[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

 

How I think the election will turn out. 

 

I think Penn will be close, but the Black Vote will end up tilting it in Hillary's favor. Maine's district is the vote nobody is talking about. But Trump is crazy popular there. The one electoral vote is really important.

 

But this year has a good chance to be a tie vote too

 

Iowa has the 2nd highest voter reactivity of all the states (your vote matters individually) so glad I might be able to make a small difference here

 

Virginia is out now that Hillary picked her VP from there

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Source, please.

https://twitter.com/DaveKIRO7/status/757650057894256640

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Cruz and Bernie both sold out their respective followers betting on Hillary. It's good to see bi-partisanship #Bernie #DemsInPhilly 

 

 

 

 

 

Choose your side

JS

[Just Crouton]

Didn't really care much about Sanders, but after what his own party did to him and his supporters, I hope Trump annihilates Hillary. Like, "Suplex City"-level annihilation.

 

That poor man must have to take 4 showers just to get the first layer of filth off himself for helping his party of backstabbing snobs by endorsing that corrupt, godless shedevil.

[Just Crouton]

"Our motto is when they go low, we go high."

 

So, shafting the guy who could win your party another 4 years is going high, Mrs. Obama?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Didn't really care much about Sanders, but after what his own party did to him and his supporters, I hope Trump annihilates Hillary. Like, "Suplex City"-level annihilation.

 

That poor man must have to take 4 showers just to get the first layer of filth off himself for helping his party of backstabbing snobs by endorsing that corrupt, godless shedevil.

Wikileaks is saying tomorrow is about Hillary. So poor Bernie might need that shower sooner than later. By endorsing he finished himself though. Even if he un-endorses his momentum is gone. Much like Trump and Trumpism, Bernie's movement has left him behind. They were both always bigger than the candidate themselves. It's unfortunate to see that Bernie decided he was worth more than his movement

Like I said, Bernie and Cruz are in the same boat. At the end of the day, the only people who're really cucks...are the bernie supporters who just got assrammed after thinking he was with them.

 

Turns out, he's with her

 

 

 

[Just Crouton]

[spoiler=nevermind]

http://newsninja2012.com/dnc-email-leaks-show-racist-outreach-to-latinos-called-taco-bowl-engagement/

 

____________________________________

 

TRUMP! FINISH THEM OFF!

 

 

 

EDIT: This was brought up previously, my mistake.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2016/07/leaks-show-dnc-asked-white-house-to-reward-donors-with-slots-on-boards-and-commissions/

 

More info, honestly the more the leak, it seems the more agencies are proven dirty

 

This reminds me of the Jacksonian spoil system

 

538 currently has Trump winning 270-268 off the Maine 2nd district delegate. Other than that, we'll have to see if there are anymore afterberners

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

As soon as Trump ended his Press Conference, the NY Times was publishing headlines saying Trump called on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton's emails.

 

Well, Hillary Clinton's server is likely in an evidence locker in Quantico. I am going to go out on a limb and say that it is not plugged in and connected to the internet.

 

Anything that Russia releases would be something they already possess, meaning they would have had to have stolen information while Hillary's server was operational.

 

Here's the Catch-22. If Hillary Clinton is telling the truth and she only deleted emails pertaining to yoga lessons and Chelsea Clinton's wedding, then Russia hacking that information is purely a civil matter. It would be nothing but a foreign government hacking a private citizen.

 

But if Hillary Clinton lied... if she violated the Federal Records Act and destroyed government documents that she had an obligation to preserve... if she violated the Espionage Act and removed classified information from a secure environment, making it available for foreign hackers to steal... then anything Russia puts forward would be evidence of Hillary Clinton committing a crime.

 

So which is it, Mainstream Media? Is Hillary Clinton innocent of wrongdoing and Russia hacking her is largely a civil matter and one to be left to local law enforcement? Or is this prospect of Russia releasing Hillary's emails a threat to national security?

 

You can't have it both ways.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-slow-economic-growth-second-quarter-2016-226419

[Aerion Brightflame]

Congrats for arriving at the problems with her Email Scandal a few weeks too late. 

