses/statements/stalking points cost him dearly….. ..."
"... He remains the Rich Guy, who does what he wants….. She remains the Robotic Gal, who will probably get what she wants…. ..."
"... Yes she was looking down a lot. Were they allowed to have iPads to look at? ..."
"... I think one of the CBS commentators said that Hillary appeared to be using notes. She did look down a lot, and I also thought she seemed unusually subdued. At times she appeared to look sleepy and bored. I don't think this "debate" changed anyone's mind. I think Trump was trying to "dial it back", and he did miss several opportunities to zing Clinton. It did confirm one thing for me – we're all screwed. ..."
"... I don't think in the great scheme of things this matters much. If there was an iPad and it worked for Clinton, then why the heck didn't the Trump team give their guy an equivalent advantage? ..."
"... Two impressions, on the bus where I could just hear them, it was pretty equal. Both spouted nonsense and both had decent points regarding the other. Home where I had visuals, before I switched, she looked relaxed and yes healthy. She even appeared amused by him.He was flustered and floundering. There were at least two opportunities where he could have landed blows on her policies which he lost by being defensive. His judgment is better than her's, but that is an incredibly low bar. Based on 2, she won. ..."
"... Ironic that in this post-democratic world I watched my first political debate ever. Give the credit to the great entertainer: Donald Trump. Problem was: he wasn't the least bit entertaining tonight. I thought Clinton did well, however she is playing a losing hand. Trump is on the right side of all the issues that matter. Unfortunately(for everyone) the only reality Clinton and the entire western political establishment cares about is how many of the 1% will pay $500 a plate for a dinner and a speech. ..."
"... Bottom line is, all Murica could do was cough up these two turds. Yeah, deliberately mixed metaphor. Main difference is, if Trump gets elected it will certify Murica before the whole world as a country full of arseholes who've finally got to elect their very own Arsehole in Chief. ..."
"... One point made by a friend of the blog: Neither candidate appealed to anyone other than their base. And it's hard to see why anyone undecided would be moved. It's even harder to see why a voter committed to Johnson or Stein would move. ..."
"... Watched the whole thing. Trump missed a good opportunity to respond to Hillary's comment that trickle down was the reason for the financial crisis. Trump could have spoken up and said it was Goldman Sachs and big banks that played the key role in bringing on the financial crisis – which would have lead many to think again about her speeches at GS. Outside of the fact that Hillary's comment made me super confused – and maybe Trump as well – it would have been great if he could have mentioned the banks and what did she promise the big banks during her speeches. ..."
"... I was wondering if he's holding the GS speech transcripts in reserve? I was hoping for more of a pounding. I wonder if his team will do polling to determine how hard-hitting he can go before it gets too negative? The history of Glass-Steagall repeal is pretty damning. I'm also hoping to hear her defence of her cattle futures trading, but perhaps that is too ancient of history? ..."
"... Also, was interesting wrt his usage of the word "secretary" - a la Scott Adams, I suspect he's hoping the average viewer will subconsciously associate Hillary with the office secretary, rather than Secretary of State. ..."
"... Before I forget, Trump was very strong on trade, early. Nailed Clinton on NAFTA, nailed her on TPP. Fits right in with "you've had 30 years," but (B team, not top tier school) he didn't keep hammering that point. An early win (on the theory that debates are won early) but for me overshadowed by the rest of it). ..."
"... Absolutely. If it had been a 35 minute debate, Trump would have won hands down. Of course, the minute they moved to taxes, the incoherence of Trump's economic policy becomes apparent. ..."
"... Among others, 3 mistakes by Trump that a seasoned politician wouldn't have made. First, Clinton accuses him of not paying maids, contractors, architects, etc. and Trump basically agrees. He doesn't dispute this, instead says "maybe they didn't do the work." In a time of economic stagnation, this was a miss. (A seasoned politician would have just lied and said "not true.") Second, the tax stuff where Clinton outlines possible reasons he isn't releasing and he didn't do the simple thing and say "none of those are true." Instead, maybe not paying taxes is a "smart thing." Third, Trump can't even do the short work to memorize a story tying the creation of ISIS to Clinton's interventionism (and thus refugee crisis). Instead he bloviates about the Iran deal that very few Americans know enough about to judge good or bad. ..."
"... Not having watched one second of this "debate," I think it's important to note that there are many different kinds of communication. As far as I can tell, Trump's a decent salesman. That's a very specific type of communication, that specifically is NOT about delivering information or or enhancing understanding. It's about establishing control of your target and leading them to do/buy what you want them to do/buy. It doesn't sound like he figured out a way to make this very different situation work for him, the way he apparently did the very different Republican debates. Note that I'm not claiming he IS a master communicator. I don't think either of them are. ..."
"... Trump is giving mixed messages - that's his communication failure. We're supposed to be disgusted by Obama/Clinton foreign policy, but it's never clear why. Because the policy is failed at the start - intervening in Middle Eastern affairs is foolish? Or, we should be intervening for the sake of American power? Trump never articulates a policy goal either way. This is the empty rhetoric of "America first." He never argues a long term strategy of foreign policy for America or the world at large ..."
"... I don't consider Hillary Clinton very smart. Her complete lack of morals and empathy are a far more significant factor in her success than her intelligence. Trump seems fairly bright in some ways, and he's certainly good at understanding certain kinds of non-verbal communication. (For example, all that gold that seems so vulgar to one audience is very appealing to another.) Beyond that, I have no strong opinion about him in this regard. Do I think he's a sizzling intellect? No. ..."
"... I'm basically with Lambert: the best we can hope for is gridlock. But since Clinton is running as an efficient, bloodthirsty Republican, and what she really wants to do is wage war, which requires no Congressional action, Trump's the better bet for gridlock, even with a Republican majority. We'll get Democrats forced to playact the role of "Democrat;" it's something. ..."
"... Clinton doesn't have her thumbs on the button yet she's just threatened Russia with a cyber-war in retaliation for purported Russian attacks on the DNC etc., 'hacks' for which there is less proof than there is an interest on Clinton's part in changing the channel away from what the 'hacks' revealed about her own nefarious doings. So, in retaliation for something that may not have happened at all Clinton's instinct is to hit what could well be the wrong guy because it suits her personal interest – more egregious still, in this instance the wrong guy happens to be engaged in an existential struggle for independent, sovereign survival on the same planet as the US Empire and quite desperately needs an American leader of calibre. ..."
"... If he'd wanted to win he could've sat down with any high school coach to map out a strategy and a set of talking points that would not just defeat Clinton, but quite possibly send a bunch of people to jail. That's why it's Trump (or could've been Cruz). You could not draw a more perfect stereo-typically encumbered character beside which to contrast Clinton, whose entire public career persona has been premised on 'breaking down' same – even if her husband did send a million poor, mostly young black Americans away to rot in fantastically lucrative private prisons working for slave wages. ..."
"... Trump doesn't have to play that "arrest the banker" card to win, and there are plenty of reasons why he would not, including he wants to stay alive. Plus, there's selling and then there's giving away. ..."
"... Senior Romney strategist: Trump brought 20 minutes of material to a 90 minute show. ..."
"... Personally, I'm not sure laziness is a disqualifying characteristic in a Presidential candidate. If a machine is so broken that all its outputs are bad, then it behooves one to turn the crank more slowly than faster. ..."
"... This was a pathetic performance all around. Hillary looked like a polished turd in the debate, compared to Trump who came off as an unpolished turd. My feeling is that Hillary was the "winner" though that word doesn't seem suitable. ..."
"... Yes she jabbed him to death, while Trump held his punches. The question is: why? Having already done the Foreman trick of KOing five guys in one night, was he guarding against punching himself out? Seeing he's already won debates with aggression, was he trying to win by playing defense? Am I simply reading into it what I want to – spinning for Trump to excuse a mediocre performance? ..."
"... Did Trump suffer a mini-stroke on stage? After slurring a word, he began to answer questions for a while with incoherent, freely associated chains of slogans and phrases. This, about the time he blurted out about Hillary's stamina–, psychological projection perhaps? Then he began to list to his left and lean pronouncedly on his podium. After the debate, he left the hall rather too promptly. Was the elderly Trump physically fit enough to withstand a one-on-one 90 minute debate? ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | www.nakedcapitalism.com
September 27, 2016 at 12:11 am

I think he genuinely sees the infrastructural decay and it frosts him.

Yes, and connects the $6 trillion invested in blowing up the Middle East to what it could have been used for instead, and repeatedly called out big bureaucracy for big mistakes.

MojaveWolf September 27, 2016 at 12:15 am

Personally, I came out of this feeling more sympathetic to Trump as a person, believe it or not. I think he genuinely sees the infrastructural decay and it frosts him.

Same with "you had 30 years to solve it." Undeniably true; Clinton's whole "let's build on our success" schtick is such a steaming lot of 10%-er-ness. But if Trump wants to make this election a referendum on the political class, he's going to have to do a lot better than this

Agreed here. My SO put it better than me: Hillary gave no indication she is going to change the course we are on now; in fact, reading between the lines, she thinks things are going great and there is no reason to change anything. " And Trump did do a good job of identifying a number of things that are wrong, even if he wasn't particularly articulate in discussing them.

I think there is a better chance that Trump will actually try to fix things, but tax policy and several other things did not give me great hope that he has any idea how to fix things, or will learn & adapt quickly enough. On the plus side, some people talk better than they deliver; some people deliver better than they talk. At least there's a chance he's one of the latter.

Hillary… we know what we are getting. She won't deliver better than she talks. I have nothing kind to say here, other than she did a good job of finishing her sentences, and her tax policy is better than Trump's. And that she used to be much, much better in debates. I remain flummoxed that people are giving her credit for doing well in this one.

ilporcupine September 27, 2016 at 12:49 am

Trump makes an occasional noise in that direction, IF there has been a related segment on the talk shows or one of the conservative sites. Where in his stated policy (ie on his website or in positions in writing) is anything to suggest he will fix any of that misery? Tax cuts and deregulation? Letting him negotiate trade deals, instead of Obama people?

I can't find where he would refuse "trade deals", only ones "These Morons running things" have negotiated. I'm betting he would push them with minor changes, as will HRC. ISDS is a foregone conclusion, with either. Jesus, one of his advisors is Larry f'n Kudlow. If the regulars here are not appalled by the guys he has surrounded himself with, I sure am. I can see it coming…

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:35 am

> if the regulars here are not appalled

Henry Kissinger and George W. Bush set a pretty high bar not being appalled, amiright?

aab September 27, 2016 at 1:53 am

At least Trump has the good taste not to have Kudlow sit on his lap. Or vice versa.

Reading liberals explain how George W. Bush is just a misunderstood patriot has been…educational. Not in the way they intend.

I think Trump's probably serious about trade. But if I understand the structural issues correctly, it doesn't really matter whether he is serious or not. Apparently the Republican base is now strongly opposed to free trade. (I think most already were, but now they have permission to affirmatively say so, and pick up stragglers.)

