News Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

[Astronuc]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/04/how-mike-pence-explains-donald-trumps-1-billion-loss.html

Mike Pence defended Tuesday Donald Trump's reported 1995 loss of nearly $1 billion, saying his running mate "brilliantly" used American tax laws after some "tough times."

However, one of Trump's former accountants asserts, "Donald Trump had no part in preparing his controversial 1995 tax returns that legally allowed him to avoid paying federal taxes for 18 years, the accountant who prepared the taxes told Inside Edition."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ex-trump-accountant-speaks-tax-193700328.html
“None whatsoever,” Jack Mitnick, 80, replied when asked how involved Trump was in his tax preparations.

So much for Trump's claim that he used the brilliantly used the tax laws. Well, he paid for someone who knew how to do that. So, no, Trump is not so brilliant.

Meanwhile, CNBC reports "During the vice presidential debate, Mike Pence won for himself but not for Donald Trump, a Trump advisor tells CNBC." Bear in mind that it's CNBC reporting.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/pence-upstaged-kaine-boss-too-122021455.html

Mike Pence for President?

 

[Evo]

Mike Pence for President?

You cannot be serious.

Think Trump Is Scary? Check Out Mike Pence On The Issues.
Trump might blow up the world, but Pence would set the clock back to 1954.

Abortion

As governor of Indiana, Pence signed the most abortion-restrictive regulations in the nation, banning abortion even in cases where the fetus has a “genetic abnormality” such as Down syndrome and holding doctors legally liable if they had knowingly performed such procedures. The law also required that aborted fetal tissue be buried or cremated. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in a landmark abortion case in June, a federal judge blocked the law from going into effect.

He led the national fight to defund Planned Parenthood and forced so many of its clinics to close in Indiana that he triggered an H.I.V. epidemic in one county.

LGBT Rights
in 2015, Pence helped pass one of the nation’s harshest “religious freedom” laws that would have protected businesses who wanted to refuse service to LGBT people if they cited religious objections. After businesses pulled out of expansion plans into the state, Pence signed an amended version of the law that was nominally intended to provide protection for sexual orientation and gender identity.

As a congressman, he opposed federal funding that would support treatment for people suffering from H.I.V. and AIDS, unless the government simultaneously invested in programs to discourage people from engaging in same-sex relationships.

He has resisted changes to hate-crime laws that would have included acts against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. And he was against the end of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” a Clinton administration policy that allowed gays to serve in the military.

He has said publicly, “I long for the day that Roe v. Wade is sent to the ash heap of history.”

Immigration

In 2006, Pence proposed an immigration compromise that envisioned a guest worker program that required undocumented immigrants to “self-deport” before returning to America legally. His plan did not offer a path to citizenship, nor did it propose a “deportation force.” He’s down with the big beautiful wall. He fought against having Syrian refugees settled in Indiana.

continuned...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...nce-on-the-issues_us_57f137d5e4b095bd896a11db

I suggest read where he stands on the issues, he scares the heck out of me.

http://www.ontheissues.org/IN/Mike_Pence.htm

Mike Pence on Civil Rights

• Future of conservatism demands traditional marriage. (Feb 2008)
• Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation. (Nov 2007)
• Voted YES on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
• Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)

• Voted YES on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
• Voted YES on protecting the Pledge of Allegiance. (Sep 2004)
• Voted YES on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
• Supports anti-flag desecration amendment. (Mar 2001)
• Require "Privacy Impact Statement" on new federal rules. (Apr 2002)

ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)

• Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)

• Rated 22% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)

• Amend Constitution to define traditional marriage. (Jun 2008)

 

[Astronuc]

I just asked the question. It's not an endorsement. I wouldn't vote for Pence.

Meanwhile, The Atlantic tepidly endorses Hillary Clinton. Since 1857, they've only endorsed two presidential candidates, Abraham Lincoln (1860) and Lyndon Johnson (1964). They consider the current election of such significance, a true national emergency or existential threat to the republic.
http://www.npr.org/2016/10/05/496754919/the-atlantic-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president
Apparently, Clinton is flawed, but otherwise meets the minimum qualifications for presidential fitness and has experience. Trump is "less qualified, or ostentatiously unqualified, more so than any previous candidate in history."

