(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

I think it much more likely that the Clinton campaign used some of the Wall Street money to hire a plethora of investigators, and one of them got a nice bonus for unearthing this. I think the campaign held it in reserve for an October Surprise and strategically unveiled it it 1/2 hour before the wikileaks dump to provide a distraction and smokescreen, and it worked to perfection.

In a campaign of sleaze and dirty tricks, this fits right in. Kudos to the planners.

(10-11-2016 10:19 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

I think it much more likely that the Clinton campaign used some of the Wall Street money to hire a plethora of investigators, and one of them got a nice bonus for unearthing this. I think the campaign held it in reserve for an October Surprise and strategically unveiled it it 1/2 hour before the wikileaks dump to provide a distraction and smokescreen, and it worked to perfection.

In a campaign of sleaze and dirty tricks, this fits right in. Kudos to the planners.

So... you dismiss JOwl by demanding a source for his suspicions that Billy Bush leaked the tape, then you offer your own (un-sourced) speculation that Clinton's camp did it to support your blanket conclusion that her campaign is full of "sleaze and dirty tricks." Ever thought about running for office?

(10-10-2016 07:01 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(10-10-2016 12:53 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 11:42 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  We all see what we want to see, I guess.

yeah, like we're having another acceptable year with our great coach, too. Seeing what we want. Four more years.

Are you suggesting that I feel that way about football?

But regardless, confirmation bias is real.

No, not you Lad. Others, perhaps.

Nevertheless, there is this nagging feeling I have that Trump is self sabotaging because he had a deal worked out with them before and is actually surreptitiously working with the Clintons to try to get Hiliary elected, since she was such a weak candidate. I don't think in his wildest dreams last year he thought he'd actually be the nominee.

As the the tape, while it was in poor taste, I don't think it's any worse than anything Bill Clinton or Obama might have said in private conversations. Perhaps not Carter. The feigned 'outrage' is humorous considering who is supposedly outraged by it.

Most Trump voters would likely be as willing to vote for a jar of p!$$ over Hiliary for President. It'd be warmer, after all. Most don't love him by any means, it's a relative merit decision. There's little to nothing trump could say or do to be the worse choice in this election. That said Trump scares the bejezzus out of the establishment on both sides because he doesn't seem to really care about them, and he knows exactly how the game is played and how the sycophants and creeps operate in Washington. The establishment of both parties, along with the media, want him defeated because if nothing else he will be able to do more to expose their corruption and insincerity than any candidate has in a long, long time. Trump is like a colon cleanse: He's not pretty, smells like ****, but in the end, you are healthier for having undergone the procedure. Anyone but Hiliary will help the country. So Trump, reluctantly, it is.

(10-11-2016 03:56 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Trump is like a colon cleanse: He's not pretty, smells like ****, but in the end, you are healthier for having undergone the procedure. Anyone but Hiliary will help the country. So Trump, reluctantly, it is.

Why am I not surprised that someone who's been drinking the Trump kool-aid (or maybe bathtub gin?) also thinks that colon cleanses are legit?

(10-11-2016 11:28 AM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:19 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

I think it much more likely that the Clinton campaign used some of the Wall Street money to hire a plethora of investigators, and one of them got a nice bonus for unearthing this. I think the campaign held it in reserve for an October Surprise and strategically unveiled it it 1/2 hour before the wikileaks dump to provide a distraction and smokescreen, and it worked to perfection.

In a campaign of sleaze and dirty tricks, this fits right in. Kudos to the planners.

So... you dismiss JOwl by demanding a source for his suspicions that Billy Bush leaked the tape, then you offer your own (un-sourced) speculation that Clinton's camp did it to support your blanket conclusion that her campaign is full of "sleaze and dirty tricks." Ever thought about running for office?

Did you see the part where I said "I think it much more likely..."? I gave my opinion as opinion, and JOwl gave...whatever he gave...as fact.

But I left the door open for him to show me that Billy Bush (or maybe some other cousin of Jeb's) had the tape and would not release it. I was asking for confirmation.

I think the timing of the tape and the mysterious appearance of the tax return are suspicious. How serendipitous. Other have suspicions about the release of the emails. also serendipitous, no?

And to answer your question, I was asked to run for office but turned it down.

(10-11-2016 05:36 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 11:28 AM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:19 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

I think it much more likely that the Clinton campaign used some of the Wall Street money to hire a plethora of investigators, and one of them got a nice bonus for unearthing this. I think the campaign held it in reserve for an October Surprise and strategically unveiled it it 1/2 hour before the wikileaks dump to provide a distraction and smokescreen, and it worked to perfection.

