News Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

[OCR]

Trump thinks he can "turn off the internet" where and when he wants.

I thought he was already doing that.....

...Off topic and outdated material removed...

 

[Dotini]

The media is doing an awful job with this election , they try to whitewash one candidate and screw the other in the ground more than he screws himself.
I understand both the desire and political will coming from the top executives at the major news organizations to demolish Trump by all means but isn't this a democracy ? Shouldn't the people be given the full chance to choose their future and either elect or "delete" a candidate...(?)

Nice post and nice questions! I say no, and no again. This is not a democracy and the people should not get anything close to a full chance to choose. IMO and in full devil's advocacy, I assert that in politics, like war and life itself, the ends justify the means and might makes right. If you are looking for truth and beauty, then you've come to the wrong place. For that, I find it at the fencing salle or music studio.

 

[Evo]

Maybe this article explains why Trump will not release his tax returns.

Trump companies owe $650 million: NY Times

Washington (AFP) - Companies belonging to Donald Trump have at least $650 million in debt, more than twice the amount shown in public filings made by his presidential campaign, the New York Times reported Saturday.

The paper employed a property information firm to search publicly available data on more than 30 US properties connected to the Republican candidate, including offices and golf courses.

In addition to the $650 million liabilities, "a substantial portion of his wealth is tied up in three passive partnerships that owe an additional $2 billion to a string of lenders," the Times said about debt that could significantly affect Trump's wealth.

Continued

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-companies-owe-650-million-ny-times-154100624.html

 

[Astronuc]

Maybe this article explains why Trump will not release his tax returns.

Continued

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-companies-owe-650-million-ny-times-154100624.html

I saw that this morning.

His lenders include one of the largest banks in China -- which the Republican candidate accuses of being a US economic foe -- and the investment bank Goldman Sachs, . . . .

Potential conflicts of interest.

This comes after the revelation that Trump gave money to Christie's campaigns and subsequently received substantial reductions in taxes and interest owed by his companies.

Donald Trump Gave Cash, Got Settlement From Chris Christie
https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-gave-cash-got-210127725.html

For years, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has faced questions about whether he has unduly rewarded energy and investment industry donors with state government favors. Now the spotlight has turned to another major donor who appears to have been treated well by Christie's administration: Donald Trump.

According to a report Wednesday in the New York Times, Trump casinos saw their tax bill reduced by roughly $25 million, when the Christie administration agreed to settle a longstanding lawsuit over back taxes for pennies on the dollar. Christie's predecessors had taken Trump's empire to court, alleging it owed nearly $30 million in unpaid taxes and interest — but after Christie came into office, state officials agreed to drop the case in exchange for just $5 million, according to the newspaper.

 

[Evo]

In reference to deleted post. Please check your sources before posting, they must be a mainstream, reputable NEWS agency.

An Opinion Publishing paper, wholly owned by The John Birch Society is not a news source and is not acceptable.

 

[Astronuc]

The media are slowly reporting on the apparent content of hacked DNC emails.

DNC emails: Behind the scenes look at care of big donors
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article91623012.html

In Hacked D.N.C. Emails, a Glimpse of How Big Money Works
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/us/politics/dnc-wikileaks-emails-fundraising.html

Journalist Alec Goodwin (at OpenSecrets.org, Center for Responsive Politics) on July 26, 2016 published an article:
Leaks show DNC asked White House to reward donors with slots on boards and commissions

Maybe we need to rethink the use of blogs from mainstream media, since it appears that what newspapers printed in the past as "columns" are now "blogs" on websites of media. I see mainstream media reporting on content from blogs as primary sources in addition to quotes from interviewees.

Newly released Clinton emails shed light on relationship between State Dept. and Clinton Foundation
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-judicial-watch/

New Emails Raise Questions About Ties Between Clinton Foundation And State Dept.
http://www.npr.org/2016/08/10/48946...ies-between-clinton-foundation-and-state-dept

Even NPR asks - "Why Are The Media Obsessed With Trump's Controversies And Not Clinton's?"
http://www.npr.org/2016/08/11/48957...-with-trump-s-controversies-and-not-clinton-sTrump and the RNC do much the same as Clinton and DNC. And RNC and DNC do the same thing. I know because in the past I've received solicitations/invitations to attend dinners with the President (GW Bush) and cabinet members. The more I contribute, the closer I get to the president. I have no idea how I got on their mailing list.

 

[Evo]

Maybe we need to rethink the use of blogs from mainstream media, since it appears that what newspapers printed in the past as "columns" are now "blogs" on websites of media. I see mainstream media reporting on content from blogs as primary sources in addition to quotes from interviewees.

From mainstream sources that may be possible, the problem is having to check to make sure the "blogger's commentary stays true to the source and doesn't go off on a personal tangent, which tends to be the problem with the blog and opinion sections, people add their own opinions which may or may not be true. We don't have a paid staff here that can spend all day verifying commentary outside of the news report. Sometimes I actually prefer these sections because a savvy commentator can really clarify what is going on, or they can cause immense confusion.

