Élection POTUS 2016 : Donald Trump

[Brock]

C'est l'evidence.Il n'a qu'a voir les cas de tabassage de supporters, de meetings pris d'assaut, et de voitures vandalisees a cause d'un autocollant Trump.Les americains intolerants se preparent la meme facon de gerer la politique qu'en France.

[Cugieran]

Ouais combat d'infirmes.

[Tramp]

Les US filent un mauvais coton :

Trump calls tax avoidance 'smart,' most Americans call it 'unpatriotic': poll

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKKCN1242FY

[Neomatix]

Les deux ne sont pas mutuellement exclusifs.

[Eltourist]

dépend si l'américain moyen considère que big guv = la patrie

[Tramp]

La SCOTUS sur ce sujet :

“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.”

[Nigel]

 En tout cas Eltourist, ton avatar est au coeur de la campagne en ce moment  

[Extremo]

dépend si l'américain moyen considère que big guv = la patrie

 

Marrant puisque c'est justement totalement contraire aux idées qui ont fondé ce pays.

[Eltourist]

Ouais Nigel je suis un suprémaciste blanc

 

 

Marrant puisque c'est justement totalement contraire aux idées qui ont fondé ce pays.

 

Marrant, triste et flippant à la fois

[Marlenus]

Moi ce que je trouve le plus intéressant dans sa campagne, c'est qu'il peut mentir sur des choses prouvable en 5sec. et pourtant garder sa popularité.

 

[h16]

http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/04/the-reporting-of-trumps-ptsd-comments-sh

[Fagotto]

Une grosse partie du boulot de la presse actuelle c'est de déformer des citations pour créer des polémiques et des clicks... pour Trump s'ajoute le facteur inimitié.

[Anton_K]

Les US filent un mauvais coton :

Trump calls tax avoidance 'smart,' most Americans call it 'unpatriotic': poll

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKKCN1242FY

 

Au fait du coup c'est vraiment de l'évasion fiscale ou c'est juste une conséquence légale de ses pertes? Peut-on douter que ce fussent de vraies pertes?

[Tramp]

C'est des pertes reportables tout ce qu'il y a de plus légales.

[Anton_K]

Je comprends pas pourquoi Pence ne l'a pas dit plus clairement. Il a demandé "don't you take deductions?" ce qui surement suggérait cela, mais pourquoi ne pas l'expliquer clairement? Pour éviter à avoir à mentionner le fait que Trump a perdu de l'argent? Une des choses les plus difficiles à supporter dans ces débat est vraiment la circonvolution dans l'expression, les insinuations très indirectes dont je doute souvent qu'elles soient comprises dans le public.

[Cthulhu]

Votre dose hebdomadaire d'analyse pro-Trump par le Mises Institute:

En résumé, Janet Yellen a peur de Trump, donc on a de bonnes chances qu'il supprime la Fed et restaure l'étalon-or. Le tout avec une administration transparente. On y croit très fort.

[h16]

Encore que Trump adore tout ce qui est doré.

[José]

If this Presidential election becomes primarily a referendum on Donald Trump and his verbal outrages, Trump will lose. His running mate, Mike Pence, has demonstrated how to avoid that.

 

Tuesday’s debate between Tim Kaine and Mike Pence is unlikely to have a significant effect on the outcome of the Presidential election. Historically, the clash of Vice-Presidential wannabes has rarely shifted the opinion polls much, let alone the actual voting. Why should this year be any different? The back-and-forth on Tuesday provided plenty of fodder for political commentators and partisans, but it was always a sideshow. The real contest moves on to St. Louis, Missouri, where, on Sunday night, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump will take part in their second Presidential debate.

 

By then, Kaine versus Pence will be old news. About the only scenario in which it remains relevant is if Trump, defying the accumulated evidence of the past sixteen months, actually learns something from his running mate’s performance. On Sunday night, Trump’s primary task will be to disguise his real self, which he appeared incapable of doing in the first Presidential debate, to disastrous results. On Tuesday, Pence showed him how it can be done.

 

Pence is an ultra-conservative Republican, and he’s spent decades vigorously opposing gay rights, abortion, trade unions, and environmental legislation, while supporting deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy. Until recently, he was a noted climate-change skeptic, and, earlier this year, as the governor of Indiana, he signed into law a measure that reinstated mandatory minimum sentences for drug dealers in the state. But on Tuesday this diehard social and economic conservative, who has been a darling of the Tea Party, affected the pose of a benign Midwestern grandfather. The arguments he made were often spurious and reactionary. But his manner was calm, courtly, and reassuring—everything Trump isn’t.

 

“Hang on a minute,” I hear you shouting at your screen, “what about the fact that Pence repeatedly either refused to defend Trump’s racist and offensive statements or baldly denied that Trump had even said them?” By Wednesday morning, the Clinton campaign had put out a video that contrasted Pence’s evasions with what Trump had actually said about Vladimir Putin being a strong leader, rounding up undocumented immigrants, banning Muslims from entering the United States, allowing Japan and Saudi Arabia to have nuclear weapons, and punishing women who get abortions.

