Elisha

Or was it the report referenced here on this very objective unbiased website?

Much better explanation. Thanks.

Further than he and the Republican party divided the nation by pushing it to the forefront of the national conversation for two years? Your statement reminds me of a joke I heard once. A politician dies and goes to the pearly gates. Peter says there is a new rule. Before you can go to heaven you must experience both places and then decide. So the man goes to heaven. There's harps playing and everyone is sitting on a cloud. Very peaceful. Then he goes to hell. What a party! Open bar, food everywhere, hookers and blow all for the asking. He goes back to St. Peter. St. peter asks him "Have you decided?" The politician tells St. peter that while heaven looks wonderful he's decided to go to Hell. Poof! When he opens his eyes there is fire and brimstone everywhere. People dressed in rags. He asks the first person he sees what happened. "Yesterday it was such a party here. now this?" The guy looks at him and smiles. "Yesterday was the campaign. Today you voted." I'm not sure it was politicians when I first heard it (but maybe it was)...but VERY similar context. This is a good one.

If you're going to be that polarizing and literal, then is the military just bad and needs to stop abusing people with those mean drill seargants and stuff? I think you need to clarify a bit more.

Good....don't need no newts.

The article title is just moronic. Lack of Transparency for not being told he's going to get a steak dinner? Really media, just GTFO. Even sadder is that there seems to be some legit complaints IN THE SAME ARTICLE, but the writer says steak dinner. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/aas-trump-leaves-press-behind-steak-dinner-incoming-admin-already-n684511 How about the following instead (bolds are mine)? "A week after the election, Trump hasn't yet held a press conference, the longest any recent president has waited to speak to the press" "The media covering the president-elect have also not yet been offered briefings on his transition efforts, which was a typical practice for past presidents that allowed the public to keep apprised of the details of the new government. And until recently, Trump's staff weren't releasing readouts of his calls with foreign leaders, leaving the press — and the public — to receive their guidance from foreign governments" My only question: define "recent" and "past" presidents, timeframe speaking.

Your post is rather reactionary. I believe the poll really is in jest and not meant to have a serious discussion...unless it is really about bromancing.

+1 here. And his ending lines are great. LOL!

Except Tiffany; she's worthless. No, I'm kidding...but yes, she's not a big executive like her older siblings and a lot of talk partying and possible drugs.

I haven't really followed all the back and forth between posters, but kudos for owning up.

A couple swats on the butt that leave a red mark that fades in a couple hours is a whole lot different than 36 bruises all over the body. Crazy.

Speaking to your headline, from the 538 link it looks like he was going to lose anyways. This stupid comment from him just cemented it.

It will be great if it is this simple. Asking soldiers to repay "fraudulent" bonuses/loans 10 years later when they counted on this money and life circumstances have completely changed is a**hattery at its finest.

But they didn't get any video of it happening, despite all the video they have of people supposedly ordering it to happen? Did these left or right wing tv segments address the issue of police being ordered to ignore violent physical assaults? If your next post completely ignores my direct question about the claim you just made then I'm done too. Your move. http://www.twincities.com/2016/08/22/minneapolis-trump-protests-campaign-event-unacceptable/ Not that I'm "claiming" like rehmwa, but just because the article says there was no "stand down" order, doesn't mean that officers may not have ignored violent protester activity or deliberately decided not to escort many people to cars. Not so easy to disprove that willful negligence didn't happen. Maybe they felt overwhelmed and so thought "yeah, f*ck it", didn't want to leave their posts, or something else. The claims seem plausable to me.

I think it was trotted out specifically to highlight Trump's absolute lack of experience, and as a counterpoint to Trump's claims of being the best everything candidate ever. Healthiest ever despite being morbidly obese. Best 'at the military' ever despite never having served and being up against the Supreme Allied Commander in the European theatre of WW2. Maybe, but instantly saw it as to combat her 60% (and likewise Trump's) unfavorability rating. It's not enough that Trump is just bad, so Hillary is better. It's the image that, well, she's NOT really bad! She's just so good with ALLLLLL her qualifications.

I think people do care about subjective opinions. Yours is. Mine is not. They care, just not the way you think. It's funny too because you just dismissed out of hand the word qualified used objectively, yet you appear to have no issue whatsoever making a completely subjective claim. Double standard much? No....not quite. I think it was originally trotted out specifically to portray Hillary as the best candidate ever (by using such a strong word as most qualified ever) to deflect from all of her moral/policy/favorability failings over the years. She's the most qualified ever, thus there is no way anyone could conceive of NOT voting for her (let alone voting for her out of fear of Trump).

Moore's schtick and method is tiresome...in both a per movie basis and overall being sick of it. Doubt I'll watch. I much prefer the way someone like Charles Ferguson of Inside Job does things.

I wish people would stop with this "more qualified" (or most/best/whatever) misleading crap. I'm sure John Stumpf could be considered more/most/best "qualified" for a CEO position, but that doesn't mean anyone really wants him to be a CEO anymore. I'm unclear what you're even attempting to say. Hillary has been in politics for a long time. Has served as a Senator and Secretary of State. Was in the situation room as Secretary of State sitting beside the President when Bin Laden was was killed. It's not a matter of the subjective. Hillary is OBJECTIVELY more qualified than Trump to be President. There's nothing misleading about it whatsoever. No one gives a crap about qualifications if the person is corrupt as death. No idea about what I'm saying? You must not read the news regarding Wells Fargo.

I wish people would stop with this "more qualified" (or most/best/whatever) misleading crap. I'm sure John Stumpf could be considered more/most/best "qualified" for a CEO position, but that doesn't mean anyone really wants him to be a CEO anymore.

FIFY Dude - I don't think even Trump is as mean to Hillary as your comment just there was. seriously, she's someone's grandma for gosh sake And Trump is someone's grandfather, so what's your point of that statement?

And unless I missed the discussion in another thread, people are trying a similar thing with Bernie in Vermont...albeit as a write-in since he's not on the ballot.

Well, a few reasons. One was described by Trump himself. When you're a star, they let you get away with it. Another is that female victims of assault fear they will be slut-shamed when they accuse a man of assault (indeed, Trump is doing this now.) Thus they may tend to remain quiet, and hope it all blows over. Until they realize that it's not just them; that the predator has struck more than once, and they now have corroboration from other victims. We saw this effect with the Bill Cosby rape accusations. A third is that people have limits. And even if the person keeps the assault to herself, and determines to just put it behind her and get on with her life, hearing her assaulter say on stage in front of the whole country "I've never done that" might push her past her limit. But everyone ultimately has their own reasons. Again, as we saw with Bill Cosby, sometimes people wait a long time - but that alone does not diminish their credibility. Fourth reason: people get emotionally charged very easily. If they were possibly on the fence, these anecdotes could sway them to not vote for him.

Here's a transcript.

I like animals...just generally don't have a schedule and residence that is good for having pets. I have a 20lb orange tabby named Falafel. He's very friendly and low maintenance.

As it's them doing the dirty work of kicking out (eliminating) ISIS/Al-Qaeda/etc and not us, so that Syria can get back to being a country again, then fine with me.