 

[Evo]

I just asked the question. It's not an endorsement. I wouldn't vote for Pence.

Phew, I can call off the intervention.

Meanwhile, The Atlantic tepidly endorses Hillary Clinton. Since 1857, they've only endorsed two presidential candidates, Abraham Lincoln (1860) and Lyndon Johnson (1964). They consider the current election of such significance, a true national emergency or existential threat to the republic.
http://www.npr.org/2016/10/05/496754919/the-atlantic-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president
Apparently, Clinton is flawed, but otherwise meets the minimum qualifications for presidential fitness and has experience. Trump is "less qualified, or ostentatiously unqualified, more so than any previous candidate in history."

Yeah, this election is unlike any other that I know of. At least Clinton is qualified and we have an idea of what she will be like in office so we shouldn't have any "OMG, didn't see that coming" moments. It all still doesn't seem real.

 

[russ_watters]

I just asked the question. It's not an endorsement. I wouldn't vote for Pence.

Meanwhile, The Atlantic tepidly endorses Hillary Clinton. Since 1857, they've only endorsed two presidential candidates, Abraham Lincoln (1860) and Lyndon Johnson (1964). They consider the current election of such significance, a true national emergency or existential threat to the republic.
http://www.npr.org/2016/10/05/496754919/the-atlantic-endorses-hillary-clinton-for-president
Apparently, Clinton is flawed, but otherwise meets the minimum qualifications for presidential fitness and has experience. Trump is "less qualified, or ostentatiously unqualified, more so than any previous candidate in history."

Trump has major issues, but I quibble with the characterization "unqualified". The only qualifications listed in the Constitution are demographics (age, citizenship), and have nothing to do with experience. I personally don't put a ton of value on government service as a "qualification"... I think we need a businessman to be CEO of the USA.

Trump's issue isn't that he is unqualified, it is that he isn't serious.

 

[Evo]

Trump's issue isn't that he is unqualified, it is that he isn't serious.

And maybe a bit too hot headed, lack of self control? And maybe acts/speaks first and thinks later? I think though if you compared Clinton's knowledge of world affairs with Trump, you'd have to say he's less qualified, could he or would he quickly get up to speed? I'm not willing to find out.

 

[Astronuc]

I think we need a businessman to be CEO of the USA.

Preferably a good business man, one who exhibits good judgment and exercises good ethics, including fiduciary responsibility, and not a real estate developer with deep insecurity.

Back in 1789, I imagine that those who authored and approved the Constitution expected some of them might be president, and they assumed qualifications. So many citizens were excluded from that opportunity, women and non-whites in particular.

The world is much more complex now in 2016, and it would be great to have a statesman with good business sense, and a sense of justice and fairness. That seems to be sorely lacking in recent administrations and candidates.

It would help also to know the Constitution, Constitutional law, the US Code, and Code of Federal Regulations, at least what each title/chapter covers.

 

[Astronuc]

How Trump is driving some believers away from the GOP
https://www.yahoo.com/news/evangeli...-some-believers-out-of-the-gop-090055268.html

Donald Trump may “love the evangelicals,” but the feeling is certainly not mutual among a good portion of them.

More than half of the most committed evangelical Christians didn’t support Donald Trump for president in the Republican primary. And although a majority of them have resigned themselves to backing him rather than supporting the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, evangelicalism is changing in ways that may not be apparent to the casual observer.

Trump’s candidacy, in fact, is helping to accelerate the trend pushing some evangelicals away from an automatic affiliation with the Republican Party. Evangelicals oppose Trump for a few reasons: They view his character as repugnant and his temperament as dangerous. And while many of them do not like Clinton, they are not as alarmed by their policy disagreements with her as they are by the idea that the church would align itself with someone like Trump.