In a campaign of sleaze and dirty tricks, this fits right in. Kudos to the planners.

So... you dismiss JOwl by demanding a source for his suspicions that Billy Bush leaked the tape, then you offer your own (un-sourced) speculation that Clinton's camp did it to support your blanket conclusion that her campaign is full of "sleaze and dirty tricks." Ever thought about running for office?

Did you see the part where I said "I think it much more likely..."? I gave my opinion as opinion, and JOwl gave...whatever he gave...as fact.

But I left the door open for him to show me that Billy Bush (or maybe some other cousin of Jeb's) had the tape and would not release it. I was asking for confirmation.

I think the timing of the tape and the mysterious appearance of the tax return are suspicious. How serendipitous. Other have suspicions about the release of the emails. also serendipitous, no?

And to answer your question, I was asked to run for office but turned it down.

These releases were likely timed because someone with the access to both the taxes and tape though "Oh crap, this buffoon might win," so they decided to try and do something about it. I think the taxes were more likely the work of a Trump insider with an ax to grind.

(10-11-2016 10:19 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

You think Billy Bush couldn't have pointed Jeb!'s oppo research team in this direction if he had wanted to?

In any case, fine, sure, I'll do your googling for you once again. Page Six claims to have sources stating that Billy did in fact bring this on himself:

Quote:the shamed 'Today' host boasted at a party in August that he had a 'tape of Trump being a real dog,' prompting staffers at 'Access Hollywood' to track it down.

Http://pagesix.com/2016/10/10/billy-bush...-staffers/

(10-11-2016 09:03 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 09:28 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 08:23 PM)gsloth Wrote:  

(10-09-2016 07:43 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  What connection does the Bush family have with this tape?

I have read that Billy Bush is a cousin of Jeb. From Wikipedia:

Quote:William Hall Bush was born in Manhattan, New York City,[2] the son of Josephine (née Bradley) and Jonathan Bush, whose older brother George H. W. Bush was the 41st U.S. President.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Bush

Ah, hence the entirely fair and not misleading in ANY way:

"Trump and Bush . . ." headlines on Yahoo News this morning . . .

No sense saying "Trump and Billy Bush. . . " since everyone who sees the headline will immediately associate anyone other than either of the Presidents or the governor without the first name in the headline, as presented . . . .

Any indication of why anyone sat on this tape this long, when it would've been far more useful if it had come out 9 or 10 months sooner, avoiding this disaster of an election cycle?

I'm sure someone has explained the timing . . . but I haven't seen it yet.

Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

In the primary, 14,015,993 Republicans voted for Trump. The next guy got 7,822,100. The Republicans got the man they they wanted, and demanded.

Trump gained momentum for months and months by winning (or coming close) with pluralities, not majorities.

Yes, I am lamenting the fact that the tape didn't surface 10 months ago so we could've avoided an unqualified nominee.

There is no reason to believe Jeb knew about the tape, and obviously his cousin had nothing to do with its release, as it's damaged him, so you've got a logical flaw in that part of your post.

And given the latest leaked emails indicate (understandably) that Clinton's camp, from the start, had a strategy of identifying the candidates she identified as desirable to run against, and addressing them in ways to provide them with more credibility, I don't think it's debatable in any way that the DNC and specifically Clinton did not want Trump to be de-railed until after the conventions. That obviously doesn't prove the latest leak was 'timed', and I've seen no evidence that it was. But nothing we've seen about HRC's campaign would provide evidence that they wouldn't do everything and anything possible to un-level the playing field. No one is expecting her to share the money she's collected. Everyone plays to win. But if you're suggesting she, or her surrogates, are above playing dirty, you've got blinders on

Frankly, it's preferable to believe that the timing was random. As the emails state, Clinton preferred to run against Trump, Carson or Cruz, and wanted to avoid other candidates. Given how obviously unqualified Trump was for office, if someone had the ability to knock him out before he got momentum and did not do so, it reflects horribly on the risk they would be willing to take to gain an advantage.

So permit me the understandable wishful second-guessing of decisions that would've avoided an election where I can't bring myself to vote for the president at all.

Anyone who is gleeful over this situation is either a Trump supporter, or so far to the left that I can't imagine where they dredge that emotion up from.

I preferred Bernie Sanders over Clinton. Not because I cared about whether a Republican could beat him or not. I don't agree with the majority of his positions. But I at least believe wholeheartedly he is an honest, decent man who would be above the (different kinds of) crap we've endured from both nominees. And I would vote for character and honesty over the alternative.