 

And I believe it was confirmed from the investigation into her server that Hilary brought her Blackberry with her on official business. And that that device was hack-able with ease, and hence her emails were hack-able with ease. I've heard it phrased as the only way foreign intelligence agencies don't have Hilary's emails is if they are incompetent. 

 

It doesn't matter what her emails actually pertained to - She was attempted to delete all of the emails on her server before the FBI got them. Deleting any of them, or even her schedules as we known she did violated at least one public information act. 

 

The issue is the investigation into Hilary is over, and she didn't get a charge. 

[Goose]

Cruz and Bernie both sold out their respective followers betting on Hillary. It's good to see bi-partisanship #Bernie #DemsInPhilly 

 

 

 

 

Choose your side

JS

 

or you could get off the internet and find out hot people support every major candidate

[Tentacruel]

So how about Gary Johnson?

 

Right guys?

 

Anyone?

[cr47t]

So how about Gary Johnson?

 

Right guys?

 

Anyone?

Don't forget Jill Stein, either.

 

Anyway Johnson has been polling pret-ty high, 13% at tops -- so let's see if he (or maybe Jill too) can get 15% and to the debates.

[Goose]

Johnson is horrible.  Absolutely terrible for the country.  Anti-federal education support, pro-citizens united, pro-gun, anti-healthcare, opposed to a lot of green energy initiatives.  These things should make any Bernie supporter quake in fear of a Johnson presidency.

 

 

This article highlights why Jill Stein is not a good candidate: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/07/27/jill_stein_is_not_the_savior_the_left_is_looking_for.html

[Tentacruel]

Johnson is horrible.  Absolutely terrible for the country.  Anti-federal education support, pro-citizens united, pro-gun, anti-healthcare, opposed to a lot of green energy initiatives.  These things should make any Bernie supporter quake in fear of a Johnson presidency.

 

Could you elaborate a bit, I'm not finding a lot of these while researching him. 

[Goose]

His official platform talks about education and green energy.  Other things you need to look elsewhere for but they come up right away when you google it.

 

http://presidential-candidates.insidegov.com/l/39/Gary-Johnson 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Gary_Johnson

https://ballotpedia.org/Gary_Johnson_presidential_campaign,_2016/Healthcare

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Don't forget Jill Stein, either.

 

Anyway Johnson has been polling pret-ty high, 13% at tops -- so let's see if he (or maybe Jill too) can get 15% and to the debates.

Maybe, but the fact remains you need to hit 15 regularly to get on the debate, and Johnson's avg is still only about 7-8%

 

Maybe if the Bushes and Romney endorse him things will change, but I rather doubt it

 

So how about Gary Johnson?

 

Right guys?

 

Anyone?

Why? He's basically the worst from both parties, he would be blatantly pushing both SJW and Corporate power

 

or you could get off the internet and find out hot people support every major candidate

It's a joke mate, don't take things so seriously. 

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/26/exclusive-irs-launches-investigation-of-clinton-foundation/?google_editors_picks=true

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So how about Gary Johnson?

 

Right guys?

 

Anyone?

No, Bernie people should vote Trump over Clinton or any of these other two that won't make it. Why?

 

A. Trump supports banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

 

The Advocate interviewed Trump in 2000 when he was considering a Presidential run, during which he was asked what he would do to combat anti-gay prejudice, and what his thoughts were on several highly publicized instances of violence against trans individuals. Trump said he supported amending the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include language that protected people on the basis of sexual orientation; would not hesitate to place LGBTQ individuals in his Administration; supported LGBTQ individuals serving in the military; supports new hate-crimes legislation to crack down on anti-gay violence; and was emotionally moved by the murder of William Shepard, a highly-publicized murder of a gay college student in 1998.

 

In an April interview on the Today Show, Trump said he said transgender individuals should use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate, and even said Caitlyn Jenner could use whichever bathroom she preferred at any Trump. Ms. Jenner took Trump up on that offer and successfully used the women’s restroom at Trump International Hotel in New York City.

 

Trump has also been critical of Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples after the Obergefell decision.