 

[Astronuc]

From mainstream sources that may be possible, the problem is having to check to make sure the "blogger's commentary stays true to the source and doesn't go off on a personal tangent, which tends to be the problem with the blog and opinion sections, people add their own opinions which may or may not be true. We don't have a paid staff here that can spend all day verifying commentary outside of the news report. Sometimes I actually prefer these sections because a savvy commentator can really clarify what is going on, or they can cause immense confusion.

I absolutely agree, which is why I emphasized "blogs on mainstream media". I see blogs on the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NPR, . . . . , which are essentially news articles with analysis. Ostensibly, the corporate media entity is legally responsible for what is written on their websites, i.e., they are subject to civil lawsuits for defamation. And I see mainstream news articles that cite blogs!

Blogs of individuals would not be acceptable, since there is no way to verify the veracity of the source, and it is more likely to be an opinion or rumor than a statement of fact.

 

[TurtleMeister]

Even NPR asks - "Why Are The Media Obsessed With Trump's Controversies And Not Clinton's?"
http://www.npr.org/2016/08/11/48957...-with-trump-s-controversies-and-not-clinton-s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States#Liberal_bias

Some critics of the media say liberal bias exists within a wide variety of media channels, especially within the mainstream media, including network news shows of CBS, ABC, and NBC, cable channels CNN, MSNBC and the former Current TV, as well as major newspapers, news-wires, and radio outlets, especially CBS News, Newsweek, and The New York Times.[43] These arguments intensified when it was revealed that the Democratic Party received a total donation of $1,020,816, given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks (NBC, CBS, ABC), while the Republican Party received only $142,863 via 193 donations.[44] Both of these figures represent donations made in 2008.

 

[Salvador]

@Dotini my question were more rhetoric than real questions , yet they still hold true.Sure I agree if everything happened according to the "blind" masses we would probably be screwed ten times over instead of being screwed just a few.After all a true democracy can only be attained if the individuals making it up are well educated ,have a good sense of what freedom means and are willing to protect that sacred state which is achieved with years of hard work.
But as I said , if the public is dumb enough to screw up their future , let them do it.After all you can't decide in other peoples place forever.
One day they will rise up and demand their right to elect a stupid and unworthy individual which somewhat represents their level of intellect.

 

[mheslep]

Trump thinks he can "turn off the internet" where and when he wants.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-explains-why-trump-cant-shut-down-internet-202157858.html

Trump said:
"We cannot allow the internet to be used as a recruiting tool, and for other purposes, by our enemy," Trump said. "We must shut down their access to this form of communication, and we must do so immediately."

Much of the rest of that article from Bree Fowler is opinion, not sourced based reporting. As a technical manner, of course the the Internet can be highly restricted in areas; the Chinese government does so on a regular basis. And, as the article states, some social media portals like Twitter have already taken steps to terminate accounts used for ISIS propaganda.

http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-06-...d-words-relating-tiananmen-square-anniversary

 

[Evo]

The point is that Trump cannot shut off internet access to ISIS and their supporters worldwide, that's ludicrous. He doesn't know what he's talking about as is pointed out. We're not talking about a country controlling their citizen's access mheslep and you know that. I am surprised that you would even bother to post that. Seriously. That's not even what we're talking about.

http://www.wired.com/2016/03/how-is-isis-online/

And this doesn't even go into the fact that they have groups operating worldwide, they aren't just in one country.

 

[rootone]

No president of the US or anywhere else has a kill button for the internet.
It's a bit like saying some guy/woman saying they could cause electricity to stop working.

 

[Astronuc]

AP - Where the race stands today:

SOLID DEMOCRATIC: California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maine 2nd District, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington.

LEANS DEMOCRATIC: Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin.

TOSS-UP: Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio.

LEANS REPUBLICAN: Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, Nebraska 2nd District, Utah.

SOLID REPUBLICAN: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wyoming.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-rates-presidential-race-road-270-123351213--election.html
It will be interesting to see where the states are in November.

 

[russ_watters]

No president of the US or anywhere else has a kill button for the internet.
It's a bit like saying some guy/woman saying they could cause electricity to stop working.

Please note that the quote "turn off the internet" in Evo's post was a quote from the article, not a quote from Trump. He didn't say that. The article is twisting his words.

 

[Evo]

Please note that the quote "turn off the internet" in Evo's post was a quote from the article, not a quote from Trump. He didn't say that. The article is twisting his words.

He said

"We must shut down their access to this form of communication, and we must do so immediately."

Potay to potah to

 

[Bystander]

Potay to potah to

Huh?

 

[phinds]

Huh?

potato can be (and is) pronounced two different ways. It's still a potato.