I know Obama is counting on getting votes from people thrown out of office and looking for lobbying work. But I don't think there will be enough of them, will there? The Dems aren't going to flip either house, it looks like - certainly not by large numbers. That means there won't be tons of "loose" Republican votes, Republicans returning won't be incentivized to betray their incoming President for Obama, and Democrats on their way out may see shrinking lobbying opportunities, as the Democratic Party - IF Clinton doesn't take power - will be very weak at both the federal and state level.

If my assessment is correct, TPP dies with a Trump win. There isn't an option to reopen negotiations, is there? A brand new "Trump style" treaty would take years to negotiate, and he has "one term" written all over him. This also would kill TISA, right? Is it technically contingent on TPP passing first?

I am looking forward to Democratic Senators using secret holds and such to stop Republican tax plans that benefit corporations and the wealthy.

Okay, now that I've stopped laughing, I'll correct this. I'm assuming BERNIE will use holds and such to stop this stuff. But it will be entertaining to watch the Democrats explain why the Republican can top from the bottom, but they never can.

Steve C September 27, 2016 at 6:53 am

The Democrats in opposition will be just as feckless as the Republicans have been effective.

John Zelnicker September 27, 2016 at 9:21 am

@aab – "This also would kill TISA, right? Is it technically contingent on TPP passing first?"

I don't think TISA depends on TPP being passed. As I understand it, they are being negotiated separately.

One particular provision of TISA is as bad as anything in TPP (bar ISDS) and that is the prohibition on remunicipalization of privatized public resources. Governments would not be allowed to take back things such as British Rail that have been sold off to the private sector, and would be prohibited from nationalizing any other public good now in private hands. It's another hit to national sovereignty.

ilporcupine September 27, 2016 at 3:07 am

You are right, indeed. I just think DT is getting more "benefit of the doubt" than is warranted, given what I know of his past, and the sources he apparently uses, and the advisors he surrounds with.

HRC, you knew from the beginning, who she was tied to/advised by/paid for by. She is a "known known". We are all seeking to know what or who DT represents, as he is harder to pin down.

HRC and Bill are the most successful organized crime outfit since Wall St., and that is enough to categorize them, even without the obvious foreign policy horrors .

jrs September 27, 2016 at 1:00 am

I don't think Clinton won every category just most. I think Trump won on "there is no evidence Russia hacked the DNC".

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:36 am

And trade.

OIFVet September 26, 2016 at 11:25 pm

Time to relax and forget the debate's ugliness: Pachelbel's Canon In D Major

fresno dan September 26, 2016 at 11:40 pm

OIFVet
September 26, 2016 at 11:25 pm

thanks for that – very soothing – and in the scheme of eternity, it doesn't much matter. And the pictures are great!

MojaveWolf September 26, 2016 at 11:27 pm

How are we gonna survive 4 years with either of them at the helm?

That was my take exactly. Since I don't honestly think Stein is going to win, and I think Johnson might be worse than either of these, I was hoping one of them would give me a reason to feel optimistic that they would do a decent job. They … both failed horribly.

And what is up with all the people on NBC and now in my twitter feed repeating this mantra that "We had high expectations for Hillary, and she exceeded them!"

What universe are they living in? Half of these people used to be Bernie supporters. Are people that easily manipulated? Did I used to be that easily manipulated? Or have I gone completely insane now. This was some kind of masterful performance? She mouthed a lot of decent sounding platitudes with no specifics re: policy (while everyone praises her for specifics, and I think she championed the ideas of specifics themselves) while doing a decent but not great job of hitting Trump on some areas where he's very vulnerable.

He did a great job finding areas where she's vulnerable, but a terrible job of hitting her on them.

She did a better job of finishing her sentences, but … wow. That was the bar for coherence and specificity here.

Meanwhile, my twitter feed is full of people who think one or the other landed telling blows. The pundits all think she was terrif. His partisans seem to think he did well.

He looked like he was posing half the time. I don't even know what to say about her expressions. I hate when people talk about stuff like that but what else is there to say here?

My SO and I were constantly covering our eyes and putting our heads down and occasionally laughing at each others expressions and occasionally laughing so hard we had tears running down our eyes at what (both) the candidates were saying. Now it's over I just want to cry.

I know a lot of people here are not fans of the Green Party, but hate on Jill all you want, she would have almost certainly been better up there tonight than either of these people. It would have been hard to be worse.

cwaltz September 26, 2016 at 11:43 pm

"Are people that easily manipulated?" Yes. Was I that easily manipulated? Probably. Don't feel bad though most of us were naïve enough to believe the BS for at least some period of time.

This was some kind of masterful performance?

Uh it's scripted reality TV. The "debates" are vetted and agreed upon by the two parties who sponsored the darn thing via their little pretend front group. Anyone, at this point, who thinks these things matter is fooling themselves. It's a 90 minute infomercial, so if you find infomercials masterful then I guess.

Personally, I'm boycotting these things until they actually allow ALL the candidates that qualify for the ballot on stage.

Jim Haygood September 27, 2016 at 12:04 am

Thank you for pointing out that as usual, the unconstitutional and illegitimate two-party duopoly has excluded other candidates who will be on the ballot. Who exactly gave them this privilege of exclusion?

ilporcupine September 27, 2016 at 12:22 am

Private enterprise, Jim. You can always put up the money for third party candidates to debate on prime time. Thought that was how the market "works".

ilporcupine September 26, 2016 at 11:29 pm

Trump can go off on 5 tangents in each sentence. I keep waiting for him to make his damn point, already. It all comes off as gibberish. I cannot wait for a verbatim transcript of this cluster****. It will be largely incomprehensible. As for "HER", I aint with her either. We are screwwwed.

jrs September 27, 2016 at 12:44 am

It was like that in the Republican debates for anyone who bothered to read the transcripts. Trump was incoherent, the other candidates were basically coherent (wrong, liars and horrible many of them, but able to form a coherent sentence. Trump stood out).

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:59 am

I disagree strongly that Trump is incoherent; I saw him in Bangor. What he is, is discursive and improvisational. He has his main points that he always circles back to, but he riffs and reacts to the crowd.

However, that style doesn't work for him in this debate. He doesn't get to determine the structure, there's no time in a two minute answer to do the kind of excursions he likes to do, and the crowd was told not to react.

The format works very much against Trump, and very much for Clinton. Delivering bullet points successfully is a marker that a candidate is president-y. Considering what PowerPoint has done to the Pentagon, that might not be such a great idea, but it is what it is and we are where we are.

Meteor2016 September 26, 2016 at 11:30 pm

hmmm, time online poll says trump won 56-44.

http://time.com/4506217/presidential-debate-clinton-trump-survey/

Yves Smith September 26, 2016 at 11:58 pm

Prediction markets are saying she killed him. I would look to see the results of multiple online polls. Both Hillary and Trump fans will be trying to game them but it will be hard to skew results across the entire web.

Nelson Lowhim September 27, 2016 at 12:19 am

how accurate were these during the primary?

Yves Smith September 27, 2016 at 5:29 am

Dunno with Rs, but the online polls showed Sanders to be a winner in debates where the MSM called him a loser, and Sanders continued gains in later, conventional polls v. Clinton seemed way more in line with the online polls than MSM takes.

PhilU September 27, 2016 at 9:34 am

I'm surprised that no one mentioned the one best line to the non political junkie. They HATE political commercials. He nailed her on spending Millions attacking him and he came across gentlemanly saying he wouldn't / hasn't done that to her.

Frenchguy September 27, 2016 at 1:24 am

Since the Brexit fiasco, I'm extremely skeptical when it comes to prediction markets (at least on political subjects…).

fresno dan September 26, 2016 at 11:37 pm

All I can think after I watched this is that I could have dismembered, dissected, discombobulated, and reduced Hillary not only to cells, not just to molecules, but to quarks.
looking at it, I just can't see how anybody could think Trump is actually very smart, or smart, or much above ANY New York cabbie…or any or those horses in central park….or the south end of any of those horses….

Honestly, I've seen 5 years olds who could resist the bait better than Trump…

ilporcupine September 27, 2016 at 12:04 am

The Donald can't even shut up for the HRC time allotment. "Debate?" Schoolyard tiff!

EGrise September 27, 2016 at 12:13 am

This.

jrs September 27, 2016 at 12:17 am

I don't know why this is surprising, Trump is the narcissist he is regardless of what people want to project on him. Of course none of that makes Clinton any better.

Whether it's effective, eh who knows, if it's authoritarians voting for him maybe that is what they like, but I don't think there are enough of them for him to win on that alone. If people are just casting random angry votes for anything but the status quo then maybe.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:38 am

> narcissist

I disagree. I think both candidates are isolated within elite bubbles, leading to behaviors we consider narcissistic (armchair diagnosis, when you think about it. I mean, "I'm with her….")

Skippy September 27, 2016 at 4:48 am

So which one is the Grandiose and the other an Insecure type – ??????

John S September 26, 2016 at 11:49 pm

I watched the debate on CSPAN, where a split screen was used that showed the candidates at all times…

….Did anyone else notice how consistently Hillary looked down at the podium? I believe she was being fed "Cliff Notes" ON AN IPAD by her staff re every topic that was bought up….she was ALWAYS looking down and, I assume she was being fed CUES AND WORDS OR PHRASES that she should use….she not only looked down a lot before the time she was supposed to speak but also looked down a lot during her responses……

OTOH, Trump was "winging it" and "shooting from the hip"…..Hillary won because the notes kept her on track….If trump had done any serious prep and could take advice, he could have destroyed her…But, he doesn't do prep, so he can't effectively respond…….

She was told to smile when he attacked….she did this……this response aggravated me, but didn't hurt her with the public of "Undecideds"

He was told to refrain from interrupting…he did an excellent job of interjecting comments at the beginning, but lost control as the night wore on…..

Lester was about the worst Moderator I have listened/watched/prayed for during a Debate…..of course, the job is "thankless"

Hillary's closing comments were stronger, but by then I don't think their were many left watching who were "Persuadables"….those of us left were "political junkies" hoping for a last lap NASCAR worthy Candidate Crash…..

I think Trump had the opportunity to win the debate handed to him on a silver platter by Hillary, but his failure to Prepare and Do the Little Things that would have helped him be ready for her totally expected responses/statements/stalking points cost him dearly…..

He remains the Rich Guy, who does what he wants….. She remains the Robotic Gal, who will probably get what she wants….

Sad…….

(and, thanks, Lambert)

TheCatSaid September 27, 2016 at 12:06 am

Yes she was looking down a lot. Were they allowed to have iPads to look at?

I felt she was listening a lot–she had that look some newscasters have when their producers are telling them updated news or giving suggestions through an ear device. Could she have been wired up? Are there rules about this?

Elizabeth September 27, 2016 at 12:31 am

I think one of the CBS commentators said that Hillary appeared to be using notes. She did look down a lot, and I also thought she seemed unusually subdued. At times she appeared to look sleepy and bored. I don't think this "debate" changed anyone's mind. I think Trump was trying to "dial it back", and he did miss several opportunities to zing Clinton. It did confirm one thing for me – we're all screwed.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:47 am

> Trump was trying to "dial it back"

Yes, you could tell that from his tone of voice. I've heard him deliver the same talking points, but with more verve.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:33 am

I don't think in the great scheme of things this matters much. If there was an iPad and it worked for Clinton, then why the heck didn't the Trump team give their guy an equivalent advantage?

