Donald vs Hillary

[BubberMiley]

The point is not resonating with you, Bubber. It's not really about adultery.

Go back and re-read.....get on the same page.

The point is that everything you think he has on Hillary would come back and bite him because he has worse skeletons in his closet. If he criticizes the Clinton Foundation, that will invite scrutiny of his own foundation, which he uses to launder money and avoid taxes. If he criticizes Bill's infidelity, it will invite scrutiny of his own infidelity. Bringing up Benghazi will work on the converted Trumpers, but so what? Everybody else is aware of the results of the investigation into what really happened and will know he is lying. His strategy in not bringing up these issues makes sense, as these tactics would only work towards making you think he's doing well. But it would otherwise hurt him.

[Rue]

Trump was silent about Benghazi, and Clinton Foundation. He didn't press her with her emails.......

......I don't think he simply forgot, or had abandoned them. It's strategic.

I mean maybe. He could be holding of Benghazi until the last debate and likewise her with the wall. Me, I think it was fatigue.

If you want to have fun you turn off the sound and watch their body language. You get a totally different read then when you listen to

the voices. The Santa Claus-fire hydrant suit, forced smiling and giggling of Clinton was weird to watch. As for Trump, his sniffing, kissing fish lips and constant ok sign with his hand when talking, orange skin and white racoon eyes and arm pit hair combed over his head is also weird.

When Trump is feeling anxious he does the ok sign, purses his lips, and narrows his eyes or closes them and starts huffing and puffing.

When Clinton is feeling anxious she grins like Obama and the Joker or Jimmy Carter, rolls her eyes in mock disgust and you can see her jaw muscles start twitching.

Neither one makes a good poker player.

By the way the grinning teethy smile of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Bush Sr. Obama and Hilary Clinton, its based on

a meta communications theory that you look friendly and more trust worthy. I disagree. I go with the theory that we are primates, and when you show your teeth, just like guerillas, chimpanzees, hyenas, its an aggressive gesture showing your fangs.

Pursing your mouth, and hiding your teeth which Trump does and Nixon did and Margaret Thatcher and Winston Churchill, Stalin, FDR, TRuman, Einsehower, Washington, Lincoln, George Bush did is supposed to look grim and focused but in primate language its

the sign of constipation and.or fear, i.e., holding your breath a primal paralysis signal of fear.

I would love to have Jane Goodall's take on both of them and the body and face gestures.

Trump comes across like an extremely agitated Baboon where as Hilary looks like an agitated ostrich.

If I were the moderator I would not touch either or get too close.

Edited September 28, 2016 by Rue

[Argus]

Trump's message were simple, and to the point. They resonate!

He's a salesman. He knows how to make a pitch, but it doesn't work if you have time to give a little thought to what he's said.

Like his comeback regarding his tax-returns: "I'll go against the advice of my lawyers and will reveal my tax returns....if she'll reveal her deleted emails!" Thus, when Hillary asks "I wonder what he's hiding..." you can't help think of her emails and wonder what she's hiding in those emails!

No, I actually don't wonder at all. The whole email nonsense is a scandal created by years of Republican efforts to smear her without any actual evidence of real wrongdoing. Whether her emails were on an officla state department server or not it was inevitable that every single thing would have been subpoened by Republicans to pour over it looking for anything they could use as dirt, any off-color joke, any hint of displeasure with other government officials, especially any suggestion of disagreement with Obama. I mean, what do you truthers actually think are in her personal emails anyway? Perhaps a request to Valdimir Putin to hack into the emails of her political enemies?

The missing emails are more damning by far than Trump's missing tax returns!

Her emails are meaningless. His tax return, and his bragging about not paying any taxes making him 'smart' fly in the face of his complaints that Americans pay too much in taxes, and his promise to slash taxes, primarily for rich people - with no explanation of how to pay for the lost income.

And yes, Hillary is right when she beamed and said she's experienced in facing inquiry committees (among other things). Exactly! Why is that?

Why is she experienced in standing before and being questioned by such committees?

Uhm, because the Republicans launched one committee investigation after another against her in an effort to smear her. There were what, nine separate congressional investigations into Benghazi alone? Which in the end came up with nothing. Instead of actually trying to govern, which requires compromises the Tea Party would not allow, they spent their time in office launching 'investigations' into Democrats, and voting forty times to repeal Obamacare.

There is a ground swell yearning for change. Which candidate delivered? Trump!

I'd love to see a change. I'd love to see a strong, smart, savvy non-politician come in and take charge. Trump is none of those. He's a narcissistic salesman who primarily inherited his money, has little business acumen, no understanding of economics, no knowledge of or interest in defense or intelligence, and a crude, bullying attitude. An outsider can be a good president, but not with his temperament, and not with the absurd arrogance which allows him to say things like "I know more than the generals about ISIS".

Huh? The only vague experience Trump has with the military is getting his doctor to write him an excuse to get out of the draft. Sorry, but this is not the kind of change I want to see at the top of the world. A guy who knows little about the world and surrounds himself with yes-men is not going to make anything but a disaster of the job.