 

[phinds]

Please note that the quote "turn off the internet" in Evo's post was a quote from the article, not a quote from Trump. He didn't say that. The article is twisting his words.

Do you dispute that his POINT was to shut off communication, by which he was referring to the internet?

 

[Dotini]

If I were Machiavelli or Sun Tzu, I would certainly try to shut off the enemy's access to communications.

 

[phinds]

If I were Machiavelli or Sun Tzu, I would certainly try to shut off the enemy's access to communications.

Yes, I agree, but the discusson here is not about whether it's a good idea but whether it's possible. If we could magically shut off terrorists access to the internet world wide that would be a wonderful thing, BUT that runs into two major problems: (1) it's impossible and (2) who gets to decide who is a terrorist? I think we would disagree w/ Iran and China on that definition.

 

[Dotini]

Yes, I agree, but the discusson here is not about whether it's a good idea but whether it's possible. If we could magically shut off terrorists access to the internet world wide that would be a wonderful thing, BUT that runs into two major problems: (1) it's impossible and (2) who gets to decide who is a terrorist? I think we would disagree w/ Iran and China on that definition.

So it is possible for China and Iran to limit internet access? Gee, they must be far ahead of us? I wonder how they do that?

 

[phinds]

So it is possible for China and Iran to limit internet access? Gee, they must be far ahead of us? I wonder how they do that?

They do that by stiffing dissent by their citizens in a way that would be, and damn well should be, impossible in the USA. Are you truly ignorant of that or are you just being disingenuous for the sake of argument?

 

[Dotini]

They do that by stiffing dissent by their citizens in a way that would be, and damn well should be, impossible in the USA. Are you truly ignorant of that or are you just being disingenuous for the sake of argument?

I'm an old man, retired over 10 years. I don't know computer programming. Maybe you do? It seems to me China has found a way to shut off undesirable websites and individual accounts from being on the internet. Simple idea, but, as you say, perhaps it is impossible - or should be - here in the USA.

 

[phinds]

I'm an old man, retired over 10 years. I don't know computer programming. Maybe you do? It seems to me China has found a way to shut off undesirable websites and individual accounts from being on the internet. Simple idea, but, as you say, perhaps it is impossible - or should be - here in the USA.

It is absolutely disgusting how the government of China treats its citizens. The internet in China has the very well known "Great Firewall". Since you seem to be unaware of it, I urge you to Google it. They not only block access to a huge swath of internet sites from the rest of the world, they also have, very literally, an army of censors who quickly delete on the Chinese internet any reference to such forbidden topics as Falon Gong, Tiananmen square, and on and on and on. They jail people who persistently try to express free speech. Your damn right it should be impossible here in the USA.

 

[Dotini]

It is absolutely disgusting how the government of China treats its citizens. The internet in China has the very well known "Great Firewall". Since you seem to be unaware of it, I urge you to Google it. They not only block access to a huge swath of internet sites from the rest of the world, they also have, very literally, an army of censors who quickly delete on the Chinese internet any reference to such forbidden topics as Falon Gong, Tiananmen square, and on and on and on. They jail people who persistently try to express free speech. Your damn right it should be impossible here in the USA.

Your emotional reply is appreciated as now honest and truthful. But walking back your earlier assertion of impossibility.

Yes, I agree, but the discusson here is not about whether it's a good idea but whether it's possible. If we could magically shut off terrorists access to the internet world wide that would be a wonderful thing, BUT that runs into two major problems: (1) it's impossible and (2) who gets to decide who is a terrorist? I think we would disagree w/ Iran and China on that definition.

 

[RonL]

So it is possible for China and Iran to limit internet access? Gee, they must be far ahead of us? I wonder how they do that?

I would suspect you have far more limits at present, than you realize. Just my opinion.

 

[russ_watters]

Do you dispute that his POINT was to shut off communication, by which he was referring to the internet?

No, but there is a really really big difference between shutting off someone's access to the internet and shutting off the entire internet. The idea of a "kill button" is way, way off from what he said.

 

[phinds]

Your emotional reply is appreciated as now honest and truthful. But walking back your earlier assertion of impossibility.

You are correct in that I stated that poorly. It is not literally impossible to shut off the internet, but a HUGE amount of commerce, banking, and our entire infrastructure would collapse. To shut it down PARTIALLY (which is what I should have emphasized) is possible but only if we go the way of China and what I am saying is that is politically impossible, not technically impossible.

 

[russ_watters]

He said Potay to potah to

Potato grapefruit.

I mean let's face it Evo: the reason those words were put in his mouth that he didn't say is that they aren't the same: they sound a lot better (worse) than what he said. Otherwise, they'd just quote him accurately.

Trump says enough dumb things that the media shouldn't need to Ryan Lochte him. It's part of the reason why he's gotten this far: the transparent misrepresentations and biased attacks send people a clear message.