There's a new generation, and they are questioning their relationship with the GOP, especially with Trump as the GOP candidate. Interesting.

 

[Kevin McHugh]

Please post your source.

Us oldsters remember well. I saw it on the news. Am I a good source?

 

[mheslep]

... not a real estate developer ...
Back in 1789, ...

George Washington was a real estate developer, and lost a lot money in some of his projects.
http://www.candocanal.org/articles/washington.html
Also was known for fierce temper, could swear a blue streak when roused.

 

[Evo]

Us oldsters remember well. I saw it on the news. Am I a good source?

No.

 

[m k]

You have a great humour.

 

[mheslep]

I suggest read where he stands on the issues, he scares the heck out of me...

On gay marriage Gov. Pence is not significantly different from Obama in '08, and Pence is similar to, say, Reagan on abortion. I understand you disagree with these positions, but do you actually find them frightening? That is, were they frightening when held Obama or Reagan?

 

[mheslep]

... Since 1857, they've only endorsed two presidential candidates, Abraham Lincoln (1860) and Lyndon Johnson (1964).

Given they were wrong about Goldwater, The Atlantic is 1-1.

 

[Evo]

On gay marriage Gov. Pence is not significantly different from Obama in '08, and Pence is similar to, say, Reagan on abortion. I understand you disagree with these positions, but do you actually find them frightening? That is, were they frightening when held Obama or Reagan?

Yes. And Pence goes even further. You may not find his homophobia and the defunding of Planned Parenthood and such things scary, I do. I disagree with probably everything on his "on the issues" page. It's not just "gay marriage", he backed allowing companies to discriminate against hiring gays, he is against laws against hate crimes.

I don't intend to go off topic, but I was not a fan of Obama when he first started campaining, Gokul kept badgering me to like him, if it hadn't been for Palin, I might have voted for McCain, I don't know. I voted against Gore. But let's stay on topic.

 

[mheslep]

Yes. And Pence goes even further. You may not find his homophobia and the defunding of Planned Parenthood and such things scary, I do. I disagree with probably everything on his "on the issues" page.

I don't intend to go off topic, but I was not a fan of Obama when he first started campaining, Gokul kept badgering me to like him, if it hadn't been for Palin, I might have voted for McCain, I don't know. I voted against Gore. But let's stay on topic.

I disagree with Pence on some of those issues too. I don't know why disagreement must become fear that provokes name calling, when the same gay marriage issue with Obama some years ago provoked a benign "not a fan" response, but now with Pence on the same issue he's called scary and homophobic.

BTW, that HuffPo piece from Jerry "Old Guy" Bowles is incorrect on the blocked Indiana abortion law. The law did not attempt "...banning abortion even in cases ..." [italics mine] as Bowles states, implying all abortion is banned, even in extreme cases. Rather, the law attempted to ban abortion solely because of the fetus particulars, like sex, race, and disability.

 

[Evo]

but now with Pence on the same issue he's called scary and homophobic.

It's due to his other actions that I mentioned, as I said not just gay marriage. but much more important issues.

he backed allowing companies to discriminate against hiring gays, he is against laws against hate crimes.

http://www.ontheissues.org/IN/Mike_Pence.htm

See Mike Pence on "Civil Rights" if you missed it the first time I posted it, I will not keep posting it, so bookmark it if you have to.

 

[Astronuc]

George Washington was a real estate developer, and lost a lot money in some of his projects.
http://www.candocanal.org/articles/washington.html
Also was known for fierce temper, could swear a blue streak when roused.

A contemporary real estate developer like Trump is very different from one 2 centuries. Furthermore, Trump is no George Washington. Did Washington lose his own money, likely, or borrow heavily from others and lose money of others? Did Washington fail to pay taxes, or rather find ways not to pay taxes to the government?

I think Washington served the nation in ways that Trump never will, or never would.

 

[TurtleMeister]

Did Washington fail to pay taxes, or rather find ways not to pay taxes to the government?