 

B. Trump has long criticized the “free trade” deals Clinton has long supported.

 

Trump is a businessman, and has long been an outspoken critic of free trade agreements. In a 1999 article in The New Mexican, Trump was quoted saying, “I do think in many cases the workers know a lot more than the people that are representing us on trade.” Trump also said, in what has come to be a common theme in his Presidential bid, that “[w]e don’t have our best and our smartest and our brightest . . . If you look at other countries, they have their smartest, their brightest, their toughest, their best negotiators. And we’re not going to beat them unless we get ours.”

 

Specifically, Trump was an opponent of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) from the beginning, and is an ardent opponent of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP).

 

President Obama promised he would renegotiate NAFTA, but never did. Trump has promised to renegotiate NAFTA, and, if a new deal cannot be reached, Trump has promised to invoke Article 2205 of NAFTA to give notice of the United States’ intent to withdraw from the agreement. Trump has also consistently said that under no circumstance would he ratify the TPP.

 

Clinton, on the other hand, supported NAFTA, and do not let her tell you she did not. During the 2008 Presidential primaries, PolitiFact rated as “true” a statement made by then-Senator Obama, in which he said, Clinton “was saying great things about NAFTA until she started running for president.” In 1996, Clinton praised NAFTA as “proving its worth,” according to NPR. But when Clinton was courting votes in her 2000 Senate bid from voters that had lost their jobs as a result of NAFTA, she conveniently argued that NAFTA was “flawed.”

 

NAFTA has utterly destroyed the American middle class. Since 1994, “growing trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have displaced production that supported roughly 660,000 (manufacturing only) and 1.0 million (total) U.S. jobs since the agreement took effect in 1994. Export growth since 1994 supported an additional 1 million U.S. jobs, while imports displaced domestic production that would support 2 million jobs,” according to the Economic Policy Institute. NAFTA also “reduced wage payments to U.S. workers by $7.6 billion in 2004 alone.”

 

Clinton has a similarly shifty record on the TPP; she publicly supported it 45 times, and even called it the “gold standard,” before “evolving” on the issue. Then Terry McAuliffe, a longtime Clinton insider, said Clinton would approve the TPP after making minor “tweaks” to the deal. The public record heavily suggests that regardless what Clinton says, she will ratify the TPP.

 

NPR also compiled Clinton’s long history of flip-flopping trade, saying she opposes such deals when running for election, but being the first one to support trade deals once in power. Here are the highlights:

 

“As a senator, she voted in favor of free trade agreements with Singapore, Chile, Australia, Morocco and Oman. She also voiced support for deals with Jordan and Peru. . . .

 

“When running for president in 2007 and 2008, she spoke strongly against potential agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. Her positions on Colombia and South Korea changed, however, when she became secretary of state under President Obama, who ironically ran to Clinton’s left in 2008 on trade.

 

“In 2007, for example, Clinton called the South Korea deal “inherently unfair.” Yet, four years later in Seoul, South Korea, as secretary of state, she said getting a South Korea deal done was a “priority for me, for President Obama and for the entire administration. We are determined to get it done, and I believe we will.”

 

“In April 2008, before the Pennsylvania primary, where she was trying to woo white working-class men, she said of a Colombia deal that she “will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.”

 

“But again, as secretary of state, she changed her tune.

 

‘We think it’s strongly in the interests of both Colombia and the United States,’ Clinton said two years later. ‘And I return very invigorated … to begin a very intensive effort to try to obtain the votes to get the free trade agreement finally ratified.'”

As an ad from the 2008 Democratic Primaries, put out by the Obama campaign, put it, Clinton will “say anything, and change nothing.”

 

Clinton simply cannot be trusted with American trade policy. Trump can; he has remained consistent for decades.

 

C. Trump has actually taken on Wall Street–and won.

 

Trump fought the Wall Street banks during the recession of 1990 and 1991, which hit the Atlantic City gaming and New York real estate industries especially hard. The recession forced Trump to file for Chapter 11 protection, a move that ultimately saved as many as 17,000 jobs.

 

At the time, Trump was personally on the hook for $900 million. Far from a bailout, Trump told it like it was and put the banks in their place. In his book Think Big, Trump wrote:

 

“I turned it back on the banks and let them accept some of the blame. I figured it was the bank’s problem, not mine. What the hell did I care? I actually told one bank, ‘I told you you shouldn’t have loaned me that money. I told you that goddamn deal was no good. You knew you were charging me too much interest.’ I was just kidding—but maybe not. That is what I had to say. It was not great, but it was better than dropping to my knees like other people did.”