 

But Pence went into Tuesday’s debate with a deliberate strategy to mislead and divert attention and, politically, it made sense. If this election becomes primarily a referendum on Trump and his verbal outrages, Trump will lose. The polling data is definitive on that. He has the highest disapproval ratings of any candidate in history, and only about a third of voters think he is qualified to be President. His erratic performance in the first debate confirmed for many people that he shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office. As a result, Clinton’s lead in the polls has widened during the past week.

 

To reverse this trend, the Trump campaign desperately needs to shift the focus away from his character and onto the broader arguments for change in the White House. According to the latest Gallup poll, just twenty-nine per cent of people are satisfied “with the way things are going in the United States at this time.” Seventy per cent are dissatisfied. With the Democrats having held the Presidency for two terms, the public’s sour mood should be playing to the Republicans’ advantage. But it isn’t, and the reason is obvious. For many voters, the “Trump factor”—i.e., the possibility of a thin-skinned narcissistic blowhard and shyster taking over the nuclear codes—looms larger than the “time for a change” factor.

 

Ultimately, I believe, there isn’t much the Republicans can do about this. On Tuesday, Pence at least tried. “For the last seven and a half years, we’ve seen America’s place in the world weakened,” he said in his opening remarks. “We’ve seen an economy stifled . . . and the American people know that we need to make a change.” A few minutes later, Pence returned to the theme, saying, “American families are struggling in this economy,” and adding, “Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine want more of the same.” Kaine countered, pointing out that the economy had created fifteen million new jobs since the end of the Great Recession, to which Pence replied dismissively, “Honestly, Senator, you can roll out the numbers and the sunny side, but I got to tell you, people in Scranton know different. People in Fort Wayne, Indiana, know different.”

 

Again, the point isn’t whether Pence’s description was accurate. Kaine got his facts right, but Pence was sticking to his plan of making the argument for change and avoiding lengthy discussions about Trump’s tax affairs or his racist remarks. Rather than trying to defend the indefensible, Pence pretended it didn’t exist. Near the end of the debate, he finally said about his boss, “Look, he’s not a polished politician like you and Hillary Clinton . . . things don’t always come out exactly the way he means them.” Referring to someone who is seeking to lead a superpower, this wasn’t much of testimonial. But, at this stage, it’s probably the best line the Trump campaign has left to offer.

 

Trump’s status as a political outsider remains his biggest strength, but, at this critical point in the campaign, he’s forgotten how to exploit it effectively. Going into Sunday’s debate, his advisers will be urging him to cut out the interruptions and the braggadocio, to stay calm, and to focus on his opponent’s record rather than swallowing the bait she’s sure to set out for him. Given the way the polls are going, there may also be some discussion about whether he should publicly disavow some of his most outrageous utterances, such as his statements about Mexican “rapists” and “murderers,” and his criticisms of the Khan family and the federal judge Gonzalo Curiel. Unlike Pence, Trump can’t pretend he didn’t say these things. But he could conceivably apologize for them and disown them. That would grab people’s attention.

 

In mid-August, when his poll numbers were plummeting, Trump went a bit of the way down this route, saying at a rally in North Carolina, “Sometimes, in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don’t choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. I have done that. And believe it or not, I regret it.” But Trump didn’t single out any of his offensive utterances, and he didn’t actually apologize. Since then, moreover, he has reverted to type, slamming his critics, blasting away on Twitter, and even, in one early-morning tweetstorm, trying to besmirch the reputation of a former beauty queen who has endorsed Clinton.

 

Clearly, that is the authentic Trump. Driven by some deep-seated insecurities, he lacks a moral compass and cares for nothing except winning, narrowly defined. There is no reason to suppose that he has the urge or the capacity to change now, and, in any case, it is almost certainly too late for him to alter public perceptions of him. But if, by any chance, he did want to evolve—or merely to minimize his chances of being dubbed a loser for the second debate running—his running mate gave him a model. In a few days’ time, we’ll find out if he took any notice of it

 

 

[José]

Still live near your hometown? If you’re white, you’re more likely to support Trump.

 

Overall, more than one-third (35%) of white Americans report still living in the town or city in which they were born, and another 27% of white Americans say they live within a two-hour drive from their hometown. Approximately four in ten (37%) report living more than two hours away from the town in which they were raised.

 

There are pronounced differences in education levels between whites who live in their hometown and those who live farther than a 2-hour drive away. A majority (53%) of whites living in their hometown have a high school education or less, compared to only 29% of those living farther away

[José]

Pour la 3e fois en 159 ans, The Atlantic se positionne dans une élection présidentielle américaine. Et demande de voter contre Trump.

 

Our endorsement of Clinton, and rejection of Trump, is not a blanket dismissal of the many Trump supporters who are motivated by legitimate anxieties about their future and their place in the American economy. But Trump has seized on these anxieties and inflamed and racialized them, without proposing realistic policies to address them.

