Political Roundtable Part XI

dckingsfan · Post #81 » by **dckingsfan** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 12:54 pm

Wizardspride wrote:

Read on Twitter

There you go - Russians win. They kicked Obama's butt for two terms and now we get Trump or Podesta... perfect.

Induveca · Post #82 » by **Induveca** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 1:54 pm

dckingsfan wrote:
Wizardspride wrote:

Read on Twitter

There you go - Russians win. They kicked Obama's butt for two terms and now we get Trump or Podesta... perfect.

The entire Russian conspiracy is ridiculous. If you take 30 minutes to follow the leaks online, the Russian angle is beyond absurd. It's a line meant to scare the generic "American".

Post #83 » by **montestewart** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 2:05 pm

Induveca wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:
Wizardspride wrote:

Read on Twitter

There you go - Russians win. They kicked Obama's butt for two terms and now we get Trump or Podesta... perfect.

The entire Russian conspiracy is ridiculous. If you take 30 minutes to follow the leaks online, the Russian angle is beyond absurd. It's a line meant to scare the generic "American".

So state sponsored hacking (USA, N. Korea, China, etc.) is a myth? Id be interested in reading more about that. Kind of seems like USA and USSR/Russia have been going at it by any means necessary for a long time.

Induveca · Post #84 » by **Induveca** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 3:53 pm

Monte, I was referring to the Clinton response of "Russia" in various forms to anything perceived as negative by her campaign team.

There have been so many variations it's become ridiculous. Wikileaks, Assange, Trump/Putin, Trump/Banks etc etc.

But somehow their campaign also spins Trump would be a risk to start nuclear war with Russia?

These are all ridiculous PR stunts of a campaign that is in freefall. In just the past 24 hours her account has tweeted references to "Russia" 15 times and "nuclear" 8 times.

dckingsfan · Post #85 » by **dckingsfan** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 4:15 pm

Kind of like Godwin's law - whomever mentions Russia and Nuclear war in an argument first loses...

I do think that Hillary and the Clinton Foundation have many ties to foreign players - and that will affect her judgment (not in a good way). Vs. Trump with absolutely zero foreign policy experience.

More nice choices.

Post #86 » by **montestewart** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 4:18 pm

Induveca wrote:Monte, I was referring to the Clinton response of "Russia" in various forms to anything perceived as negative by her campaign team.

There have been so many variations it's become ridiculous. Wikileaks, Assange, Trump/Putin, Trump/Banks etc etc.

But somehow their campaign also spins Trump would be a risk to start nuclear war with Russia?

These are all ridiculous PR stunts of a campaign that is in freefall. In just the past 24 hours her account has tweeted references to "Russia" 15 times and "nuclear" 8 times.

If you steal slogans from 80s punk rock lyrics, you can get "Russia" and "nuclear" pretty easily. "Bored" and "anarchy" come up a lot too.

Agreed about the deflecting. Between Russia/Assange/Etc. and Press/Rigged/Etc. I'm not getting a sense of personal accountability among the candidates.

AFM · Post #87 » by **AFM** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 4:51 pm

Assange deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He and Carlos Danger. Instead Assange will probably be droned.

popper · Post #88 » by **popper** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 4:54 pm

Leaks: Podesta Discusses ‘Dumping’ Hillary Emails One Day After NYT Report

http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/01/leaks-podesta-discusses-dumping-hillary-emails-one-day-after-nyt-report/#ixzz4OmE2U9FR

BigA · Post #89 » by **BigA** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 4:54 pm

Remember the 2012 debate when Romney was warning about Russia, and Obama responded "the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back"? Not to mention Hillary herself with that reset button. Good times.

gtn130 · Post #90 » by **gtn130** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:02 pm

BigA wrote:Remember the 2012 debate when Romney was warning about Russia, and Obama responded "the 80s called and they want their foreign policy back"? Not to mention Hillary herself with that reset button. Good times.

Russia has ~half the GDP of California. They're not a world power despite how badly Putin wants everyone to think they are.

gtn130 · Post #91 » by **gtn130** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:04 pm

AFM wrote:Assange deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He and Carlos Danger. Instead Assange will probably be droned.

