Relax Oak, no need to go personal. I am being a realist here. I live in NYC and see the armed soldiers in Penn Station every day. It's real. What happened in Orlando is real. We have to protect what is left of the United States. Don't go thinking I am a white bigot. I happen to not be white. Now if someone wants to call a distrust of lettings hundreds of thousands of religious people from violent countries where suicide bombings are an every day affair, a bigot, I won't stop you. This has nothing to do with race, nothing. We have a responsibility to protect the women and children of the United States and not expose them to shrapnel. It's not complicated or emotional.

There's no conspiracy here, except to hide an illness which she and her campaign feel will hurt her approval numbers were the diagnosis broadcast.

Her "basket of deplorables" comment was her Mittens R-Money 47% moment. Truly truly dumb of her. Dumb and dumber. I said that she had a meltdown at the time I first heard the comment. Then she had a real collapse in the street.

You are running for President. There are people that haven't yet made up their minds. Then you say that half of anybody voting for the other guy is a degenerate. Meltdown. The lady let out what she was really thinking about the electorate and that shows she is not entirely in her right mind.

Oh, of course not. Where would I get that idea?



Oh, yeah. That's where.

Again, thank you for proving what Hillary's been saying all along about a lot of her opposition.

Uh, you already revealed that this is not the reason you're against her.

Even though you'd vote for a person who'd let 50,000 Syrians resettle into the heart of America, I still love ya Oak. But make no mistake, you and her, are as wrong as two left shoes.

The highest responsibility of the President is to protect the United States. So the ultimate question is not healthcare or even the economy. It comes down to national security. This is not even about having an open southern border and allowing illegal aliens to have free run. It's deeper than that. This is about terrorism.

Bigotry and blind nationalism always travel together.

You have to also call all of the soldiers in Penn Station who are armed to the teeth...bigots. Bigots because they distrust and are ready to discharge weapons of war in case of any active shooter situation. You have to also call all of the NYC police Hercules teams bigots for fearing terrorism and bio chemical warfare. You have to call the soldiers carrying heavy machine guns near the New York Stock Exchange bigots for being prepared and distrusting. Everyone in France scarred by all of the shooting and mowing down of their citizens with guns and vehicles, you have to call them bigots for being afraid also.

If you are at war with a country, you can legally ban their citizens from entry. That's different from some ignorant religious ban. Like it or not, and I don't really know what country you are living in, but the United States is at war with much of the Middle East.

I forgot to add, militarism and paranoia usually join bigotry and blind nationalism. Thanks for reminding me.

Oak, what country do you live in? Can you please share that?

Let me guess, if I say outside of the U.S., you say that I don't share your paranoia and bigotry because neither I or my family would be harmed in the series of terrorist attacks that you hope...I mean...fear will happen if Hillary's elected.

If I say I live in the U.S., like, say, somewhere near where the "Oakland A's" play, or near the "East Bay", you say I'm brainwashed by hippies and commies, or I'm a traitor, or something.

Now that we got that out of the way...

I don't troll people that way. That's not my style.

Sometimes a question is just a question.

I specifically did not ask what local area you are from, just the country.

I'll tell you what. Why don't you give me a list of your responses to each particular country you think I'd answer with. I mean, you could make whatever point you're trying to make without even asking me this question. So, in a way, it is trolling.

Well,

I live in the United States, and I don't think a ban on immigration from Middle Eastern countries, as Mr. Trump has proposed, is racist, or bigoted, or wrong, or whatever one might want to call it. These are serious times.

You're entitled to your opinion, and I won't call you a dirty name for it.

Whether you think it's wrong or not does not change the fact that it is racist, bigoted, and wrong.

Do you have locks on the front door of your home?

If not, why not?

Again, why not just make your point? These rhetorical questions.

People have locks on their doors to keep honest people from robbing them. It does not stop professional thieves from robbing them. Honest people who see a bicycle unlock would rob it under certain conditions so it is to keep honest people honest. Real thieves my night rob the bike because there is no fun to stealing something easy to steal.

I go to the Giglio feast one year. I want to buy a shirt while I am there. They told me their are no more for sale. The rest were for those who ordered them in advance. There in a locked truck parked out in the open. I go to the truck that is locked and break into it and take a shirt and leave 20 dollars to pay for it.

I would like to think that Duke has no chance in this election, and his lack of success in numerous earlier elections seems to point that way.

However, his Klan association was definitely well known when he was elected to the LA house in '89.

Look up real clear politics polls for Wednesday today then tell me from all those polls who is going to win the election? It isn't Hillary not a chance. Plus republicans are going to hold the senate and the congress.

Ohio state poll and the LA Times national are a nice bump for Trump. Clinton ahead in Reuters national.

No other surprises.