 

Our interest here is not to advance the prospects of the Democratic Party, nor to damage those of the Republican Party. If Hillary Clinton were facing Mitt Romney, or John McCain, or George W. Bush, or, for that matter, any of the leading candidates Trump vanquished in the Republican primaries, we would not have contemplated making this endorsement. We believe in American democracy, in which individuals from various parties of different ideological stripes can advance their ideas and compete for the affection of voters. But Trump is not a man of ideas. He is a demagogue, a xenophobe, a sexist, a know-nothing, and a liar. He is spectacularly unfit for office, and voters—the statesmen and thinkers of the ballot box—should act in defense of American democracy and elect his opponent.

 

[Brock]

Pfffrt.C'est le camp Clinton qui pratique l'hysterie depuis le depart.

[h16]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-06/citi-getting-brexity-feeling-asks-what-if-we-are-all-wrong-about-election

While some, such as David Rothschild at Microsoft Research are not convinced that the surprise of Brexit is a model for what may happen in the U.S. election because Brexit was such an unusual vote whereas the U.S. election is a regularly scheduled event with a plethora of dense polling data that will prove to be more reliable, other disagree. David Woo at BofA disagrees, saying the markets are in for a rude awakening. And Fordham says some investors seem to agree.

“I’m getting this Brexit-y feeling and I know other investors are as well,” she said. “The thinking is: I didn’t expect Brexit, so I better assume Trump is going to win. That element of investor psychology is at play here.”

Brexit-y feeling ...

[Raffarin2012]

Pour la 3e fois en 159 ans, The Atlantic se positionne dans une élection présidentielle américaine. Et demande de voter contre Trump.

 

 

He is a demagogue, a xenophobe, a sexist, a know-nothing, and a liar

 

Quels trouducs vraiment, c'est pas possible. Pourtant j'aime bien The Atlantic et je suis pas spécialement pro Trump.

 

 

[Takeshin]

Je suis également tombé là-dessus :

 

https://i.sli.mg/YiuzpB.png

 

Je n'ai pas vérifié les chiffres, mais j'avais déjà remarqué que certains échantillons du même sondeur variaient curieusement de semaine en semaine (je sais qu'il peut y avoir une variation même sur le pourcentage de gens qui iront voter, mais des différences pareilles ?).

Et savoir que certains sondages sont orientés de manière à créer la bonne histoire (dans un sens comme dans l'autre, c'est juste que vu la situation, la majorité des médias se retourne effectivement contre Trump) ne m'étonne pas spécialement.

[h16]

Pour de l'oversampling, c'est de l'oversampling...

Bon, reste à savoir si c'est vrai ou si c'est un hoax.

[Asthenik]

Le creepy "grab them by the pussy" de Trump va être bien monté en épingle et va lui coûter très cher. Ca a été très bien amené par les démocrates avec l'histoire de la miss. Et concomitament, les dossiers de plus en plus compromettants s'accumulent pour Clinton qui apparaît de plus en plus nettement comme une sacrée ordure. Le planning est plus que serré mais possible que dans ce champ de ruines Johnson surprenne dans la dernière ligne droite pendant que les deux gros se tapent dessus en mode destruction thermo-nucleaire...

[h16]

Objectivement, je ne crois pas trop en Johnson. Ce serait rigolo, mais la proba se situe probablement en dessous du 1%.

Et à mon avis, à force de cogner Trump en dessous de la ceinture (alors qu'Hillary continue d'avoir des soucis qui sont, objectivement, bien plus graves, depuis sa santé jusqu'à ses emails et tout le reste), les médias et les démocrates vont probablement se faire aussi du mal à eux-mêmes.

[Asthenik]

Objectivement, je ne crois pas trop en Johnson. Ce serait rigolo, mais la proba se situe probablement en dessous du 1%.

Et à mon avis, à force de cogner Trump en dessous de la ceinture (alors qu'Hillary continue d'avoir des soucis qui sont, objectivement, bien plus graves, depuis sa santé jusqu'à ses emails et tout le reste), les médias et les démocrates vont probablement se faire aussi du mal à eux-mêmes.

Oui, on va voir si par exemple cela fait boomerang en faisant rejaillir les histoire glauques de Bill.

Sur Johnson, je suis d'accord, je ne crois pas en sa victoire miraculeuse, c'est trop tard, son charisme de serpillière humide ne le permettra pas, mais je pense quand même que son score peut être historique pour le parti libertarien. Un petit 20% semble possible au niveau national.

[José]

Le Trump est fini.

Vous pouvez reprendre vos activités normales.

[Nigel]

 Annoncer sa mort, c'est démobiliser les troupes de Clinton, et faire gagner Trump. 

 

 Je suis persuadé que le meurtre de Cox a démobilisé les anti-brexit et remobilisé les pro-brexit - car les deux camps se sont persuadés suite à cet acte de la défaite du Brexit.

 

 Bon je spécule peut-être^^ Mais j'attends de voir quand même^^ Puis c'est peut-être très bon pour Johnson toute cette polémique.