geek tragedy
geek tragedy's JournalUSA Today: Don't Vote for Trump: Our View
This year, the choice isnt between two capable major party nominees who happen to have significant ideological differences. This year, one of the candidates Republican nominee Donald Trump is, by unanimous consensus of the Editorial Board, unfit for the presidency.
From the day he declared his candidacy 15 months ago through this weeks first presidential debate, Trump has demonstrated repeatedly that he lacks the temperament, knowledge, steadiness and honesty that America needs from its presidents.
Whether through indifference or ignorance, Trump has betrayed fundamental commitments made by all presidents since the end of World War II. These commitments include unwavering support for NATO allies, steadfast opposition to Russian aggression, and the absolute certainty that the United States will make good on its debts. He has expressed troubling admiration for authoritarian leaders and scant regard for constitutional protections.
....
Where does that leave us? Our bottom-line advice for voters is this: Stay true to your convictions. That might mean a vote for Clinton, the most plausible alternative to keep Trump out of the White House. Or it might mean a third-party candidate. Or a write-in. Or a focus on down-ballot candidates who will serve the nation honestly, try to heal its divisions, and work to solve its problems.
Whatever you do, however, resist the siren song of a dangerous demagogue. By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/09/29/dont-vote-for-donald-trump-editorial-board-editorials-debates/91295020/
Evan McMullin, the non-racist Republican
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/4407870-155/jonathan-capehart-still-hate-trump-and
His policies would obviously hurt lots of folks, African-Americans included. But, unlike the Party of Trump, that is not the goal.
There's a reason why an overwhelming majority of white 'conservatives' chose Trump instead of someone like this guy.
Break Up With That Trump Supporter
http://time.com/4509441/presidential-debates-donald-trump-relationships/This is not just a political disagreement, as if one of you supports free trade agreements because you think they bolster the economy and the other believes theyve wreaked havoc on the American working class. Its not a difference of political opinion, where you both want to see low-income Americans thrive, but you disagree on how to get there. This is about fundamental values: How should we treat other human beings? Is blatant, aggressive racism acceptable? Are women human?
...
A vote for Trump is an affirmation of racism, sexism, and bigotry. Even if you personally swear up and down you are not racist, sexist or bigoted, you cant support putting someone hateful in the highest national office and claim your own innocenceit doesnt work like that. If you support a racist, sexist bigot, you are supporting a racist, sexist bigotand that reflects back on you, and suggests you too might be a racist, sexist bigot. If youre dating someone who supports a racist, sexist bigot, you are either actually dating a racist, sexist bigot, or youre dating someone who pledges his allegiance racist, sexist bigots. Its a distinction without a meaningful difference.
...
If your partners response to bigotry is So what, that tells you everything you need to know about their character. If youre a woman, this isnt some ephemeral idea or hazy theoryits about you, and your very humanity. Your partner hears that someone hates womena category to which you belongand this person thinks youre less capable than men and even less than human, and his response is to validate that persons aspirations to one of the most powerful positions in the world, and shrug off your concerns as so what.
So what? Dont be with someone who thinks its ok for people to hate you is what. Dont be with someone who is willing to support those who would blithely disrespect you. Dont be with someone who, in his so what, renders your existence a political talking point or a funny punch line or some desirable ability to say what he thinks without consequences. There is not value in everyone saying aloud everything that runs through ones mind, especially when it comes to ugly, uncharitable, prejudiced thoughts; what Trumps fans are applauding isnt just that he says the previously taboo, but that he thinks it and seeks to normalize it. They agree with what Trump thinks. And what he thinks is that you dont matter. Why is that enviable and authentic anti-PC truth-telling instead of the more obvious Wow, this guy is an authentically sexist jerk?
When you cast your ballot in November, you arent voting for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. Youre voting for a scared pregnant teenager in Arkansas who doesnt know how shes going to make this work. Youre voting for the son of undocumented immigrant parents in California who fears his family will be torn apart. Youre voting for a Muslim family in Oklahoma who thought they knew their neighbors and now arent so sure. Youre voting for the single mom in Wisconsin whos just trying to hold it all together. When youre voting in November, youre answering the question: How do these people deserve to be treated in the United States of America?
When your boyfriend or husband supports Trump, hes answering that question too. Which should lead you to another one: Why is this the man you choose?