(If true, this shows the dangers of an overly lean campaign team.)

Pat September 26, 2016 at 11:51 pm

Two impressions, on the bus where I could just hear them, it was pretty equal. Both spouted nonsense and both had decent points regarding the other. Home where I had visuals, before I switched, she looked relaxed and yes healthy. She even appeared amused by him.He was flustered and floundering. There were at least two opportunities where he could have landed blows on her policies which he lost by being defensive. His judgment is better than her's, but that is an incredibly low bar. Based on 2, she won.

Based on the nonsense they both reeled off the biggest loser tonight, election day and the future are the American people either way.

Jim Haygood September 27, 2016 at 12:18 am

J-Yel must be shocked that Trump ripped her early on. The earnest bureaucrats at the Fed are not used to being fodder for campaign criticism.

Trump went on to call today's economy a "big fat Bubble." (I call it Bubble III.) He implied that one rate hike will be the pin that pops it, and he's probably right.

Knowing this does not mean he can do anything about it. Currently J-Yel plans to hike in December during the interregnum, when the US political system is inert and the MSM is all focused on cabinet picks.

Almost certainly, the next president will have a close-up, personal encounter with a harsh recession. The only advice from pros is "get it behind you early." That's why I have it penciled in for 2017-18.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:38 am

> 2017-2018

That's what the hotel people think (see yesterday's water cooler). Hotel bookings being a fine indicator of the animal spirits of the managing and investing classes. Whether they are a leading indicator remains to be seen….

cm September 27, 2016 at 12:39 am

Fed is political, no doubt about that:

I quote :

And in 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson, who wanted cheap credit to finance the Vietnam War and his Great Society, summoned Fed chairman William McChesney Martin to his Texas ranch. There, after asking other officials to leave the room, Johnson reportedly shoved Martin against the wall as he demanding that the Fed once again hold down interest rates. Martin caved, the Fed printed money, and inflation kept climbing until the early 1980s.

EoinW September 27, 2016 at 12:19 am

Ironic that in this post-democratic world I watched my first political debate ever. Give the credit to the great entertainer: Donald Trump. Problem was: he wasn't the least bit entertaining tonight. I thought Clinton did well, however she is playing a losing hand. Trump is on the right side of all the issues that matter. Unfortunately(for everyone) the only reality Clinton and the entire western political establishment cares about is how many of the 1% will pay $500 a plate for a dinner and a speech.

Regarding tonight's shenanagans, I thought Lester Holt was the winner. A good moderator should be virtually invisible, let the candidates do their thing. Clinton scored her debating points but I'm not convinced that won her any votes. Was Trump performing in a strait jacket? Seemed like he was more worried about appearing reserved and presidential. And holy repetitive! I was looking forward to Tyson-Spinks, instead I got Tyson-Douglas! Yet I wouldn't be surprised if it all worked and Trump comes out ahead in the polls. He certainly didn't look scary tonight. Boring yes, however doesn't boring deflate these ideas that he's an out of control amateur who can't be trusted?

Brad September 27, 2016 at 12:34 am

Bottom line is, all Murica could do was cough up these two turds. Yeah, deliberately mixed metaphor. Main difference is, if Trump gets elected it will certify Murica before the whole world as a country full of arseholes who've finally got to elect their very own Arsehole in Chief.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:44 am

One point made by a friend of the blog: Neither candidate appealed to anyone other than their base. And it's hard to see why anyone undecided would be moved. It's even harder to see why a voter committed to Johnson or Stein would move.

Therefore, we would not expect the polls to move. And what matters is a tiny population of voters in swing counties in swing states (not national polls), which data is not available to us.

Of course, since the political class is all in for Clinton, they will portray it as an overwhelming win for Clinton (as did I, since I am a 10%-er manqué ). However, exactly as with TV advertising, the pronouncements of the political class have had greatly diminished returns this year….

I'll be interested what old-school people like Nooners have to say….

manymusings September 27, 2016 at 2:54 am

I don't see them as playing only to their respective bases - it seems like they also were trying to affect overarching narratives. Clinton's case against Trump is that he's monstrous. I think he cut against that indictment tonight (and it wasn't a foregone conclusion that he would). Trump's case against Clinton is that she's a corrupt and dishonest version of politics as usual, which already is corrupt and dishonest. I don't know whether she moved the dial on that. Apart from immediate reactions, wonder if there will be any shifts.

Susan C September 27, 2016 at 12:46 am

Watched the whole thing. Trump missed a good opportunity to respond to Hillary's comment that trickle down was the reason for the financial crisis. Trump could have spoken up and said it was Goldman Sachs and big banks that played the key role in bringing on the financial crisis – which would have lead many to think again about her speeches at GS. Outside of the fact that Hillary's comment made me super confused – and maybe Trump as well – it would have been great if he could have mentioned the banks and what did she promise the big banks during her speeches.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:53 am

Very good point on Goldman. In a way, it seems that Clinton threw the kitchen sink on Trump (her assault on his business dealings, using the income tax thing as a hook, was prepared but highly effective). But Trump didn't throw the kitchen sink back at her. Odd.

OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL September 27, 2016 at 2:56 am

Rope-a-dope? There are still two more debates. America loves an underdog

aab September 27, 2016 at 6:01 am

Voting has already started. I don't see any benefit to going soft on her. He relied on free media in the primary, and he has much less money than she does. If he's serious about winning, this was an important opportunity that he apparently blew. The next one isn't even a pseudo-debate, is it? I read today it's a Town Hall - i.e., completely useless. Actually less than useless; it should be a very poor format for him, and a very protected format for her.

By the time they get to the next direct confrontation, a lot of votes will have been banked.

pretzelattack September 27, 2016 at 6:12 am

i'm starting to try to mentally prepare myself for a clinton win. or steal, or whatever. "i survived reagan, i didn't totally lose it during the time of the chimp, i can do this. happy thoughts".

aab September 27, 2016 at 6:52 am

I can't. I'm too afraid of her. I can picture surviving Trump. But Clinton really scares me. I have a draft age child; that's a not insignificant element. That plus TPP.

Sorry if I'm harshing your buzz.

John Zelnicker September 27, 2016 at 9:39 am

@aab – I feel your pain about your kid and the draft. I was in the first draft lottery in 1969 and came out with #27. Fortunately, I was able to avoid being drafted due to it being suspended for the first 90 days of 1972 because they had enough soldiers and were beginning to draw down the forces in Viet Nam.

cm September 27, 2016 at 1:02 am

I was wondering if he's holding the GS speech transcripts in reserve? I was hoping for more of a pounding. I wonder if his team will do polling to determine how hard-hitting he can go before it gets too negative? The history of Glass-Steagall repeal is pretty damning. I'm also hoping to hear her defence of her cattle futures trading, but perhaps that is too ancient of history?

Also, was interesting wrt his usage of the word "secretary" - a la Scott Adams, I suspect he's hoping the average viewer will subconsciously associate Hillary with the office secretary, rather than Secretary of State.

Old news (from May), but sad to see the "fact checkers" on the birther origins

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 12:50 am

Before I forget, Trump was very strong on trade, early. Nailed Clinton on NAFTA, nailed her on TPP. Fits right in with "you've had 30 years," but (B team, not top tier school) he didn't keep hammering that point. An early win (on the theory that debates are won early) but for me overshadowed by the rest of it).

relstprof September 27, 2016 at 1:07 am

Absolutely. If it had been a 35 minute debate, Trump would have won hands down. Of course, the minute they moved to taxes, the incoherence of Trump's economic policy becomes apparent.

relstprof September 27, 2016 at 1:03 am

Among others, 3 mistakes by Trump that a seasoned politician wouldn't have made. First, Clinton accuses him of not paying maids, contractors, architects, etc. and Trump basically agrees. He doesn't dispute this, instead says "maybe they didn't do the work." In a time of economic stagnation, this was a miss. (A seasoned politician would have just lied and said "not true.") Second, the tax stuff where Clinton outlines possible reasons he isn't releasing and he didn't do the simple thing and say "none of those are true." Instead, maybe not paying taxes is a "smart thing." Third, Trump can't even do the short work to memorize a story tying the creation of ISIS to Clinton's interventionism (and thus refugee crisis). Instead he bloviates about the Iran deal that very few Americans know enough about to judge good or bad.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:11 am

Trump's team needs to slap some sense into him (if that's possible and he can listen). So many winning arguments left on the table (and ripe for Trump's simple language, too).

relstprof September 27, 2016 at 3:33 am

Upon a second watch of the debate (ok, I'm crazy), he actually does make the point about the creation of ISIS. Unfortunately, his rhetoric ends on "we should have taken the oil." So he doesn't distinguish the story as the failure of Obama/Clinton foreign policy as a policy of interventionism . His argument is that interventionism must pay out in some way.

Trump didn't help himself by claiming earlier that Clinton has been fighting ISIS her whole life. That obvious gaffe makes it hard to hear anything he says later in the debate.

I'm in agreement with Corey Robin - Trump is not a master communicator. Pace Scott Adams.

Also, it's not nice that Hillary buys negative ads

aab September 27, 2016 at 3:54 am

Not having watched one second of this "debate," I think it's important to note that there are many different kinds of communication. As far as I can tell, Trump's a decent salesman. That's a very specific type of communication, that specifically is NOT about delivering information or or enhancing understanding. It's about establishing control of your target and leading them to do/buy what you want them to do/buy. It doesn't sound like he figured out a way to make this very different situation work for him, the way he apparently did the very different Republican debates. Note that I'm not claiming he IS a master communicator. I don't think either of them are.

So many people are saying she was obviously looking down a lot and reading from notes or possibly an iPad. If so, why wouldn't he call her out on it?

relstprof September 27, 2016 at 4:32 am

Trump is giving mixed messages - that's his communication failure. We're supposed to be disgusted by Obama/Clinton foreign policy, but it's never clear why. Because the policy is failed at the start - intervening in Middle Eastern affairs is foolish? Or, we should be intervening for the sake of American power? Trump never articulates a policy goal either way. This is the empty rhetoric of "America first." He never argues a long term strategy of foreign policy for America or the world at large .

NATO is just a tool. For what? Not clear.

If you think, well: America shouldn't be articulating a strategy for global politics. Fine. I'm happy to listen, but so far, Trump hasn't even made this idea coherent.

relstprof September 27, 2016 at 4:38 am

But I'm an internationalist socialist, so what do I know?

aab September 27, 2016 at 5:12 am

Bear in mind, I didn't watch tonight. I'm not an expert on Trump. But I'm so sick of all this discourse around "intelligence" and "communication" that defines both concepts in extremely limited and fundamentally false ways that align with the proclivities of those in the position to do the defining. I don't consider Hillary Clinton very smart. Her complete lack of morals and empathy are a far more significant factor in her success than her intelligence. Trump seems fairly bright in some ways, and he's certainly good at understanding certain kinds of non-verbal communication. (For example, all that gold that seems so vulgar to one audience is very appealing to another.) Beyond that, I have no strong opinion about him in this regard. Do I think he's a sizzling intellect? No.