If Trump did not do anything illegal concerning his taxes then I don't understand why it should be an issue. Shouldn't the issue be the tax code itself?

 

[Astronuc]

If Trump did not do anything illegal concerning his taxes then I don't understand why it should be an issue. Shouldn't the issue be the tax code itself?

The tax code is certainly an issue. Is there any belief or evidence to suggest either candidate will encourage Congress to improve the tax code?

Trump has mentioned more tax cuts. Clinton had mentioned increased taxes. Apparently both are comfortable with ongoing deficits.

Is Trump simply not mentioning that he will cut expenditures on certain groups?

In the case of Trumps taxes, he talks about his responsibility to investors. However, he has lost investors money, failed to repay bank loans, failed to pay contractors, . . . .

I'll have to find some discussions I heard about his taxes and business practices, and the comments were rather negative.

 

[Astronuc]

Gary Johnson struggles once more on naming a foreign leader. Hint: The last three are Kim.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/gary-joh...orth-koreas-leader-kim-jong-un-153924294.html

In an http://hsrd.yahoo.com/RV=1/RE=1477014691/RH=aHNyZC55YWhvby5jb20-/RB=/RU=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5ueXRpbWVzLmNvbS8yMDE2LzEwLzA2L3VzL3BvbGl0aWNzL2dhcnktam9obnNvbi1jYW1wYWlnbi5odG1sAA--/RS=%5EADA627eJMZ63ORS6W0OJiAzviyRvcc- , the New York Times asked Johnson, a former governor of New Mexico, if he knew the name of North Korea’s leader.

“I do,” the third-party candidate replied.

“You want me to name” the person, he continued, before adding, “Really.” Johnson ultimately declined to provide a name.
. . .
In early September, Johnson was widely ridiculed after drawing a blank on “Morning Joe” when asked about Aleppo, the most populous city in Syria and the epicenter of the ongoing refugee crisis.

I would certainly expect someone running for POTUS to know some of the world leaders with whom he or she will have to deal.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Did Washington lose his own money, likely, or borrow heavily from others and lose money of others? Did Washington fail to pay taxes, or rather find ways not to pay taxes to the government?

Actually, he sort of did. He took no salary as general of the Continental Army, asking only that his expenses be paid. In 1970, Marvin Kitman published George Washington's Expense Account, which is a hoot. Washington's expenses - including loans to friends that were never repaid were 30x a general's salary. Not exactly the same, but not exactly kosher either.

Given they were wrong about Goldwater

"In your heart, you know he's right" - Goldwater campaign slogan.
"In your guts you know he's nuts." - Variation on the above

 

[Astronuc]

Interesting views on Donald Trump and the parties from various supporters.

GOP strategist Scott Miller is also betting on Trump. Miller says, "George Bernard Shaw said that all progress is accomplished through unreasonable people, and Donald Trump is probably as unreasonable as they come."

Voters Drawn To Donald Trump In Florida Panhandle
http://www.npr.org/2016/10/06/496911566/voters-drawn-to-donald-trump-in-florida-panhandle

I can appreciate folks frustrations, but Trump is not the answer.

 

[HossamCFD]

Gary Johnson struggles once more on naming a foreign leader. Hint: The last three are Kim.

I can't help but wonder how would Trump fare under similar specific questioning. Something tells me that there might be plenty of 'Aleppo moments' there if journalists were looking for them.

 

[Astronuc]

Trump would probably also be oblivious of world leaders outside the US, although hopefully he'd remember the president of Mexico, Enrique Peña Nieto, whom he recently visited.

I could understand Johnson not admiring any world leader, or not knowing many or most of them, but I would hope he'd have some idea of who the world leaders are. George W. Bush had trouble identifying world leaders before assuming the presidency, although he did acknowledge Saddam Hussein.

It certainly does seem hard to identify admirable world leaders these days. Any candidates? Perhaps a topic for another thread.

 

[russ_watters]

Did Washington fail to pay taxes, or rather find ways not to pay taxes to the government?