Supporting Trump is per se evidence of moral degeneracy and compromised character.
Trump too cowardly to use his harshest attacks against Clinton in person, reminds me of Joe in 2008
Clinton to score another GOP endorsement: former senator John Warner of Virginia
Source: Washington Post
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton will score another high-powered Republican endorsement on Wednesday, according to a campaign aide: retired senator John Warner of Virginia, a popular GOP maverick with renowned military credentials.
Warners decision not to support his partys nominee, Donald Trump, is intended to send a signal in the five-term senators battleground home state and beyond that mainstream, security-minded Republicans should side with Clinton.
...
Perhaps best known by some for marrying actress Elizabeth Taylor, Warner, 89, is also known for bucking his party. A World War II veteran, former U.S. Navy secretary and former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Warner famously opposed the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork, as well as the 1994 Senate candidacy of Oliver North of Iran-contra notoriety. He endorsed Democrat Mark R. Warner over Republican Jim Gilmore to fill his own seat in the U.S. Senate.
John Warners ability to withstand the Republican criticism he endured for those decisions stemmed largely from the gravitas he had built over a lengthy Senate career in which he mastered national security issues and diligently delivered for the states military bases and defense contractors.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-to-score-another-gop-endorsement-former-senator-john-warner-of-virginia/2016/09/27/43caf6e6-84cf-11e6-a3ef-f35afb41797f_story.html
There are precious few, if any, like him left in the GOP. Which is why we're seeing this endorsement.
When Trump said that not paying taxes ‘makes me smart,’ undecided voters in N.C. gasped
But Trumps response Monday night when Hillary Clinton accused him of not paying a cent of federal tax left Townley appalled.
That makes me smart, Trump said, unapologetic and smiling, during the presidential debate.
That comment caused a gasp in the hotel conference room where Townley and a half-dozen other undecided voters in this battleground state were watching the debate.
Thats offensive. I pay taxes, said Townley, 52, a program director for a local council of governments.
...
Each of the men and women said they had not yet found a candidate to rally around because they found fault with both. But after the debate, four of the six undecided voters said they now leaned toward Clinton after she showed mastery of the issues and appeared more presidential. A fifth voter declared himself essentially now in the Clintons camp: After tonight, I think I am convinced, I will vote for Clinton, said Rev. Kelly Andrews, a Baptist pastor from Tarboro.
Hint for Dumbass Donald: smart people don't brag to voters about how smart they are.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-lean-toward-clinton-among-one-group-of-undecided-north-carolina-voters/2016/09/27/ff271b2e-8469-11e6-92c2-14b64f3d453f_story.html
I hope he's all right. (Debate video)
What are some good non-poll metrics for measuring the state of the race?
In particular, ones showing that Clinton's ground game is plugged into the electorate and moving votes.
I think it has to be early voting statistics, in states like Iowa, Florida, Ohio, and North Carolina.
Clinton's team showed themselves very adept at using absentee ballots in the primary against Sanders.
We should see the fruits of that weeks before the actual election day.
Ted Cruz, Dignity Wraith, endorses the man who insulted his wife and father in public
and wipes out his best moment in public life, his showing up Trump at the RNC.
In a way, this is a relief as it nullifies the only two times I've ever felt respect for Cruz as a man.
NBC/WSJ Poll--likely voters--Hillary .... +7!!!!!!!!!! (48-41) in 2 way race
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/21/heading-into-first-debate-clinton-with-6-point-lead-over-trump-new-nbc-wsj-poll.html43-37 in 4-way race
...
But the poll shows Clinton, a former First Lady, senator, and Secretary of State, with powerful advantages over Trump on "being knowledgeable and experienced enough to handle the presidency" (60 percent to 23 percent), and "having the right temperament to be president" (56 percent to 23 percent). Voters prefer Trump on "being honest and straightforward" by 41 percent to 31 percent, down from his 16-percentage point edge on that quality in June.
Voters choose Clinton by a two-to-one margin, 51 percent to 25 percent, on "being in charge of our nuclear weapons," and by 48 percent to 33 percent on "being a good Commander-in-Chief." Though Trump has cast himself as the candidate of change, voters pick Clinton narrowly (44 percent to 38 percent) on "changing the country for the better."
Profile Information
Member since: Thu May 13, 2004, 12:50 PMNumber of posts: 68,868