Again, salesmanship has nothing to do with messaging per se. In fact, one sales technique would be to using contradictory messaging at differing points in the sales path, to confuse the target. Salesmanship is about control and manipulation.

Persuasion is a different process, where messaging, as the term is generally used, matters.

I would have liked him to take her out tonight. But beyond the strategic goal of keeping her out of power, I don't know whether I'd prefer a smart and/or disciplined Trump over a less smart, less disciplined one. I'd like him to be smart enough not to be a stooge for the existing "bipartisan" elite, since merely resisting their desires and goals seems like it would good for the rest of us. But it's possible (probable?) he means all or part of that noxious traditional Republican swill he's offering up. In which case, being less smart and less disciplined might be better in terms of him acting as an obstacle to business as usual - as long as he's stubborn.

I'm basically with Lambert: the best we can hope for is gridlock. But since Clinton is running as an efficient, bloodthirsty Republican, and what she really wants to do is wage war, which requires no Congressional action, Trump's the better bet for gridlock, even with a Republican majority. We'll get Democrats forced to playact the role of "Democrat;" it's something.

That's why I focus mostly on the structural stuff. We know what Clinton is and will do, and it's horrendous. That's why throwing the Trump spanner into the works is worth doing. I would love for him to govern way to the left of how he ran, just as Obama governed way to the right of how he ran. But there really aren't a lot of incentives for Trump to do that, unlike for Obama. I'm not naive enough to count on Trump's human decency, although I do get the impression he may have a sliver of it, unlike both Obama and Clinton. But I also think he's sincerely racist. If Clinton wasn't such a profound and effectively violent racist, Trump's racism would really give me pause.

Anyway, my key point is that doing very badly in the format and conditions of tonight's event does not prove he is a bad communicator in some overarching sense.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:12 am

Corey Robin:

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:16 am

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:18 am

Fiver September 27, 2016 at 1:19 am

Now that's what I call talent. But as one of them is going to be President, I just want to point out the one thing worth noting she said all night.

Clinton doesn't have her thumbs on the button yet she's just threatened Russia with a cyber-war in retaliation for purported Russian attacks on the DNC etc., 'hacks' for which there is less proof than there is an interest on Clinton's part in changing the channel away from what the 'hacks' revealed about her own nefarious doings. So, in retaliation for something that may not have happened at all Clinton's instinct is to hit what could well be the wrong guy because it suits her personal interest – more egregious still, in this instance the wrong guy happens to be engaged in an existential struggle for independent, sovereign survival on the same planet as the US Empire and quite desperately needs an American leader of calibre.

I know it's hard to look past the enormous frozen smile, still, close your eyes and try to remember the look in her eyes, the downward cut of her mouth and clamped jaw when Trump briefly brushed past a sore spot – that person in there, that is the person who will be the next Leader of The Free World, that is to say, the woman who will lead the revolution of the globalists over the tyranny of nations. The effort to re-assert US hegemony will prove calamitous.

jrs September 27, 2016 at 1:24 am

It does seem to me that the voice that can proclaim with little evidence that Russia hacked into the DNC can easily become the same voice that can proclaim with little evidence that Iraq has WMDs (that is the modern version of that for the enemy du jour of course).

Skippy September 27, 2016 at 4:55 am

Yet Trump clearly said the – WORLD – owes tribute to America and some trade wars with them including China…

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 1:23 am

TheCatSaid September 27, 2016 at 2:21 am

mtaibbi : "This will go down as one of the signature events in the history of cocaine"

John k September 27, 2016 at 1:40 am

All trump has to do to win handily is say 'I will jail bankers that break the law'.

Fiver September 27, 2016 at 2:54 am

That's actually brilliant, and the fact he didn't/hasn't so far supports my thesis – so don't expect him to try it. Trump doesn't want to win – what he wants is to lose without being a 'loser'. It's been evident for a long time now.

If he'd wanted to win he could've sat down with any high school coach to map out a strategy and a set of talking points that would not just defeat Clinton, but quite possibly send a bunch of people to jail. That's why it's Trump (or could've been Cruz). You could not draw a more perfect stereo-typically encumbered character beside which to contrast Clinton, whose entire public career persona has been premised on 'breaking down' same – even if her husband did send a million poor, mostly young black Americans away to rot in fantastically lucrative private prisons working for slave wages.

jrs September 27, 2016 at 2:59 am

I suspect if he wanted to win he would spend on advertising, just saying. It may or may not pan out, but why not make use of things that might help him win if winning was what he wanted?

Fiver September 27, 2016 at 3:25 am

Not to mention avoiding things clearly marked 'high explosives'.

Cry Shop September 27, 2016 at 3:36 am

http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-special-1474910731
Trump doesn't have to play that "arrest the banker" card to win, and there are plenty of reasons why he would not, including he wants to stay alive. Plus, there's selling and then there's giving away.

If he wanted to loose and yet come out a winner, then I'd expect him to take the high ground or stake a claim in a way that would allow him to claim the vote was rigged. Not seeing that at all.

Steve C September 27, 2016 at 7:53 am

No way is Cruz interested in jailing banksters.

John k September 27, 2016 at 1:51 am

The critical issue is, we're undecideds moved?
How about this blog? By definition, undecideds don't much like either… Pretty much like NC. So who here is now decided? And which way?

megamike48 September 27, 2016 at 1:53 am

Senior Romney strategist: Trump brought 20 minutes of material to a 90 minute show.

Lambert Strether Post author September 27, 2016 at 2:36 am

Personally, I'm not sure laziness is a disqualifying characteristic in a Presidential candidate. If a machine is so broken that all its outputs are bad, then it behooves one to turn the crank more slowly than faster.

OK, tongue in cheek, but not 100%

eleanor rigby September 27, 2016 at 3:05 am

Just finished watching. She cleaned his clock, and I wanted to see him prevail. The exchange early in the debate about Trump not paying people … that really came back to mind when he started talking about how the countries we support don't pay their fair share. Really hypocritical. Bad night for DT; he will be hopping mad, kind of like after that trip to Mexico. I wonder what his reaction will be in next day or two.

ewmayer September 27, 2016 at 3:21 am

Scott Adams on one particular claim Trump made tonight: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/150979891156/trumps-african-american-reframing

I think Adams is prone to tunnel vision – focusing on one thing he especially likes or dislikes – as exemplified by his recent switch in endorsement from Hillary ("for my safety, as I live in CA") to Trump, based on Hillary's endorsement (hard to tell if genuine or mere triangulation) of the estate tax.

In tonight's case, I suspect any points Trump may have won for the statement Adams focuses on were more than negated by his stop-and-frisk inanity, but being white like Adams, I can't claim to speak for the AA community in any way.

On a separate-but-related note, my sister – who strongly supported Bernie during the primaries – does seem to fit Adam's claim that subjective impressions rule, and we humans busily construct rational-sounding narratives to justify our gut takes. In her case, she appears to have been as off-put by Hillary's Martin-Shkreli-esque smug smirking as Yves was:

I watched almost all of it and thought he did pretty well, in fact i thought he totally trounced her in many areas. I'm shocked to see every single mainstream media outlet say she was the clear winner and he was the total loser and unprepared. She was smug and ingenuous [sic – she clearly meant 'dis'-], can't stand her.

Yves Smith September 27, 2016 at 5:51 am

Sanders supporters are not representative of anything other than Sanders supporters…but they do constitute a decent chuck of Dem voters and bigger chunk of independents. The ones who were paying attention were painfully of the MSM misrepresentations re Sanders, the DNC putting its finger on the scale (confirmed only by Wikileaks), Clinton campaign totally bogus attacks (BernieBros, when he had more female millennial supporters than male AND Clinton supporters were more aggressive in social media than Sanders supporters), and the rampant cheating in NY and even worse in CA. So there is a burning resentment of Clinton in many Sanders voters looking for continued proof of Clinton's dishonesty and bad character.

Having said all that, a contact who is a "pox on both their houses" type said the comments re Clinton's smugness were widespread. The question is then how big a demerit that is to different voters.

jgordon September 27, 2016 at 3:52 am

This was a pathetic performance all around. Hillary looked like a polished turd in the debate, compared to Trump who came off as an unpolished turd. My feeling is that Hillary was the "winner" though that word doesn't seem suitable.

I will preface this by saying that substance and issues are completely irrelevant now. If you are someone who cares about that stuff then you're out of luck this time around.

1) All the people who already like Trump thought he was great, while everyone who hates him will stick with Hillary. Independents, I don't know. I can't imagine that people are going to be motivated to do much of anything either way after that.

2) Trump had multiple opputinites to destroy Hillary and end the race but passed them all up. The consequence is that this will continue dragging out. Hillary did about as well as she could have considering how compromised she is; she is lucky that Trump is was so unprepared.

3) Trump had shown an ability to learn from his mistakes. I want to believe that he will immediately start doing preparation for the next debate rather than blowing this off. If he fails to, whether or not he can win will be in doubt.

4) As someone else mentioned the one thing of actual import said tonight was by Hillary: she reiterated that she wants to get belligerent with Russia over these these cyber attacks, even though there is zero evidence of Russian involvement in them. This is a reaffirmation of of why Hillary scares the crap out of me, and the reason she is unfit to be president.

5) We know something more about Trump's character now: He's a smart, lazy, loudmouthed braggart who relies on his very good intuition and people skills decide things. He wings everything because he can't be bothered to study anything too deeply. Hillary? She is a very well scripted psychopath with bad people skills. And she enjoys war. Lots and lots of war.

6) I'm going to call this debate a wash even if it was slightly in Hillary's favor. Trump is still on a trajectory to win, he's just going to have to put in actual effort accomplish that–which he should realize now.

7) We are screwed no matter who is president in 2017, but simply as a matter of survival we have to support Trump.

8) surprisingly Hillary didn't keel over tonight. This is both good and bad. Good for Trump because Hillary is someone he's likely to win against, bad for us because there is still a slight chance that Hillary could win, meaning that war war and more war, including nuclear war, could be on the agenda from 2017 on. I don't believe we'll survive that.

Lambert Strether September 27, 2016 at 3:53 am

One more:

Trump is talking about problems… Hillary is talking about solutions. Voters always want to hear solutions. #DebateNight - Frank Luntz (@FrankLuntz) September 27, 2016

So Clinton stole Trump's clothes on law and order (which she would do; "super-predators," for-profit prisons).

jrs September 27, 2016 at 4:00 am

If voters always want to hear solutions Bernie Sanders would be on that stage tonight.

aab September 27, 2016 at 4:20 am

The reason Bernie is not on the stage is because Clinton stole the primary.

Ian September 27, 2016 at 8:39 am

+ however many votes were stolen and however many voters disenfranchised.