Intentionally misleading word choice aside, I would certainly expect - even hope - a smart man like Washington would have taken advantage of all the deductions and legal shelters available to him in order to legally "fail to pay taxes". Wouldn't you? Don't you?

 

[Astronuc]

Intentionally misleading word choice aside, I would certainly expect - even hope - a smart man like Washington would have taken advantage of all the deductions and legal shelters available to him in order to legally "fail to pay taxes". Wouldn't you? Don't you?

It's more of a rhetorical question; no misleading choice of words. I don't take advantage of all deductions and legal shelters. My income tax rate is about 15% (including deferred income) with another 1.4% to Medicare/Medicaid and 6.1% to SS. While I take some deductions (e.g., mortgage, standard, . . .), there are charitable donations and business expenses that I don't use as deductions.

As I understand Trump's ~$916 million losses, it was not out of pocket (i.e., his money), but rather mostly borrowed money (or otherwise other peoples' monies).

 

[russ_watters]

It's more of a rhetorical question; no misleading choice of words.

I'll be explicit: "Fail to pay..." is roughly the legal definition of tax evasion. With the qualifier that came after, the phrase is incorrect and the sentence as a whole is self-contradictory.

I don't take advantage of all deductions and legal shelters. My income tax rate is about...

Fair enough; for me also it is a question of cost/benefit. I have in the past taken deductions for home office equipment, but it is a pain to itemize for a few dollars, so I don't always do it. But if the stakes were tens or hundreds of thousands, I would.

Plausible scenario: You buy a decent amount of stock -- whatever value that is for you; a thousand, or a hundred thousand in a small pharma company. Eleven months later it gets shut down by the FDA and the stock tanks. You think you want out, but maybe the stock will recover a little (not generally good to sell instantly after bad news because people oversell). Do you sell now or wait another month?

You probably sell now because that's an income loss and if you wait a month it will be a capital loss and you'll be able to take a bigger tax deduction on the income loss.

Is that tax avoision (tm)? Absolutely! "Failure to pay..."? Certainly not.

 

[russ_watters]

I can't help but wonder how would Trump fare under similar specific questioning. Something tells me that there might be plenty of 'Aleppo moments' there if journalists were looking for them.

Journalists don't need to ask him such questions or perhaps can't because he short-circuits (credit to Hillary for inventing the term) the questions he is asked. Take his "I know more about ISIS than the generals" statement and apply it to this question and you'll have his likely answer.

 

[Astronuc]

I wasn't distinguishing between avoidance and evasion, but your point is taken. Both are intentional acts, one legal and the other not, of course.

I was thinking more in terms of civic duty.

I'll have to read Kitman's book about Washington's expenses.

Fair enough; for me also it is a question of cost/benefit. I have in the past taken deductions for home office equipment, but it is a pain to itemize for a few dollars, so I don't always do it. But if the stakes were tens or hundreds of thousands, I would.

Same here.

 

[Kevin McHugh]

[
UOTE="russ_watters, post: 5587062, member: 142"]Intentionally misleading word choice aside, I would certainly expect - even hope - a smart man like Washington would have taken advantage of all the deductions and legal shelters available to him in order to legally "fail to pay taxes". Wouldn't you? Don't you?[/QUOTE]

It is every Americans citizens' moral obligation to pay the least amount of income tax required by law. If you are feeling particularly altruistic, you may pay more. However the government doesn't spend money responsibly, so you might be better off donating to charity.

 

[SW VandeCarr]

The Russian government has sent a formal complaint to the UN for the criticism of Donald Trump by a UN human rights official.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/un-criticism-of-trump-prompts-russian-response-229287

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I really can't imagine any women voting for Trump after this latest story with his hot mic in 2005. If you want to hear it, Google for it. It's NSFW.