[Argus]

Trump said that the US should renounce the first use of nuclear weapons. Trump won.

No US president can renounce the first use of nuclear weapons for the very obvious reason that they are a deterrent to autocratic countries who are willing to devote immense amounts of their industry and GDP to their military, and don't care about casualties.

The Soviets always outnumbered NATO in Europe, for example, in troops and tanks. Now the Russians do too, because they've been building up their military while all NATO nations have been dissolving theirs. And don't say the Americans have a larger military. Most of their land forces are in America, not in Europe. The possibility of the use of tactical nukes is one of the reasons why the Soviets/Russians would think twice about the idea of sending a flood of tanks into Western Europe.

So what would the use gain from such an announcement? The Russians saying the same? Russian and Chinese promises are meaningless, and would last only as long as they wanted them to.

[Argus]

She was talking about improving the sharing of information among allied intelligence services.

Trump supporters don't believe in intelligence. It contradicts their world views.

Much like their master, who has openly stated he doesn't trust or believe what the intelligence agencies say.

[Argus]

As opposed to slick talking politicians who can smoothly deliver her lies.

But according to neutral third parties she was far more honest than Trump.

[Argus]

"I'm gonna stop jobs from leaving America and bring jobs back to America!" Yeah? Is he going to call up Apple and tell them "stop building your phones in China and build a factory in America"? And what's he going to do when they explain to him that real-world economic forces make that economically impossible? He knows why companies moved their low-skill jobs off-shore, because his own business did the same thing. If it's that easy, why is Trump's own Trump-branded merchandise made in China and Bangladesh?

I suppose next you'll say he won't really be able to put a quick end to drug smuggling and terrorism.

[Argus]

Yes, this is what I am talking about. Trump knows that a vote from a gullible, simple-minded voter counts just as much as a vote from a well-informed one. And he's banking that America has more of the former than the latter.

"I love the poorly educated!"

No truer words has Trump ever spoken.

[Argus]

Trump's pitch, on the other hand, is aimed at people who don't like the way things are going in America, who distrust and are sickened by career politicians like Hillary running the show for so long.

That would be me. I trust you aren't going to call me a liberal?

But having watched Trump 'perform', his style, his character (or lack thereof), his utter dishonesty, and his ignorance about almost every aspect of what government does (and a refusal to learn) I've come to believe he is, as the New York Times said, the worst candidate for president in modern history.

[Argus]

Substance-wise, what's not to the point when Trump talked about tax cut for companies, and lessening the regulations that strangles and discourage would-be employers??? Does that need any more explanation?

Yeah. What kind of regulations? Like, the regulations that protect employees from being exposed to dangerous working conditions?

And what is he going to do to make up for the loss of income when he cuts taxes, just put it all into more debt?

Honestly, don't you people ever give a moment of thought to such things?

[Argus]

He was asked that question....he said he was tempted but refrained.

Hillary as an enabler, might still come up in future debates.

And Trump is a notorious adulterer, not that that seems to bother you.

[Argus]

The point is not resonating with you, Bubber. It's not really about adultery.

So the good Christian lady doesn't care if a man is an adulterer? Seriously?

[dialamah]

He was asked that question....he said he was tempted but refrained.

Hillary as an enabler, might still come up in future debates.

Hillary is having problems gaining the trust of women......

I think it's strategic since he could be saving them for later. Maybe at the last debate?

Clinton Foundation will stress the point that Hillary and honesty are like water and oil.

Hillary, and anything connected with her, seems to always be in the midst of inquiries and questionings, eh?

All throughout her and Bill's political career. They always seem to be in front of some committees answering to some sort

of allegations.

With her huge experience with inquiries ....she might be "over-qualified."

And yet, these enquiries find little or nothing. Its like people keep trying to prove she's corrupt, but the evidence just isn't there when the allegations are investigated.

Trump, on the other hand uses his foundation to pay off lawsuits he's actually lost, has a long and proud record of conning people (calls it smart business to fool simple-minded people) lies constantly and has a terrible bankrupt-ridden business history. But stupidly angry people think he's some kind of cult hero.

Some days I imagine reading history around this time, how Trump came to power and what came next. I don't think history would be kind to him.

[betsy]

He's a salesman. He knows how to make a pitch, but it doesn't work if you have time to give a little thought to what he's said.

Both of them are salesmen! They're both making a pitch! For all the many words that came out of Hillary.....she actually didn't say much at all, substance-wise.

No, I actually don't wonder at all. The whole email nonsense is a scandal created by years of Republican efforts to smear her without any actual evidence of real wrongdoing. Whether her emails were on an officla state department server or not it was inevitable that every single thing would have been subpoened by Republicans to pour over it looking for anything they could use as dirt, any off-color joke, any hint of displeasure with other government officials, especially any suggestion of disagreement with Obama. I mean, what do you truthers actually think are in her personal emails anyway?