Michael Fiorillo September 27, 2016 at 6:23 am

To use a boxing metaphor, Hillary by decision.

EoinW September 27, 2016 at 9:11 am

Yes she jabbed him to death, while Trump held his punches. The question is: why? Having already done the Foreman trick of KOing five guys in one night, was he guarding against punching himself out? Seeing he's already won debates with aggression, was he trying to win by playing defense? Am I simply reading into it what I want to – spinning for Trump to excuse a mediocre performance?

I guess all politicians and non-politicians have their limitations. Trump's talent is he's a salesman and what he sells is himself. He's not an intellectual. He's likely not even a thoughtful person. What amused me most tonight was his egotism. Compared to Trump, if Narcissus looked at his reflection he'd be filled with self loathing.

Hana M September 27, 2016 at 7:20 am

"Personally, I came out of this feeling more sympathetic to Trump as a person, believe it or not. I think he genuinely sees the infrastructural decay and it frosts him. Same with "you had 30 years to solve it." Undeniably true; Clinton's whole "let's build on our success" schtick is such a steaming lot of 10%-er-ness. But if Trump wants to make this election a referendum on the political class, he's going to have to do a lot better than this. If you regard success in the debate as emitting presidential markers (like NATO Article 5), then Clinton unquestionably won."

Well said and thanks for doing this, Lambert. I went to bed right after the debate so it's great to get a recap with this excellent comment thread. I watched on C-Span and after the debate the candidates went down to the foot of the stage and it seemed that apart from family no one wanted to shake Trump's hand. The whole crowd was around Clinton. Trump and his family just looked at each other and headed for the exit. It was weird and sad.

stefan September 27, 2016 at 9:11 am

Did Trump suffer a mini-stroke on stage? After slurring a word, he began to answer questions for a while with incoherent, freely associated chains of slogans and phrases. This, about the time he blurted out about Hillary's stamina–, psychological projection perhaps? Then he began to list to his left and lean pronouncedly on his podium. After the debate, he left the hall rather too promptly. Was the elderly Trump physically fit enough to withstand a one-on-one 90 minute debate?

[Sep 27, 2016] No, Really, Clinton Will Be Very Hawkish as President

Notable quotes:
"... The first is that Clinton has consistently sided with the conventional wisdom in Washington at the time about what the U.S. should do in response to any conflict or crisis. She has reliably backed more aggressive measures abroad in part because that is what pundits and analysts in Washington are usually demanding on any given issue. She isn't one to resist demands to "do something," because she typically sees no reason to resist them, and often enough she is making the same demands. ..."
"... Clinton will have few opportunities to advance a domestic agenda in the face of determined resistance in Congress. Even if Clinton has a Senate majority, she won't have one in the House, so it is doubtful that she will be able to get any "domestic reforms" passed. ..."
"... It is quite possible that governing as an liberal hawk will "derail her presidency," as Walt says, but we have at least one example that tell us that isn't necessarily true. Obama has presided over eight continuous years of war, including at least two interventions that he started and continued illegally without Congressional approval, and yet he is poised to leave office with a reasonably good approval rating ..."
"... That isn't going to discourage Clinton from her usual interventionism. The Obama years have reminded us of the unfortunate truth that the public will tolerate quite a few foreign wars as long as the direct costs to the U.S. in American lives are low. ..."
"... Remember, Clinton doesn't think that the Libyan war was a failure or a mistake, but rather considers it "smart power at its best." ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The American Conservative

Stephen Walt isn't persuaded that Hillary Clinton will be as hawkish a president as her record suggests:

If Clinton goes overboard with more globalization, expanded U.S. security guarantees, open-ended nation-building in distant lands, or even expensive acts of international philanthropy, all those skeptical people beguiled by Trump or Sanders will be even angrier. By contrast, if she can win over some of the people during her first term, her popularity will soar and re-election would be easy. The lesson? Clinton should focus on domestic reforms and not on international crusades. And as former State Department officials Jeremy Shapiro and Richard Sokolsky suggest, that's been her basic inclination all along.

Clinton would be unwise to pursue an even more activist and militarized foreign policy agenda as president, but Walt and I agree about this because we generally view that sort of foreign policy as dangerous and contrary to American interests anyway. It does seem foolish for any president to want to do the things that Clinton thinks the U.S. should do, but that is not a reason to think it won't happen. I have made my objections to Shapiro and Sokolsky's piece before , so I won't repeat all of them here, but there are at least four major reasons why we should assume that Clinton's foreign policy will be even more hawkish and interventionist than Obama's .

The first is that Clinton has consistently sided with the conventional wisdom in Washington at the time about what the U.S. should do in response to any conflict or crisis. She has reliably backed more aggressive measures abroad in part because that is what pundits and analysts in Washington are usually demanding on any given issue. She isn't one to resist demands to "do something," because she typically sees no reason to resist them, and often enough she is making the same demands.

The second is that Clinton won't be able to "focus on domestic reforms" alone because foreign events and her public enthusiasm for U.S. "leadership" won't allow her to do that. There will probably be a new civil war or international crisis at some point over the next four years, and she will feel compelled to be seen doing something about it, and given her record that will almost certainly mean deeper U.S. involvement than most Americans would prefer.

The third is that Clinton will have few opportunities to advance a domestic agenda in the face of determined resistance in Congress. Even if Clinton has a Senate majority, she won't have one in the House, so it is doubtful that she will be able to get any "domestic reforms" passed. The one area where Congress is totally submissive to the executive is foreign policy, and that is what Clinton will spend a disproportionate amount of her time on because she will mostly be stymied at home. Clinton won't be hemmed in by budgetary concerns. The other party has been insisting for years that we must throw more money at the Pentagon, and there is no reason to think that Clinton worries about paying for this through borrowing. Finally, Clinton will be inheriting at least two ongoing wars, one of which she will be under significant pressure to escalate, and she will also inherit the Obama administration's horrible enabling of the Saudi-led war on Yemen. In that sense, it won't be entirely up to Clinton how much time these matters take up in her first term, because she is already committed to continuing these missions for the foreseeable future.

It is quite possible that governing as an liberal hawk will "derail her presidency," as Walt says, but we have at least one example that tell us that isn't necessarily true. Obama has presided over eight continuous years of war, including at least two interventions that he started and continued illegally without Congressional approval, and yet he is poised to leave office with a reasonably good approval rating and (if this scenario is to be believed) about to be succeeded as president by a member of his own party.

That isn't going to discourage Clinton from her usual interventionism. The Obama years have reminded us of the unfortunate truth that the public will tolerate quite a few foreign wars as long as the direct costs to the U.S. in American lives are low. So we should expect Clinton to rely heavily on air wars and missile strikes as Obama and her husband did. There presumably won't be a repeat of something on the scale of Iraq, but we should assume that there will be other Libya-like interventions and some of them will be in places that we're not even thinking about at the moment.

Remember, Clinton doesn't think that the Libyan war was a failure or a mistake, but rather considers it "smart power at its best." I'm fairly sure about all this because Clinton has never given us any reason to think that she doesn't want to govern this way, and almost everything in her foreign policy record says that this is how she will govern.

[Sep 27, 2016] Whos protecting Hillary Clinton

Sep 27, 2016 | www.voltairenet.org

While the Press celebrates the Democratic Party victory of the first female billionaire in history, a somber legal battle is going on in the shadows.

The State Department report on Hillary Clinton's emails, and the different legal proceedings which followed, establish that she is guilty of :

In principle, and since the facts and their gravity have been established by the FBI, the State Departement, and a Federal judge, Hillary Clinton should have been arrested this week.

Bernie Sanders, the other candidate for the Democratic nomination, was counting on Mrs. Clinton's arrest before their party's convention. He therefore decided to stay in the running, although he does not have enough delegates. But he was summoned to the White House, and informed that President Barack Obama would prevent his administration from applying the law. Obama then followed through by publicly announcing his support for the candidacy of Mrs. Clinton.

Translation
Pete Kimberley

[Sep 27, 2016] A highly predictable debate between the worst US bipartisan couple for decades

Notable quotes:
"... Tonight's first US presidential debate involves two candidates who actually depict emphatically the high degree of the US politics degeneration: deeply pro-establishment, war-thirsty Hillary Clinton, against the reserve of the establishment , racist billionaire Donald Trump. ..."
"... She knows that these voters, and especially the American youth, had enough of the neoliberal establishment in previous years, and therefore, it would be very hard to be persuaded that the warmongering Hillary has been "relocated" further to the Left. There is no need to expose her absolute commitment to conduct more dirty wars because the US deep state and the neocons know very well that she will focus on this policy, in case that she will be the next US president. Furthermore, it seems that she does not expect anything from the most conservative voters to the Right, who are clearly determined to support Trump. ..."
"... It appears that after Sanders, the US voters are left with zero options, again. Yet, they do have options which the corporate media don't want to become known. ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | the unbalanced evolution of homo sapiens

...Tonight's first US presidential debate involves two candidates who actually depict emphatically the high degree of the US politics degeneration: deeply pro-establishment, war-thirsty Hillary Clinton, against the reserve of the establishment, racist billionaire Donald Trump.

No matter how they act, no matter what they say and what rhetoric they use, they can both be identified, more or less, by the few characteristics above. It would be rather pointless for someone to expect anything better from both.

As we approach the day of the US elections, time is running out and the two candidates will naturally focus on one thing: fix their picture to attract more voters and increase their chances to win. As polls show that it will be a tight race, the two will try to attract as many voters as possible from the huge tank of undecided US citizens.

Hillary took a good taste from the fight for the Democratic nomination against Bernie Sanders. She will probably try to retain a more progressive profile which was forced to exhibit during the race against Bernie, in order to gain voters from the tank of the mass movement he created. She knows that these voters, and especially the American youth, had enough of the neoliberal establishment in previous years, and therefore, it would be very hard to be persuaded that the warmongering Hillary has been "relocated" further to the Left. There is no need to expose her absolute commitment to conduct more dirty wars because the US deep state and the neocons know very well that she will focus on this policy, in case that she will be the next US president. Furthermore, it seems that she does not expect anything from the most conservative voters to the Right, who are clearly determined to support Trump.

Trump has also a difficult job. He has to find a balance between the highly conservative audience, which is the core of his voters, and the more moderate, undecided ones, who may determine the outcome of the elections. Therefore, he is expected to smooth his extremely patriotic (to the point that becomes racist) rhetoric, in order to become "more presidential", as actually warned recently by the establishment. He knows that he can't win without taking a crucial percentage of the more moderate tank.

It appears that after Sanders, the US voters are left with zero options, again. Yet, they do have options which the corporate media don't want to become known.

... ... ...