I'm not sure if this idea that the tape would've derailed Trump's nomination is hilarious or disgusting. There's nothing new there that we didn't already know about Trump. He has already, in just about every way possible, shown he considers those with less power than himself as things he can use. Immigrants, people less well off than himself, unattractive women, all women - he exploits and/or degrades at any opportunity. To the roaring appreciation of his crowds. Nothing in this tape is news to anyone who cares in the slightest about such issues.

Again, he got nearly double the votes of the next guy in the primary. And he's going to get tens of millions of votes in November. He is the man the Republicans wanted, and want, for the job.


PS - I'm guessing you haven't read the strategy doc from the leaked email yourself but it didn't sound to me like HRC's team thought they could get the Republicans to nominate Trump. They just hoped he and the other "Pied Pipers" (Carson and Cruz) would lead the legit candidates into staking out much more extreme, conservative positions in the primary, and also that the PPs would tar the whole Republican slate with their general craziness. Actually nominating Trump? The Republicans did that all on their own.

(10-11-2016 06:00 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I think the taxes were more likely the work of a Trump insider with an ax to grind.

That ls a reasonable supposition.

How many of Trump's umpteen thousand employees had access to his personal 1040? I am guessing, not many.

(10-11-2016 06:20 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:19 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

You think Billy Bush couldn't have pointed Jeb!'s oppo research team in this direction if he had wanted to?

In any case, fine, sure, I'll do your googling for you once again. Page Six claims to have sources stating that Billy did in fact bring this on himself:

Quote:the shamed 'Today' host boasted at a party in August that he had a 'tape of Trump being a real dog,' prompting staffers at 'Access Hollywood' to track it down.

Http://pagesix.com/2016/10/10/billy-bush...-staffers/

Blabbing in the wrong company is a far cry from releasing it. I don't see what Billy had to gain by releasing it. So who released it, why, and how long did they have it before releasing it?

(10-12-2016 12:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 06:20 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 10:19 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 07:28 AM)JOwl Wrote:  Ha, I love that you're hinting that there was some sort of conspiracy to foist Trump on us by sitting on this tape... when Jeb couldn't even get his own cousin to leak it for him.

You think Billy Bush had the tape and decided to torpedo his own career? i doubt it, but if you have some source that says this came from Billy, I would appreciate a link.

You think Billy Bush couldn't have pointed Jeb!'s oppo research team in this direction if he had wanted to?

In any case, fine, sure, I'll do your googling for you once again. Page Six claims to have sources stating that Billy did in fact bring this on himself:

Quote:the shamed 'Today' host boasted at a party in August that he had a 'tape of Trump being a real dog,' prompting staffers at 'Access Hollywood' to track it down.

Http://pagesix.com/2016/10/10/billy-bush...-staffers/

Blabbing in the wrong company is a far cry from releasing it. I don't see what Billy had to gain by releasing it. So who released it, why, and how long did they have it before releasing it?

You tell me. Frankly, I have no idea what you're trying to argue with me about.

(10-11-2016 04:48 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(10-11-2016 03:56 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Trump is like a colon cleanse: He's not pretty, smells like ****, but in the end, you are healthier for having undergone the procedure. Anyone but Hiliary will help the country. So Trump, reluctantly, it is.

Why am I not surprised that someone who's been drinking the Trump kool-aid (or maybe bathtub gin?) also thinks that colon cleanses are legit?

Clearly, you've never had a colonoscopy before. I know what you're trying to say (I think you meant enema or one of those wacky juice diets), but let's just say that it's actually very straightforward to cleanse the colon. Maybe not pleasant, but they work.

Bets on whether Pence stays on the ticket until the bitter end?

Really, at this point I think the only viable candidates for 2020 for the GOP are those who had the guts to never endorse Trump. That would have been Cruz until recently. He's got to be kicking himself.

So, Clinton v Kasich should be a much more substantive campaign. We can hope, anyway.

(10-13-2016 02:42 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Bets on whether Pence stays on the ticket until the bitter end?

Really, at this point I think the only viable candidates for 2020 for the GOP are those who had the guts to never endorse Trump. That would have been Cruz until recently. He's got to be kicking himself.

So, Clinton v Kasich should be a much more substantive campaign. We can hope, anyway.

Whiny pants Reince already threatened Kasich and those Republican candidates who didn't endorse Trump would "not find it easy for them" in 2020. There's a guy that shouldn't have a job.

I'd be all in for Kasich most likely (or potentially a Gary Johnson 2020 run). Kasich has shown, from not endorsing Trump, to working with Obama on TPP, that he is a guy that has the right attitude to reach across the aisle, something which pretty much every other Republican candidate lacked.

(10-13-2016 02:42 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Bets on whether Pence stays on the ticket until the bitter end?