You don't know that. The FBI don't know that. The emails are gone!

According to the official statement of FBI director, James Comey, agency experts were unable to recover information from Clinton’s wiped-clean server, and Clinton’s legal team claims there are no backups.

Thus the contents of the 30,000 deleted “private” emails are not known unless they are in the hands of foreign intelligence hackers, who could deploy them to influence the 2016 election, blackmail a President Clinton once in office, or to embarrass her and the United States.

We do not know the criteria by which Clinton and her staff used to select her “private” emails for destruction.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2016/07/09/its-the-30000-wiped-clean-clinton-e-mails/#7e3e190e467f

Perhaps a request to Valdimir Putin to hack into the emails of her political enemies?

She'll be ripe for blackmail, if there's anything incriminating. If she's the President......think what that means for national security.

Her emails are meaningless.

You don't know that.

His tax return, and his bragging about not paying any taxes making him 'smart' fly in the face of his complaints that Americans pay too much in taxes, and his promise to slash taxes, primarily for rich people - with no explanation of how to pay for the lost income.

He was not bragging about not paying any taxes. Where did you get that?

[bush_cheney2004]

If you don't vote then you're not a voter.

In this context, that would be all the wannabe Canadian voters. Many U.S. citizens will not vote as voters, and still be counted in voter turnout percentages in each state.

[betsy]

Argus,

No one will be able to launch a frivolous inquiry....if an inquiry isn't warranted!

Edited September 28, 2016 by betsy

[betsy]

That would be me. I trust you aren't going to call me a liberal?

But having watched Trump 'perform', his style, his character (or lack thereof), his utter dishonesty, and his ignorance about almost every aspect of what government does (and a refusal to learn) I've come to believe he is, as the New York Times said, the worst candidate for president in modern history.

That's a matter of opinion, Argus. Some don't like his style.

Yes, he's abrasive when he wants to.....I suppose he doesn't suffer fools.

However, he won't be the businessman that he is if his temperament is out of control. His position requires a lot of negotiating.

Edited September 28, 2016 by betsy

[bush_cheney2004]

I suppose next you'll say he won't really be able to put a quick end to drug smuggling and terrorism.

Trump's walls on the Canadian and Mexican borders would put a dent in drug smuggling, and LAX bombers too !

[BubberMiley]

He was not bragging about not paying any taxes. Where did you get that?

I expected you would have watched the debate. She said the tax returns he released for a casino licence showed he paid $0 in federal income taxes. His reply was "That makes me smart."

[BubberMiley]

Argus,

No one will be able to launch a frivolous inquiry....if an inquiry isn't warranted!

Where have you been? Not paying very close attention, obviously.

[betsy]

And Trump is a notorious adulterer, not that that seems to bother you.

Too bad, that's the kind of society we now have.....why does it bother you?

Adultery is irrelevant in the issue regarding Hillary. It's how she handled the women who complained about having been sexually assaulted by her husband.

Sexual assault isn't dismissed as simply adultery.....even if the guy doing the assault is married !

[betsy]

Yeah. What kind of regulations? Like, the regulations that protect employees from being exposed to dangerous working conditions?

And what is he going to do to make up for the loss of income when he cuts taxes, just put it all into more debt?

Honestly, don't you people ever give a moment of thought to such things?

Like these regulations:

What's stopping job creation? Too much regulation

By Clarence Otis Jr., Special to CNN

Regulatory mandates flowing from federal health care reform may be the most visible, but the list also includes measures such as new mandatory paid leave provisions that require us to change the way we accommodate employees who need to take time off when they are ill and ever more unrealistic requirements regarding employee meal and rest breaks that, in California for example, force our employees to take breaks in the middle of serving lunch or dinner.

This reality is the result of the best intentions. Policymakers working in silos at every level are pushing through regulations that on their face seem to address admirable goals -- that are each directed at outcomes that seem desirable.

The cumulative effect of these regulations, however, is significant damage to the hard-working Americans who are the intended beneficiaries.

The employer mandate contained in the new health care reform law, for example, forces us to change the way we have offered health care coverage to our full- and part-time workers and, together with all the other looming regulations, causes us to rethink the way we schedule the hourly work force that is at the heart of how we deliver our product to customers.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/06/opinion/otis-regulations-job-creation/

Edited September 28, 2016 by betsy

[BubberMiley]

Sexual assault isn't dismissed as simply adultery.....even if the guy doing the assault is married !

How do you feel about how Trump handled the allegations that he raped a 13-year-old? Do you think that's why he didn't bring up Bill's infidelities?

http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/23/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit/

[?Impact]

After the debate, Trump was again on his "crooked Hiliary" nonsense. Time to call him "freeloader Donald" for living large off the American taxpayer for years.

[bush_cheney2004]

Clintons are crooked...going way back to Whitewater. Crooked Hillary is just continuing the tradition for personal gain, national security be damned (foundation + "missing emails").