[Sep 27, 2016] An Inconsequential Debate

Notable quotes:
"... My hunch is still that this election will come down to a deeply felt "not-Clinton" attitude in the general U.S. electorate. ..."
"... Both candidates are obviously lying. Clinton proudly knows some very selective facts ..."
"... The fate of the world should not be left in the hands of some Intellectuals but Idiots , to people who can not see beyond their noses, to "thinkers" for whom human history starts with their high school prom. ..."
"... Trump started off horribly. He went after Hillary on foreign policy at the end which was pretty decent.. ..."
"... Both went after each others shadiness. Very fun to watch. I'm not sure if it will amount to much of anything, but I at least enjoyed that she was gotten after for her atrocious policymaking. ..."
"... Nothing of substance is allowed to be discussed. Their main function is to convince Americans that these two are the only possible choices to vote for on 8 November. ..."
"... Spending energy on discussing presidential elections only feeds the established political psycopathy, and energizes the inherently corrupt status quo. I feel that my energy would be better spent reinforcing my local community, where a much higher degree of open democracy manifests. ..."
"... The only countries I know about that still apply true and open democracy are Iceland and to a lesser degree Costa Rica. In Iceland at least, there is still a very valid reason to vote in the national elections. For the rest of us unfortunate souls I'm afraid that ship has sailed. ..."
"... The idea that cataclysmic change is necessary for improvement is madness. A dramatic collapse of the Western economies will likely lead to the evil elite thrusting us into WW3. From which humanity may never recover. Collapse of the US economy has a good chance of them lashing out with their military to retain their hegemony, also leading to WW3, or a cataclysmic nuclear war. ..."
"... Any dramatic political change will far more likely lead to the eventual rise of a fascist demagogues across western politics. The way US politics is headed, with Trump and Hitlery. ..."
"... She fully intends to finish the annihilation of the Shia crescent from one end to the other for her Israeli/Saudi masters. The U.S. will be at war with Iran within a year if she is elected ..."
"... If Trump wins, he too will eventually be convinced to start a war with them at the behest of his Israeli/Saudi/CIA handlers, but I expect that 'project' to take years before he's confident enough to commit to it. The U.S. might be gone by then. You would think Iranians would be a little more inclined to go with him in the interests of a few more years of Iranian self-preservation. ..."
"... I'm somewhat convinced that if Clinton wins office (not an election); 2017 will make the last 15 years seem peaceful. My only question is; will it go nuclear? Given the insane development of small nukes, stupidly called tactical, too many have themselves convinced there is justification for their use. ..."
"... You're link to a worldwide vote for U.S. president is interesting, but Iran voting for Clinton? yeah, that one threw me for a loop as well, but as you pointed out, 17 or so votes for Clinton out of 79 million Iranians is pretty much meaningless. probably just a cluster of 'progressive' exchange students. ..."
"... Forcefully resisting the brand of globalization imposed on us by the thugs and slave drivers of disaster capitalism is a moral obligation all world citizens should embrace. When people in power live in the castle of their own lies, it is time to dismantle the fortress. When governance has lost all moral ground and reason, it is time to call for a revolution ..."
"... The foundational myths of the United States are becoming less and less credible by the day. As more people stop believing them and, even more importantly, realize that others do not believe them either, compliance in the system becomes less and less. ..."
"... People do not even need to think in terms of self sacrifice for some greater good, or in terms of being part of a revolution. They actually only have to realize that their own best interests are served better by non compliance than compliance. ..."
"... In recent history 19.6% of Americans voted for neither Clinton nor Bush in 1992. A hard hurdle to beat I reckon, and frankly I can't see it happening. ..."
"... Wrong, catalysmic collapse is what lies in stall for the US and probably Europe but it's not annihilation. Just that they got no money for hegemony anymore but they are still alive. And they still chose to remain alive just like in the Soviet Union. ..."
"... The whole debate was unreal. Trump was bragging about his business successes with a sad grim while Hillary with a forever ironic botoxed smile and an empty look in her eyes looked like a worn out robot. It was more a scene from the Muppets show than a presidential debate! ..."
"... I like Trump because he is hated by all the right people. ..."
Sep 27, 2016 | www.moonofalabama.org
From the first reactions I see the show made no difference to the outcome of the U.S. election. Both sides spin that their paymasters won.

My hunch is still that this election will come down to a deeply felt "not-Clinton" attitude in the general U.S. electorate.

Would that be good or bad? I don't know. Both candidates are obviously lying. Clinton proudly knows some very selective facts . Her general plans can be inferred from her political history. They would be mostly bad for this world. Trump doesn't care about facts, nor do most voters. Nobody seems to know what his real plans would be. With him we all are in for a lot of surprises - likely bad ones.

From a global perspective the election again shows why U.S. global influences must be cut to size. The fate of the world should not be left in the hands of some Intellectuals but Idiots , to people who can not see beyond their noses, to "thinkers" for whom human history starts with their high school prom. Their linear analysis, their inexperience with real life, their linear solutions are inadequate for our complex, non-linear world. This needs to change.

Such a change requires some cataclysmic events. Both candidates seem well positioned to achieve such.

From The Hague | Sep 27, 2016 2:22:58 AM | 1
Hillary Clinton Lost? Or was that the other one?
Penelope #93 in:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/09/hillary-clinton-knows-that-she-lost.html
lemur | Sep 27, 2016 2:30:48 AM | 2
"Both candidates are obviously lying. Clinton proudly knows some very selective facts. Her general plans can be inferred from her political history. They would be mostly bad for this world. Trump doesn't care about facts, nor do most voters."

good argument against democracy.

bbbb | Sep 27, 2016 2:33:23 AM | 3
Trump started off horribly. He went after Hillary on foreign policy at the end which was pretty decent.. All and all it was cringworthy but entertaining. I think I'll be writing Harambe instead of voting for these 2
bbbb | Sep 27, 2016 2:39:33 AM | 4
Trump also kept pimping his business.. He clearly wants to advertise! Both went after each others shadiness. Very fun to watch. I'm not sure if it will amount to much of anything, but I at least enjoyed that she was gotten after for her atrocious policymaking.
jfl | Sep 27, 2016 2:54:02 AM | 5
Missed the 'debate'. In the USA the Amalgamated Republicrat/Demoblican Party controls the debates and limits participation in them to themselves ... the Republicrat and Demoblican candidates. Nothing of substance is allowed to be discussed. Their main function is to convince Americans that these two are the only possible choices to vote for on 8 November.

I hope that more of us than ever before choose a candidate other than one of these two, ideally that both of these trail the aggregate vote cast for candidates other than themselves. That's the cataclysmic event I'd like to see happen.

dan | Sep 27, 2016 3:26:58 AM | 6
These people and this system depend entirely on power that we the people give them. Spending energy on discussing presidential elections only feeds the established political psycopathy, and energizes the inherently corrupt status quo. I feel that my energy would be better spent reinforcing my local community, where a much higher degree of open democracy manifests.

I am not from the US, but the same principle applies here. The only countries I know about that still apply true and open democracy are Iceland and to a lesser degree Costa Rica. In Iceland at least, there is still a very valid reason to vote in the national elections. For the rest of us unfortunate souls I'm afraid that ship has sailed.

tom | Sep 27, 2016 4:08:43 AM | 7
The idea that cataclysmic change is necessary for improvement is madness. A dramatic collapse of the Western economies will likely lead to the evil elite thrusting us into WW3. From which humanity may never recover. Collapse of the US economy has a good chance of them lashing out with their military to retain their hegemony, also leading to WW3, or a cataclysmic nuclear war.

Any dramatic political change will far more likely lead to the eventual rise of a fascist demagogues across western politics. The way US politics is headed, with Trump and Hitlery.

And if it's not as bad as the next to worst outcomes, then the time lost necessary over the short to midterm of combating climate change, Will mean chronic food and water shortages in the frayed will see humans are reverting to selfish struggle.

john | Sep 27, 2016 4:23:20 AM | 8
here's some more inconsequentness.
jfl | Sep 27, 2016 4:25:28 AM | 9
@6 dan

Putting your head in a hole in the sand is not going to make your or my national government go away.

Yes, certainly work at the more democratic, more local levels of government. But if we want to stop the wars - I do - we have to (re)gain control of the national government to do so. At least we citizens of the US - author of all war in this century - must do so.

Paying attention to these two is a waste of time. The only way to deal with them, and their endless replacements, is to deal them out of the popular vote. No to Clinton, no to Trump on 8 November ... and every election year thereafter to their elephant and jackass replacements and to those in the House and Senate as well, until we can select a minimalist platform acceptable to us in our majority and replace such candidates from the menagerie with spokespeople chosen from among ourselves.

It's a multiyear program, but that's what it will take, it seems to me. Alternatives welcome. But it does seem to me that change is essential, and that we're the only ones who can bring it about. I'm going to do my part. I hope my 229,000,000 fellows will too.

PavewayIV | Sep 27, 2016 4:51:42 AM | 10
john@8 - You're link to a worldwide vote for U.S. president is interesting, but Iran voting for Clinton? That's hard to believe. She fully intends to finish the annihilation of the Shia crescent from one end to the other for her Israeli/Saudi masters. The U.S. will be at war with Iran within a year if she is elected (and I regretfully but sincerely expect both to happen). Drinking the blood of live infants is only going to keep her corpse alive for - what - maybe a year or two? She is going to hit the ground running, and will not be satisfied until the Iranian death toll cracks two million. She came, she saw, they died [cackle, cackle!].

If Trump wins, he too will eventually be convinced to start a war with them at the behest of his Israeli/Saudi/CIA handlers, but I expect that 'project' to take years before he's confident enough to commit to it. The U.S. might be gone by then. You would think Iranians would be a little more inclined to go with him in the interests of a few more years of Iranian self-preservation.

Since the on-line fantasy election is in English and only 31 Iranians have voted so far, it's probably too early to tell. I'm thinking they are not representative of the other 78 million Iranians, but who really knows?

V. Arnold | Sep 27, 2016 4:56:53 AM | 11
dan | Sep 27, 2016 3:26:58 AM | 6

Indeed, left port a decade ago.
Posted by me @ Ian Welsh's;
Didn't watch any of "it" (not a debate).
With all that's going on in the world today, militarily,

I'm somewhat convinced that if Clinton wins office (not an election); 2017 will make the last 15 years seem peaceful. My only question is; will it go nuclear? Given the insane development of small nukes, stupidly called tactical, too many have themselves convinced there is justification for their use.

Us humans are not the brightest bulbs in the known universe; I've removed optimistic/optimism from my vocabulary.
In my definition of intelligence; humans are not even in the top 100…
That's my view at this time; voting is a very bad joke.

nmb | Sep 27, 2016 5:40:53 AM | 14
A highly predictable debate between the worst US bipartisan couple for decades
john | Sep 27, 2016 6:12:19 AM | 15
PavewayIV says:

You're link to a worldwide vote for U.S. president is interesting, but Iran voting for Clinton? yeah, that one threw me for a loop as well, but as you pointed out, 17 or so votes for Clinton out of 79 million Iranians is pretty much meaningless. probably just a cluster of 'progressive' exchange students.

john | Sep 27, 2016 6:29:10 AM | 16
jfl says:

It's a multiyear program,...

blah, blah, blah

All members of the fake left advocate that the system must be changed progressively from within and that a collapse would be mainly a disaster for the poor and weak. This notion is as valid as to claim that a building destroyed by an earthquake is in need of some fresh window dressing. Regardless of the global elite's arrogance, a systemic collapse is on its way and will exponentially take hold of the planet within two or three decades. The super-rich will eventually have nowhere to run or hide, and no private armies to protect them from the wrath of nature.