Really, at this point I think the only viable candidates for 2020 for the GOP are those who had the guts to never endorse Trump. That would have been Cruz until recently. He's got to be kicking himself.

So, Clinton v Kasich should be a much more substantive campaign. We can hope, anyway.

Doubtful. You might have a point about those that broke for him early. But at this point, everyone should be on board. Fair or not, anyone not bending the knee now will be seen as surrendering to the Clinton Machine. Ryan, Kasich, Bush, and their ilk will be seen as toxic by far too much of the GOP primary electorate. Remember, the Republicans actually hold a fair primary...

(10-13-2016 02:42 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Bets on whether Pence stays on the ticket until the bitter end?

He'll stay on the ticket to the end. Obviously....

Quote:Really, at this point I think the only viable candidates for 2020 for the GOP are those who had the guts to never endorse Trump. That would have been Cruz until recently. He's got to be kicking himself.

If Trump doesn't win, then whoever wants to run in 2020 will run. Endorsements or the lack thereof will be a non-issue.

Quote:So, Clinton v Kasich should be a much more substantive campaign. We can hope, anyway.

Judging by the evidence from this campaign, if Clinton is running, it's guaranteed to be a non-substantive campaign. Actually, if any Democrat is running, it's guaranteed to be a non-substantive campaign. Such is life today....

(10-13-2016 08:41 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 02:42 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Bets on whether Pence stays on the ticket until the bitter end?

He'll stay on the ticket to the end. Obviously....

Quote:Really, at this point I think the only viable candidates for 2020 for the GOP are those who had the guts to never endorse Trump. That would have been Cruz until recently. He's got to be kicking himself.

If Trump doesn't win, then whoever wants to run in 2020 will run. Endorsements or the lack thereof will be a non-issue.

Quote:So, Clinton v Kasich should be a much more substantive campaign. We can hope, anyway.

Judging by the evidence from this campaign, if Clinton is running, it's guaranteed to be a non-substantive campaign. Actually, if any Democrat is running, it's guaranteed to be a non-substantive campaign. Such is life today....

Ah yes, because Trumo has run the most issue-centric compaign we have ever seen. Neither of them can go more than a minute without bashing the other.

(10-13-2016 08:41 PM)Jonathan Sadow Wrote:  

(10-13-2016 02:42 PM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  Bets on whether Pence stays on the ticket until the bitter end?

He'll stay on the ticket to the end. Obviously....

Quote:Really, at this point I think the only viable candidates for 2020 for the GOP are those who had the guts to never endorse Trump. That would have been Cruz until recently. He's got to be kicking himself.

If Trump doesn't win, then whoever wants to run in 2020 will run. Endorsements or the lack thereof will be a non-issue.

Quote:So, Clinton v Kasich should be a much more substantive campaign. We can hope, anyway.

Judging by the evidence from this campaign, if Clinton is running, it's guaranteed to be a non-substantive campaign. Actually, if any Democrat is running, it's guaranteed to be a non-substantive campaign. Such is life today....

You are really living in a bubble if you don't realize how deeply Trump is alienating various groups. Trump could very well lose every group but white men, or even every group but white men without a college degree.

Yesterday, while Trump defended himself against the sexual assault claims by the People reporter by saying essentially, "don't be ridiculous, she's ugly" and trump supporters were tweeting #repealthe19th, Michelle Obama gave a powerful speech against sexism and misogyny. Every mom I know who has daughters in the 10-18 range watched it with them or is planning two, including my wife and our two daughters. Now, I'm admittedly in my own bubble (as are most Americans, which is part of the problem, but that's another discussion) but this includes a lot of people who were not really active politically who have been activated and enraged that a major political party has nominated this guy.

So maybe you are right and Republican primary voters will not care in 2020. If so, I hope they don't mind being shut out of the White House for the foreseeable future.

The interesting thing is that Republicans have (at least until they potentially lose the Senate) had the biggest highwater mark in quite a while; they own the House, have a slight current majority in the Senate, 60% of US governors are Republican and U.S. state legislatures have over 4,000 Republican representatives compared to just over 3,000 Democratic representatives. Yet this November, barring an October Surprise to end all October Surprises, Republicans will lose the popular vote in the U.S. presidential election for the sixth out of the last seven elections.

"In Texas, Trump Sees Clinton High-Beams in His Rear-View Mirror: A Blip on the Radar? Or Early Evidence of a GOP Collapse?"

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollRepo...846d8a5c55

ElectoralVote currently has Texas as "Barely Republican."
But Nate Silver gives Trump an 86% chance of winning Texas.