 

[mheslep]

Did Washington fail to pay taxes, or rather find ways not to pay taxes to the government

You'll recall that the scoflaws prior to the revolution went to great lengths to refuse to pay taxes on imports from Great Britain. Tea, etc. After establishment of the US, no US income tax was collected for the first 130 years or so. Also, aside from the civil war, the spending of the US government never exceeded 4% of US GDP from 1792 until WWI. Now federal spending approaches 25% of GDP. Total state, local, and federal almost 40%. The point being, that there was no leviathan government collecting enough tax to motivate many to avoid it. As you say, things were different back then, especially the size of government.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1792_2010USp_17s1li011mcn_F0t

 

[mheslep]

The Russian government has sent a formal complaint to the UN for the criticism of Donald Trump by a UN human rights official.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/un-criticism-of-trump-prompts-russian-response-229287

Not just Trump. That UN diplomat, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein of Jordan, decided to use his diplomatic passport to speak in Cleveland about the US election, and earlier also unloaded on political leaders in half a dozen other countries. Not among the targets: any of the middle eastern totalitarian governments. How does he find the time in between invited speeches from Hollywood movie stars at the UN (this year Leo DiCaprio, Emma Watson).

...Zeid also criticized by name the pro-Brexit head of the U.K. Independence Party, Nigel Farage, who appeared with Trump at an August rally; Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico; Austrian presidential candidate Norbert Hofer; French nationalist leader Marine Le Pen; Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban; and Czech President Milos Zeman.

 

[mheslep]

...
I can appreciate folks frustrations, but Trump is not the answer.

If Clinton was built in such a way as to have said something like that, instead of her all-is-well except for the "deplorable" Americans narative, she'd be 20 points ahead. But she is not built in such a way.

 

[olivermsun]

The thing is, the context seems to describe a dichotomy:

"You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up...

"But the other basket, the other basket, and I know because I see friends from all over America here. I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas, as well as you know New York and California. But that other basket of people who are people who feel that government has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they are just desperate for change."

So, doesn't the listener get to choose which basket they think they're in?

 

[Astronuc]

It's just gets stranger -
Bill Weld Pivots From Helping Gary Johnson to Harming Donald Trump
The Libertarian vice presidential nominee hints he may focus on rebuilding the Republican party after the election.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...-helping-gary-johnson-to-harming-donald-trump

I'd rather have Bill Weld at the top of that ticket.

I'm listening to Gary Johnson talking with Katie Couric, and for a change, he sounded pretty reasonable. I think he's been doing his homework, or at least he's thinking about the details. I finished listening to the interview, and Johnson is thoughtful and mostly reasonable, although I don't necessarily agree with him on all points.
https://www.yahoo.com/katiecouric/2...rm-his-party-and-the-2016-race-195136143.html

And it just seems to get worse. Trump's shocking crude comments on women leave him reeling
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-clinton-campaigns-watch-matthews-impact-fla-072835319--election.html

 

[Astronuc]

The thing is, the context seems to describe a dichotomy:

Clinton could have chosen her words more carefully. If she mentioned 'half', rather than those who are "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic", then she's writing off many people. Clinton could have simply acknowledged those who feel that government has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they are just desperate for change, and who may be the majority of Trump supporters.

I'm saddened by disparaging comments by anyone who wants to represent the US and serve all it's citizens.

 

[olivermsun]

Clinton could have chosen her words more carefully. If she mentioned 'half', rather than those who are "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic", then she's writing off many people. Clinton could have simply acknowledged those who feel that government has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they are just desperate for change, and who may be the majority of Trump supporters.

I'm saddened by disparaging comments by anyone who wants to represent the US and serve all it's citizens.

I agree with you there.

But it does leave us with the question: suppose it were actually true that half of Trump supporters embraced racism, sexism, etc., then would it mean that these things must be spoken about in a non-disparaging way? And if so, then how?

 

[Astronuc]

suppose it were actually true that half of Trump supporters embraced racism, sexism, etc., then would it mean that these things must be spoken about in a non-disparaging way? And if so, then how?

It might be a challenge, but through positive and constructive engagement. If one wishes to change the hearts and minds of someone, then one has to find a positive way, knowing that it may not work in all cases. One can address the issues without denigrating the other.