Forcefully resisting the brand of globalization imposed on us by the thugs and slave drivers of disaster capitalism is a moral obligation all world citizens should embrace. When people in power live in the castle of their own lies, it is time to dismantle the fortress. When governance has lost all moral ground and reason, it is time to call for a revolution ( Gilbert Mercier )

so vote however the fuck you want, but please spare us your tedious proselytizing.

Lysander | Sep 27, 2016 7:17:48 AM | 19
Dan's point in 12 is an excellent one. The foundational myths of the United States are becoming less and less credible by the day. As more people stop believing them and, even more importantly, realize that others do not believe them either, compliance in the system becomes less and less.

People do not even need to think in terms of self sacrifice for some greater good, or in terms of being part of a revolution. They actually only have to realize that their own best interests are served better by non compliance than compliance.

One early example is the housing crisis back in 2008. People simply stopped paying their mortgages while continuing to live in the houses. Banks were able to force a bailout, but that only encouraged more people to feel justified in defaulting. Ignore your debts to credit card companies, banks, etc and you are striking a serious blow against the system. While actually freeing yourself.

That is just one more example of resistance. Dan mentioned many others. The system's best weapon is that they got most people to believe in it, which encourages semi voluntary obedience.

Jules | Sep 27, 2016 7:19:57 AM | 20
Re: Posted by: jfl | Sep 27, 2016 2:54:02 AM | 5
I hope that more of us than ever before choose a candidate other than one of these two

In recent history 19.6% of Americans voted for neither Clinton nor Bush in 1992. A hard hurdle to beat I reckon, and frankly I can't see it happening.

What is Aleppo anyway?

ThatDamnGood | Sep 27, 2016 7:48:58 AM | 21
#7

Wrong, catalysmic collapse is what lies in stall for the US and probably Europe but it's not annihilation. Just that they got no money for hegemony anymore but they are still alive. And they still chose to remain alive just like in the Soviet Union.

... .... ...

virgile | Sep 27, 2016 8:00:27 AM | 23
The whole debate was unreal. Trump was bragging about his business successes with a sad grim while Hillary with a forever ironic botoxed smile and an empty look in her eyes looked like a worn out robot. It was more a scene from the Muppets show than a presidential debate!
Secret Agent | Sep 27, 2016 8:06:27 AM | 24
I like Trump because he is hated by all the right people.

[Sep 27, 2016] The Trump-Clinton Debate

Sep 26, 2016 | The American Conservative
That's it. Trump blew this thing, in my view. Hillary caught her stride about a half-hour in, and showed herself to be presidential. He came off as extremely unprepared. I cannot believe Trump helped himself tonight, though for all I know, the voters loved him. Hillary didn't have a big win, but she did win, and I believe that she stopped the bleeding for her campaign.

I know that everybody has a different standard for Trump, but if Trump ends up judged the winner of this debate in the polls, I don't know what to say anymore. There is no way Donald Trump is ready to be President of the United States. No way. And I don't believe many undecided voters changed their mind to vote for Trump based on his performance tonight.

[Sep 26, 2016] Red-Light Warning on Now, About Hillary Clinton

Notable quotes:
"... Russia even hacked into the Democratic National Committee, maybe even some state election systems. So, we've got to step up our game. Make sure we are well defended and able to take the fight to those who go after us. As President, I will make it clear, that the United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack . We will be ready with serious political, economic and military responses. ..."
"... "We need to respond to evolving threats from states like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea from networks, criminal and terrorist networks like ISIS. We need a military that is ready and agile so it can meet the full range of threats, and operate on short notice across every domain, not just land, sea, air and space, but also cyberspace". ..."
"... "serious political, economic and military responses" ..."
"... notwithstanding ..."
"... The mainstream The Hill newspaper bannered, "Clinton: Treat cyberattacks 'like any other attack'" , and reported that, "Since many high-profile cyberattacks could be interpreted as traditional intelligence-gathering - something the US itself also engages in - the White House is often in a tricky political position when it comes to its response". That's not critical of her position, but at least it makes note of the crucial fact that if the US were to treat a hacker's attack as being an excuse to invade Russia, it would treat the US itself as being already an invader of Russia - which the US prior to a President Hillary Clinton never actually has been, notwithstanding the routine nature of international cyber espionage (which Clinton has now stated she wants to become a cause of war), which has been, and will continue to be, essential in the present era. ..."
"... The International Business Times, an online-only site, headlined September 1 st , "Clinton: US should use 'military response' to fight cyberattacks from Russia and China" , and reported that a Pentagon official had testified to Congress on July 13 th , that current US policy on this matter is: "When determining whether a cyber incident constitutes an armed attack, the US government considers a broad range of factors, including the nature and extent of injury or death to persons and the destruction of or damage to property. … Cyber incidents are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and the national security leadership and the president will make a determination if it's an armed attack". ..."
"... Hillary's statement on this matter was simply ignored by The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, Fox, CNN, The Nation, The Atlantic, Harper's, National Review, Common Dreams, Alternet, Truthout, and all the rest of the US standard and 'alternative news' reporting organizations. Perhaps when Americans go to the polls to elect a President on November 8th, almost none of them will have learned about her policy on this incredibly important matter. ..."
"... Hillary's statement was in line with the current Administration's direction of policy, but is farther along in that direction than the Obama Administration's policy yet is. ..."
"... On Tuesday, June 14 th , NATO announced that if a NATO member country becomes the victim of a cyber attack by persons in a non-NATO country such as Russia or China, then NATO's Article V "collective defense" provision requires each NATO member country to join that NATO member country if it decides to strike back against the attacking country. … ..."
"... NATO is now alleging that because Russian hackers had copied the emails on Hillary Clinton's home computer , this action of someone in Russia taking advantage of her having privatized her US State Department communications to her unsecured home computer and of such a Russian's then snooping into the US State Department business that was stored on it, might constitute a Russian attack against the United States of America, and would, if the US President declares it to be a Russian invasion of the US, trigger NATO's mutual-defense clause and so require all NATO nations to join with the US government in going to war against Russia, if the US government so decides. ..."
"... And finally, we did talk about cyber-security generally. I'm not going to comment on specific investigations that are still alive and active, but I will tell you that we've had problems with cyber-intrusions from Russia in the past, from other countries in the past, and, look, we're moving into a new era here, where a number of countries have significant capacities, and frankly we've got more capacity than anybody both offensively and defensively, but our goal is not to suddenly in the cyber-arena duplicate a cycle of escalation that we saw when it comes to other arms-races in the past, but rather to start instituting (9:00) some norms so that everybody's acting responsibly. ..."
"... "neoconservative" ..."
"... Hillary is now the neoconservatives' candidate . (And she's also the close friend of many of them, and hired and promoted many of them at her State Department .) If she becomes the next President, then we might end up having the most neoconservative (i.e., military-industrial-complex-run) government ever. This would be terrific for America's weapons-makers, but it very possibly would be horrific for everybody else. That's the worst lobby of all, to run the country . (And, as that link there shows, Clinton has received over five times as much money from it as has her Republican opponent.) ..."
"... George Herbert Walker Bush knows lots that the 'news' media don't report (even when it has already been leaked in one way or another), and the Clinton plan to destroy Russia is part of that. Will the Russian government accept it? Or will it do whatever is required in order to defeat it? This is already a serious nuclear confrontation . ..."
Sep 26, 2016 | www.strategic-culture.org
Hillary Clinton, on September 19th, was endorsed for President, by the most historically important, intelligent, and dangerous, Republican of modern times.

She was endorsed then by the person who in 1990 cunningly engineered the end of the Soviet Union and of its Warsaw Pact military alliance in such a way as to continue the West's war against Russia so as to conquer Russia gradually for the owners of US international corporations. The person, who kept his plan secret even from his closest advisors, until the night of 24 February 1990, when he told them that what he had previously instructed them to tell Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev as the West's future military intentions about Russia if the USSR were to end, was actually a lie.

He also told them that they were henceforth to proceed forward on the basis that the residual stump of the former Soviet Union, Russia, will instead be treated as if it still is an enemy-nation, and that the fundamental aim of the Western alliance will then remain: to conquer Russia (notwithstanding the end of the USSR, of its communism, and of its military alliances) - that the Cold War is to end only on the Russian side, not at all, really, on the Western side. (All of that is documented from the historical record, at that linked-to article.)

This person was the former Director of the US CIA, born US aristocrat, and committed champion of US conquest of the entire world, the President of the United States at the time (1990): George Herbert Walker Bush .

He informed the daughter of Robert F. Kennedy, Kathleen Hartington Kennedy Townsend - as she posted it, apparently ecstatically, on September 19th, to her facebook page after personally having just met with Mr. Bush - "The President told me he's voting for Hillary!!" She then confirmed this to Politico the same day, which headlined promptly, "George H.W. Bush to Vote for Hillary" .

G.H.W. Bush is an insider's insider: he would not do this if he felt that Hillary Clinton wouldn't carry forward his plan ( which has been adhered-to by each of the US Presidents after him ), and if he felt that Donald Trump - Bush's own successor now as the Republican US candidate for President - would not carry it forward. (This was his most important and history-shaping decision during his entire Presidency, and therefore it's understandable now that he would be willing even to cross Party-lines on his Presidential ballot in order to have it followed-through to its ultimate conclusion.)

What indications exist publicly, that she will carry it forward? Hillary Clinton has already publicly stated (though tactfully, so that the US press could ignore it) her intention to push things up to and beyond the nuclear brink, with regard to Russia:

German Economic News was the first news medium to headline this, "Hillary Clinton Threatens Russia with War" (in German, on September 4th: the original German of the headline was " Hillary Clinton Droht Russland mit Krieg" ), but the source of this shocking headline was actually Clinton's bellicose speech that had been given to the American Legion, on August 31 st , in which she had said:

Russia even hacked into the Democratic National Committee, maybe even some state election systems. So, we've got to step up our game. Make sure we are well defended and able to take the fight to those who go after us. As President, I will make it clear, that the United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack . We will be ready with serious political, economic and military responses.

Russia denies that it did any such thing, but the US even taps the phone conversations of Angela Merkel and other US allies ; and, of course, the US and Russia routinely hack into each others' email and other communications; so, even if Russia did what Clinton says, then to call it "like any other attack" against the United States and to threaten to answer it with "military responses", would itself be historically unprecedented - which is what Hillary Clinton is promising to do.

Historically unprecedented, like nuclear war itself would be. And she was saying this in the context of her alleging that Russia had "attacked" the DNC (Democratic National Committee), and she as President might "attack" back, perhaps even with "military responses". This was not an off-the-cuff remark from her - it was her prepared text in a speech. She said it though, for example, on 26 October 2013, Britain's Telegraph had headlined, "US 'operates 80 listening posts worldwide, 19 in Europe, and snooped on Merkel mobile 2002-2013' : US intelligence… targeted Angela Merkel's phone from 2002 to 2013, according to new eavesdropping leaks".