In the end, Trump was able to negotiate his personal debts down to $150 million, nearly four-fifths of the original responsibility. Moreover, Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence, led the fight and voted against the Wall Street bailout of 2008.

 

II. CONCLUSION

 

Whether it was the fake “Bernie Bros” narrative or the “thrown chair” story at the Nevada convention, Bernie Sanders supporters know what it is like to be the subject of establishment media smear campaigns. The anger that you felt when reading those stories and watching those news programs is the exact same way that every Trump supporter has felt this entire election cycle.

 

The fact is that the media cannot and should never be trusted. Wikileaks demonstrated why–collusion.

 

While no one suggests that Trump is a perfect messenger, he is a real messenger.

 

And, frankly, he may be our last hope to end the bipartisan corruption of the Establishment.

 

Edit:

 

 

As for education, he's covered that too

 

He's talked about this before, tie loan awards to degree taken. Degrees that more likely pay off loans get bigger loans. Schools will finally be incentivized to not trick kids into studying art and paying off $200,000 in loans through unpaid museum internships.

[cr47t]

Tell me, Winter, do you know if TPP has anything like Article 50 2205 in it so those in the deal who want out can get out?

[Aerion Brightflame]

There's a lot of Libertarian Social policies that essentially make them unelectable in our current climate, like removal of the minimum wage at both state and federal level. Really that's all that I'd need to see to scare me off of that party right now. It should terrify anyone given how little few rights and how little negotiating power the average US worker has. 

 

And again, Green is just a nice moral vote. Because whilst most of there policies (Save the stance of Nuclear Power) are admirable, and should be introduced gradually into most nations, as a collective there are a terrible financial burden. 

 

And Winter, doesn't that education idea serve to just price people out of jobs? Part of the reason people get degrees, even shitty ones, are because degrees are somewhat of a necessity to employment nowadays across almost any field. In the long term that changes, but in the short term you just have either a larger chunk of the workforce with no way of getting the necessary qualifications for the available jobs (Due to the lack of Bluecollar work that is going to only increase as time goes on), or you just massively increase competition in other fields. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Tell me, Winter, do you know if TPP has anything like Article 50 2205 in it so those in the deal who want out can get out?

I believe I read that no one country can get out of the TPP without all countries in the treaty getting out of it. It’s as close to locked in as you can get

[cr47t]

no one country can get out of the TPP without all countries in the treaty getting out of it. It’s as close to locked in as you can get

OK, who in the world came up with THAT idea?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

And Winter, doesn't that education idea serve to just price people out of jobs? Part of the reason people get degrees, even shitty ones, are because degrees are somewhat of a necessity to employment nowadays across almost any field. In the long term that changes, but in the short term you just have either a larger chunk of the workforce with no way of getting the necessary qualifications for the available jobs (Due to the lack of Bluecollar work that is going to only increase as time goes on), or you just massively increase competition in other fields. 

Speaking of MW, it's intriguing to see Trump cave and offer a MW of 10 Dollars at the minimum. It'll be intriguing to see if he goes up to 15 by the end

 

Well the idea Tom is, going to STEM fields, or law, or Medicine tends to be far more expensive and debt-crushing in the long run. By incentives people looking to go in that area, yes you would have more competition. But that's a good thing cause people really want to push those fields at the moment. 

 

As for the lack of blue collar workers, those jobs are going away. The Wall and infrastructure can keep the steel and other blue-collar alive for a while, but in the future those will be mechanized. We really shouldn't be encouraging our generation to go into blue collar or useless professions like a Art Degree 

[Goose]

Actual text from the TPP:

 

Article 30.6: Withdrawal

1. Any Party may withdraw from this Agreement by providing written notice of withdrawal to the Depositary. A withdrawing Party shall simultaneously notify the other Parties of its withdrawal through the overall contact points designated under Article 27.5 (Contact Points).

2. A withdrawal shall take effect six months after a Party provides written notice to the Depositary under paragraph 1, unless the Parties agree on a different period. If a Party withdraws, this Agreement shall remain in force for the remaining Parties.

So Winter is wrong, you can withdraw unilaterally given six months notice.