I hope you're joking

AFM · Post #92 » by **AFM** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:08 pm

gtn130 wrote:
AFM wrote:Assange deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He and Carlos Danger. Instead Assange will probably be droned.

I hope you're joking

I am not. Carlos Danger deserves his own monument in downtown DC. Maybe a marble bust of him sitting at a MacBook, with no pants on.
Inscription "Magna Cum Laude" (Latin for, "cums very loudly")

Post #93 » by **montestewart** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:11 pm

gtn130 wrote:
AFM wrote:Assange deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He and Carlos Danger. Instead Assange will probably be droned.

I hope you're joking

AFM never jokes

DCZards · Post #94 » by **DCZards** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:11 pm

The FBI's new investigation into Weiner's emails is indeed bad (and distracting) news for the Clinton campaign. But the silver-lining is that it will help the Dems GOTV for Hillary.

dckingsfan · Post #95 » by **dckingsfan** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:14 pm

DCZards wrote:The FBI's new investigation into Weiner's emails is indeed bad (and distracting) news for the Clinton campaign. But the silver-lining is that it will help the Dems GOTV for Hillary.

Why? I would think it would make it harder for them to get their constituents to vote, no?

Post #96 » by **montestewart** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:25 pm

dckingsfan wrote:
DCZards wrote:The FBI's new investigation into Weiner's emails is indeed bad (and distracting) news for the Clinton campaign. But the silver-lining is that it will help the Dems GOTV for Hillary.

Why? I would think it would make it harder for them to get their constituents to vote, no?

I think there is a perception among many Democrats that the timeline of the various revelations has an appearance of being engineered (by whatever powers) specifically to cause damage to HRC, creating a counterpoint to Trump's "rigged" claims.

DCZards · Post #97 » by **DCZards** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:28 pm

montestewart wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:
DCZards wrote:The FBI's new investigation into Weiner's emails is indeed bad (and distracting) news for the Clinton campaign. But the silver-lining is that it will help the Dems GOTV for Hillary.

Why? I would think it would make it harder for them to get their constituents to vote, no?

I think there is a perception among many Democrats that the timeline of the various revelations has an appearance of being engineered (by whatever powers) specifically to cause damage to HRC, creating a counterpoint to Trump's "rigged" claims.

Exactly! And that perception is motivation for the Dem voter.

Induveca · Post #98 » by **Induveca** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:37 pm

montestewart wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:
DCZards wrote:The FBI's new investigation into Weiner's emails is indeed bad (and distracting) news for the Clinton campaign. But the silver-lining is that it will help the Dems GOTV for Hillary.

Why? I would think it would make it harder for them to get their constituents to vote, no?

I think there is a perception among many Democrats that the timeline of the various revelations has an appearance of being engineered (by whatever powers) specifically to cause damage to HRC, creating a counterpoint to Trump's "rigged" claims.

So they purposely chose to associate her name with Anthony Weiner for 10 days? Surely if the "unknown powers" would enact such an illogical strategy they would have a better option.

Post #99 » by **montestewart** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 5:41 pm

Induveca wrote:
montestewart wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:Why? I would think it would make it harder for them to get their constituents to vote, no?

I think there is a perception among many Democrats that the timeline of the various revelations has an appearance of being engineered (by whatever powers) specifically to cause damage to HRC, creating a counterpoint to Trump's "rigged" claims.

So they purposely chose to associate her name with Anthony Weiner for 10 days? Surely if the "unknown powers" would enact such an illogical strategy they would have a better option.

Yours is just as much supposition as theirs is. It's all a mixture of facts and suppositions.

Induveca · Post #100 » by **Induveca** » Tue Nov 1, 2016 6:24 pm

Another oddity, both Obamas (obviously pr team) unfollowed Clinton on Twitter today.

Michelle Obama also scrubbed all tweets mentioning Clinton from her account.

I've become addicted to this election, for some reason I just keep expecting it to get more and more outlandish. I doubt any political fiction author could dream up two more ridiculous characters.