But now, this tapping against Merkel would, according to Hillary Clinton's logic (unless she intends it to apply only by the United States against Russia), constitute reason for Germany (and 34 other nations ) to go to war against the United States.

Clinton also said there: "We need to respond to evolving threats from states like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea from networks, criminal and terrorist networks like ISIS. We need a military that is ready and agile so it can meet the full range of threats, and operate on short notice across every domain, not just land, sea, air and space, but also cyberspace".

She also said that the sequester agreement between the Congress and the President must end, because US military spending should not be limited: "I am all for cutting the fat out of the budget and making sure we stretch our dollars… But we cannot impose arbitrary limits on something as important as our military. That makes no sense at all. The sequester makes our country less secure. Let's end it and get a budget deal that supports America's military". She wasn't opposing "arbitrary limits" on non-military spending; she implied that that's not "as important as our military".

She was clear: this is a wartime US, not a peacetime nation; we're already at war, in her view; and therefore continued unlimited cost-overruns to Lockheed Martin etc. need to be accepted, not limited (by "arbitrary limits" or otherwise). She favors "cutting the fat out of the budget" for healthcare, education, subsidies to the poor, environmental protection, etc., but not for war, not for this war. A more bellicose speech, especially against "threats from states like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea from networks, criminal and terrorist networks like ISIS", all equating "states" such as Russia and China, with "terrorist networks like ISIS", could hardly be imagined - as if Russia and China are anything like jihadist organizations, and are hostile toward America, as such jihadist groups are.

However, her threat to respond to an alleged "cyber attack" from Russia by "serious political, economic and military responses" , is unprecedented, even from her. It was big news when she said it, though virtually ignored by America's newsmedia.

The only US newsmedia to have picked up on Clinton's shocking threat were Republican-Party-oriented ones, because the Democratic-Party and nonpartisan 'news' media in the US don't criticize a Democratic nominee's neoconservatism - they hide it, or else find excuses for it (even after the Republican neoconservative President George W. Bush's catastrophic and lie-based neoconservative invasion of Iraq - then headed by the Moscow-friendly Saddam Hussein - in 2003, which many Democratic office-holders, such as Hillary Clinton backed).

So, everything in today's USA 'news' media is favorable toward neoconservatism - it's now the "Establishment" foreign policy, established notwithstanding the catastrophic Iraq-invasion, from which America's 'news' media have evidently learned nothing whatsoever (because they're essentially unchanged and committed to the same aristocracy as has long controlled them).

However, now that the Republican Party's Presidential nominee, Donald Trump, is openly critical of Hillary Clinton's and George W. Bush's neoconservatism, any Republican-oriented 'news' media that support Trump's candidacy allows its 'journalists' to criticize Clinton's neoconservatism; and, so, there were a few such critiques of this shocking statement from Clinton.

The Republican Party's "Daily Caller" headlined about this more directly than any other US 'news' medium, "Clinton Advocates Response To DNC Hack That Would Likely Bring On WWIII" , and reported, on September 1st, that "Clinton's cavalier attitude toward going to war over cyber attacks seems to contradict her assertion that she is the responsible voice on foreign policy in the current election".

The Republican Washington Times newspaper headlined "Hillary Clinton: US will treat cyberattacks 'just like any other attack'" , and reported that she would consider using the "military to respond to cyberattacks," but that her Republican opponent had indicated he would instead use only cyber against cyber: "'I am a fan of the future, and cyber is the future,' he said when asked by Time magazine during the Republican National Convention about using cyberweapons". However, Trump was not asked there whether he would escalate from a cyber attack to a physical one. Trump has many times said that having good relations with Russia would be a priority if he becomes President. That would obviously be impossible if he (like Hillary) were to be seeking a pretext for war against Russia.

The mainstream The Hill newspaper bannered, "Clinton: Treat cyberattacks 'like any other attack'" , and reported that, "Since many high-profile cyberattacks could be interpreted as traditional intelligence-gathering - something the US itself also engages in - the White House is often in a tricky political position when it comes to its response". That's not critical of her position, but at least it makes note of the crucial fact that if the US were to treat a hacker's attack as being an excuse to invade Russia, it would treat the US itself as being already an invader of Russia - which the US prior to a President Hillary Clinton never actually has been, notwithstanding the routine nature of international cyber espionage (which Clinton has now stated she wants to become a cause of war), which has been, and will continue to be, essential in the present era.

The International Business Times, an online-only site, headlined September 1 st , "Clinton: US should use 'military response' to fight cyberattacks from Russia and China" , and reported that a Pentagon official had testified to Congress on July 13 th , that current US policy on this matter is: "When determining whether a cyber incident constitutes an armed attack, the US government considers a broad range of factors, including the nature and extent of injury or death to persons and the destruction of or damage to property. … Cyber incidents are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and the national security leadership and the president will make a determination if it's an armed attack".

Hillary's statement on this matter was simply ignored by The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, Fox, CNN, The Nation, The Atlantic, Harper's, National Review, Common Dreams, Alternet, Truthout, and all the rest of the US standard and 'alternative news' reporting organizations. Perhaps when Americans go to the polls to elect a President on November 8th, almost none of them will have learned about her policy on this incredibly important matter.

Hillary's statement was in line with the current Administration's direction of policy, but is farther along in that direction than the Obama Administration's policy yet is.

As the German Economic News article had noted, but only in passing: "Just a few months ago, US President Barack Obama had laid the legal basis for this procedure and signed a decree that equates hacker attacks with military attacks". However, this slightly overstated the degree to which Obama has advanced "this procedure". On 1 April 2016 - and not as any April Fool's joke - techdirt had headlined "President Obama Signs Executive Order Saying That Now He's Going To Be Really Mad If He Catches Someone Cyberattacking Us" and linked to the document, which techdirt noted was "allowing the White House to issue sanctions on those 'engaging in significant malicious cyber-enabled activities'".

The writer, Mike Masnick, continued, quite accurately: "To make this work, the President officially declared foreign hacking to be a 'national emergency' (no, really) and basically said that if the government decides that some foreign person is doing a bit too much hacking, the US government can basically do all sorts of bad stuff to them, like seize anything they have in the US and block them from coming to the US". What Hillary Clinton wants to add to this policy is physical, military, invasion, for practices such as (if Russia becomes declared by the US President to have been behind the hacking of the DNC) what is actually routine activity of the CIA, NSA, and, of course, of Russia's (and other countries') intelligence operations.

It wasn't directly Obama's own action that led most powerfully up to Hillary Clinton's policy on this, but instead NATO's recent action - and NATO has always been an extension of the US President, it's his military club, and it authorizes him to go to war against any nation that it decides to have been invaded by some non-member country (especially Russia or China - the Saudis, Qataris, and other funders behind international jihadist attacks are institutionally prohibited from being considered for invasion by NATO, because the US keeps those regimes in power, and those regimes are generally the biggest purchasers of US weapons). I reported on this at The Saker's site, on 15 June 2016, headlining "NATO Says It Might Now Have Grounds to Attack Russia" . That report opened:

On Tuesday, June 14 th , NATO announced that if a NATO member country becomes the victim of a cyber attack by persons in a non-NATO country such as Russia or China, then NATO's Article V "collective defense" provision requires each NATO member country to join that NATO member country if it decides to strike back against the attacking country. …

NATO is now alleging that because Russian hackers had copied the emails on Hillary Clinton's home computer , this action of someone in Russia taking advantage of her having privatized her US State Department communications to her unsecured home computer and of such a Russian's then snooping into the US State Department business that was stored on it, might constitute a Russian attack against the United States of America, and would, if the US President declares it to be a Russian invasion of the US, trigger NATO's mutual-defense clause and so require all NATO nations to join with the US government in going to war against Russia, if the US government so decides.

So, Obama is using NATO to set the groundwork for Hillary Clinton's policy as (he hopes) America's next President. Meanwhile, Obama's public rhetoric on the matter is far more modest, and less scary. It's sane-sounding falsehoods. At the end of the G-20 Summit in Beijing, he held a press conference September 5th (VIDEO at this link) , in which he was asked specifically (3:15) "Q: On the cyber front, … do you think Russia is trying to influence the US election?" and he went into a lengthy statement, insulting Putin and saying (until 6:40 on the video) why Obama is superior to Putin on the Syrian war, and then (until 8:07 in the video) blaming Putin for, what is actually, the refusal of the Ukrainian parliament or Rada to approve the federalization of Ukraine that's stated in the Minsk agreement as being a prerequisite to direct talks being held between the Donbass residents and the Obama-installed regime in Kiev that's been trying to exterminate the residents of Donbass . Then (8:07 in the video), Obama got around to the reporter's question:

And finally, we did talk about cyber-security generally. I'm not going to comment on specific investigations that are still alive and active, but I will tell you that we've had problems with cyber-intrusions from Russia in the past, from other countries in the past, and, look, we're moving into a new era here, where a number of countries have significant capacities, and frankly we've got more capacity than anybody both offensively and defensively, but our goal is not to suddenly in the cyber-arena duplicate a cycle of escalation that we saw when it comes to other arms-races in the past, but rather to start instituting (9:00) some norms so that everybody's acting responsibly.

He is a far more effective deceiver than is his intended successor, but Hillary's goals and his, have always been the same: achieving what the US aristocracy want. Whereas she operates with a sledgehammer, he operates with a scalpel . And he hopes to hand this operation off to her on 20 January 2017.

This is what Hillary's statement that "the United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack" is reflecting: it's reflecting that the US will, if she becomes President, be actively seeking an excuse to invade Russia. The Obama-mask will then be off.

If this turns out to be the case, then it will be raw control of the US Government by the military-industrial complex, which includes the arms-makers plus the universities . It's the owners - the aristocrats - plus their servants; and at least 90% of the military-industrial complex support Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Like her, they are all demanding that the sequester be ended and that any future efforts to reduce the US Government's debts must come from cutting expenditures for healthcare, education, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, environmental protection, and expenditures on the poor; no cuts (but only increases) for the military. This is based on the conservative theory, that the last thing to cut in government is the military.

The Republicans used to champion that view (thus the "conservative" in "neoconservative" ). But after Obama came into office, the Republican Party became divided about that, while the Democratic Party (under Obama) increasingly came to support neoconservatism . Hillary is now the neoconservatives' candidate . (And she's also the close friend of many of them, and hired and promoted many of them at her State Department .) If she becomes the next President, then we might end up having the most neoconservative (i.e., military-industrial-complex-run) government ever. This would be terrific for America's weapons-makers, but it very possibly would be horrific for everybody else. That's the worst lobby of all, to run the country . (And, as that link there shows, Clinton has received over five times as much money from it as has her Republican opponent.)

George Herbert Walker Bush knows lots that the 'news' media don't report (even when it has already been leaked in one way or another), and the Clinton plan to destroy Russia is part of that. Will the Russian government accept it? Or will it do whatever is required in order to defeat it? This is already a serious nuclear confrontation .