Trump always had South Carolina and Kansas. Maine has two polls, one going to Clinton, one Trump.

Clinton's ahead in Nevada, which is important.

At Real Clear Politics, Clinton still leads on Electoral Votes, and as we know, the EC the only thing that matters in US elections.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html

Trump can get 100% of the vote in the states that normally go red, and it won't matter. The election will be decided in a few battleground states. Those state polls are the ones to pay attention to.

Also, regarding Clinton's "deplorable" comment being the same as Romney's "47%" comment, it's not the same.

Clinton was referring strictly to Trump supporters.

Romney was talking about the entire country.

Yeah but you see, the assumption you appear to be under is that Trump supporters are somehow different and separate from the rest of the "real" United States. That's not true. Trump has support within each and every demographic, albeit a small share. Those demographics each have what they feel is a good reason to back Trump's bid. To belittle the Trump movement and boil it down to just nationalism and [white] bigotry is to miss the point entirely. That's where the GOP went wrong. They dismissed Trump, until all of the candidates they put forward were all summarily dismissed by their party membership. They just. Don't. Get it.

No arguments or debate needed. Just call everyone that disagrees with you a sexist, racist bigot in order to silence opposition. That's what political discourse has devolved into. It's just desperation for somebody like Clinton that has no substance. In many ways, these childish yet authoritarian tactics are a big reason someone like Trump has been able to gain this much popularity. It's backlash. People attempt to swing hard in the opposite direction.

Wrong again. Romney's 47% statement could not have been about the whole country simply because if he was talking about the entire country he would have said "100%," which he didn't say since that would have been ridiculous.

Moreover, the statement was correct. Romney said 47% of Americans pay no tax. Politifact and CBS News both fact-checked it and found it accurate.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-no-income-tax/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fact-checking-romneys-47-percent-comment/

I'm not sure there's any data that proves otherwise. On that token, I don't think Hillary's supporters represent "real" America, either. Not sure if any candidate is cracking the 50% mark in the polls. It's safe to say, however, that according to polls, Hillary Clinton is a lot closer to representing the views of real America than Trump is.



If this election season has been an indication of anything so far, it's that Trump is the one who doesn't get it. Trump is not winning. He has no high ground over his critics in the GOP in that regard. The results thus far only show that the GOP establishment was right about Trump.

Clinton has no need to be desperate. Since the nominees were selected, Clinton has been ahead in the polls nearly all of the time, and still is today.



Popularity among right wing conservatives? Certainly not the country. At least there's no poll which indicates it.



In this regard, it's your imagination that's swinging hard. Hillary Clinton has no need to be desperate. Donald Trump is not popular on a national level.

My bad for not wording it correctly.

Clinton was sample sizing Trump voters, and Trump voters only, to make her point.

Romney was sample sizing the entire country to which the 47% he's referring to is included in.



That's not what he said. Just to brush you up, here's his exact quote.

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what...who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims. ...These are people who pay no income tax. ...and so my job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

He called nearly half the country "dependent on government", and implied they don't have "personal responsibility".

A statement like that is only going to play to the far right, and would be disastrous in a national election, as it turned out to be.

I don't think were being fair here. Sure there are a few minor things about Trump to overlook, like…

… he thinks that the world would be better if more countries had Nukes (including North Korea), murdering civilians is ok if their relative does something bad, that the Tiananmen Square Massacre wasn’t a bad thing, the Geneva Convention is a “problem,” that torture is acceptable, that we should leave NATO, that we should establish a database of people who adhere to a given religion (Reinhard Heydrich would be proud), that the interpretation of the Constitution for over two centuries should be tossed out and citizens deported, that global warming is a hoax that was created by the Chinese, that Japanese internment camps were acceptable, that POWs aren’t heroes because they were captured, that freedom of the press should be restricted, that Kim Jong and Saddam deserve praise, that cozying up with white supremacists and echoing their dog whistle propaganda is tolerable, that only Jews should count money, that blacks are inherently lazy, that housing discrimination based on race is alright, that mocking disabilities like a grade-schooler is groovy, women should be punished for seeking abortions (but the men who played a part in the pregnancy, and likely in advocating for the abortion, should remain unscathed), that repeatedly sexualizing your own daughter (even when she was only a 1 year old) is appropriate, that men who are hands-on in the raising of their children are taking on the role of the wife, that women can be reduced to nothing more than their appearance, that we should commit acts of war if someone flips us off, and that Ted Cruz’s dad helped kill Kennedy and Clinton murdered an intern…

… but once you look past those iddy-biddy snags, you find that he’s going to build a wall, be totally extra tough, and win a lot. Those are some serious qualifications that deserve careful consideration. I don’t see Gary Johnson talking about winning a lot -- just sayin’.