 

[Astronuc]

Calls for Donald Trump to remove himself from the presidential race rushed in late Friday and into Saturday morning from prominent Republican officials.

The last couple weeks for the real-estate businessman have gone from disappointing to near-apocalyptic.

Now, a bombshell audio recording that is shaping up to be the GOP nominee's biggest campaign scandal has forced some Republicans to hit the panic button.

GOP Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois said on Friday Trump "should drop out" and the Republican National Committee "should engage rules for emergency replacement."

Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, whom Trump recently named as a potential Supreme Court nominee, echoed Kirk.

http://www.businessinsider.com/will-donald-trump-quit-republican-party-2016-10

GOP leaders want Trump to step down. Isn't this unprecedented?

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/p...kened-by-Donald-Trumps-comments-in-video.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aviksar...ally-get-gop-elites-to-drop-him/#1fab0379ef6e
I wonder if Trump will lose Utah?
Will republicans turn to Pence? Ryan? Who else?

 

[RonL]

http://www.businessinsider.com/will-donald-trump-quit-republican-party-2016-10

GOP leaders want Trump to step down. Isn't this unprecedented?

It's disappointing to say the least, but I'm old enough to remember JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Bill Clinton and others of which recordings reveal substance that would not be allowed on PF. I'll look for some links if needs be, others might find them quicker than I can.

 

[Astronuc]

JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Bill Clinton and others

I remember comments of LBJ and Nixon, and we all know of Clinton's scandals, but they are all in the past. Trump is the current candidate and GOP nominee.

 

[phinds]

It's disappointing to say the least, but I'm old enough to remember JFK, Johnson, Nixon, Bill Clinton and others of which recordings reveal substance that would not be allowed on PF. I'll look for some links if needs be, others might find them quicker than I can.

Yes, all that is true but happily we now live in a time when denigrating blacks, women, the disabled, etc, is more quickly and strongly condemned than it was even 20 years ago.

Does this "revelation" really come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention to Trump? It struck me as being totally in character for him and was no surprise at all. I quite readily believe the talk shows that are reporting that there are hours and hours of such taped occurrences of him being absolutely obscene regarding women (sometimes in their presence) in at least two separate sets of archives, one of which is apparently not likely to see the light of day and the other that might.

 

[RonL]

I remember comments of LBJ and Nixon, and we all know of Clinton's scandals, but they are all in the past. Trump is the current candidate and GOP nominee.

This tape is a bit from the past as well, ( I feel he hasn't changed) I'm not likely to vote for him, I just don't think I agree with the standard of judgement.

 

[Astronuc]

This tape is a bit from the past as well, ( I feel he hasn't changed) I'm not likely to vote for him, I just don't think I agree with the standard of judgement.

Yes, the tape and comments are 11 years old, but it there is no indication that Trump has changed for the better. I don't believe Trump or Roger Ailes represent the majority of republicans. It is just sad.

Wasn't the same standard applied to Bill Clinton?

 

[Kevin McHugh]

It might be a challenge, but through positive and constructive engagement. If one wishes to change the hearts and minds of someone, then one has to find a positive way, knowing that it may not work in all cases. One can address the issues without denigrating the other.

One would hope. If only it were true for our "deplorable" candidates. The level of professionalism of these two is on par with the 4th grade school yard.

 

[Kevin McHugh]

http://www.businessinsider.com/will-donald-trump-quit-republican-party-2016-10

GOP leaders want Trump to step down. Isn't this unprecedented?

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/p...kened-by-Donald-Trumps-comments-in-video.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aviksar...ally-get-gop-elites-to-drop-him/#1fab0379ef6e
I wonder if Trump will lose Utah?
Will republicans turn to Pence? Ryan? Who else?

And I thought it was the Democrats who were going to have to replace their candidate at the last moment

 

[StevieTNZ]

If this leaked video with his disgraceful remarks makes Trump lose the election, I'll be happy. He shouldn't even be running in the first place; a complete embarrassment.