The Donald-thread

[Brian Peacock]

"Hanging chads" anyone? Disenfranchising any black person who shares a name with a convicted felon in another state?

[pErvinalia]

Fucken nutjob.

Yes, the very idea that Hillary Clinton would be in cohoots with the press to help swing the election is absurd. There were never any incidents of collusion between the Democrats and the press, like pre-screening of news articles to make sure they were approved by the Democratic Party. That would never happen. And, Hillary is always honest and upstanding, she said so, like when she said the FBI found that she'd be completely truthful in her statements about the email/server scandal. And, she never would cover anything up, or do anything unethical. Not Hillary. Anyone who would question her pristine record is a nutjob.

That's not the same as the elections being "rigged". "Rigged" implies fraud.

[pErvinalia]

Did you guys see the baby incident. He really is a tosser of the highest order.

[pErvinalia]

Is there no level this odious little toad won't stoop to? That's a rhetorical question.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us ... -1.2742906

Donald Trump asked a woman with a crying baby to leave a rally in Virginia on Tuesday.

At a rally in Ashburn, the Republican nominee for US president stopped his speech when a baby began to cry.

Initially, he suggested he didn’t mind the noise, telling the crowd: “Don’t worry about that baby. I love babies. I hear that baby crying, I like it. What a baby. What a beautiful baby. Don’t worry. The mom’s running around like – don’t worry about it, you know. It’s young and beautiful and healthy and that’s what we want.”

Trump then briefly went back to criticising China, claiming when the country devalues its currency “they take our guts out”.

However, the baby continued to cry, and Mr Trump then asked the woman to leave. “Actually, I was only kidding, you can get the baby out of here,” he said. “That’s all right. Don’t worry. I think she really believed me that I love having a baby crying while I’m speaking. That’s okay. People don’t understand. That’s okay.”

I almost feel sorry for the guy. He can't do anything right. He can't even maintain his own empty rhetoric for a few minutes, let alone a decent timeframe. The US is potentially about to elect a total loser!

[NineBerry]

I was at a church wedding once where there was a crying baby. (*) And the priest asked the mother to leave the church with the baby. And the crowd went nuts. The priest was only an inch away from being lynched. And it took quite some time and effort to calm the crowd so that the wedding ceremony could continue.



* (In fact I think I have never been to a church wedding where there wasn't a crying baby. I even some time considered the possibility that they put crying babies at weddings on purpose so that the couple can later on not deny they were aware what would expect them when having children.)

[JimC]

[DRSB]

By November, Russian hackers could target voting machines
If Russia really is responsible, there's no reason political interference would end with the DNC emails.

By Bruce Schneier July 27

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump says it's "far-fetched" and "ridiculous" to say Russia hacked Democratic Party emails to help him become president. (Reuters)

Russia was behind the hacks into the Democratic National Committee’s computer network that led to the release of thousands of internal emails just before the party’s convention began, U.S. intelligence agencies have reportedly concluded.

The FBI is investigating. WikiLeaks promises there is more data to come. The political nature of this cyberattack means that Democrats and Republicans are trying to spin this as much as possible. Even so, we have to accept that someone is attacking our nation’s computer systems in an apparent attempt to influence a presidential election. This kind of cyberattack targets the very core of our democratic process. And it points to the possibility of an even worse problem in November — that our election systems and our voting machines could be vulnerable to a similar attack.

If the intelligence community has indeed ascertained that Russia is to blame, our government needs to decide what to do in response. This is difficult because the attacks are politically partisan, but it is essential. If foreign governments learn that they can influence our elections with impunity, this opens the door for future manipulations, both document thefts and dumps like this one that we see and more subtle manipulations that we don’t see.

Retaliation is politically fraught and could have serious consequences, but this is an attack against our democracy. We need to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin in some way — politically, economically or in cyberspace — and make it clear that we will not tolerate this kind of interference by any government. Regardless of your political leanings this time, there’s no guarantee the next country that tries to manipulate our elections will share your preferred candidates.

Even more important, we need to secure our election systems before autumn. If Putin’s government has already used a cyberattack to attempt to help Trump win, there’s no reason to believe he won’t do it again — especially now that Trump is inviting the “help.”

Over the years, more and more states have moved to electronic voting machines and have flirted with Internet voting. These systems are insecure and vulnerable to attack.

[Your iPhone just got less secure. Blame the FBI.]

But while computer security experts like me have sounded the alarm for many years, states have largely ignored the threat, and the machine manufacturers have thrown up enough obfuscating babble that election officials are largely mollified.

We no longer have time for that. We must ignore the machine manufacturers’ spurious claims of security, create tiger teams to test the machines’ and systems’ resistance to attack, drastically increase their cyber-defenses and take them offline if we can’t guarantee their security online.

Longer term, we need to return to election systems that are secure from manipulation. This means voting machines with voter-verified paper audit trails, and no Internet voting. I know it’s slower and less convenient to stick to the old-fashioned way, but the security risks are simply too great.

There are other ways to attack our election system on the Internet besides hacking voting machines or changing vote tallies: deleting voter records, hijacking candidate or party websites, targeting and intimidating campaign workers or donors. There have already been multiple instances of political doxing — publishing personal information and documents about a person or organization — and we could easily see more of it in this election cycle. We need to take these risks much more seriously than before.

Government interference with foreign elections isn’t new, and in fact, that’s something the United States itself has repeatedly done in recent history. Using cyberattacks to influence elections is newer but has been done before, too — most notably in Latin America. Hacking of voting machines isn’t new, either. But what is new is a foreign government interfering with a U.S. national election on a large scale. Our democracy cannot tolerate it, and we as citizens cannot accept it.

[Why would Russia try to hack the U.S. election? Because it might work.]

Last April, the Obama administration issued an executive order outlining how we as a nation respond to cyberattacks against our critical infrastructure. While our election technology was not explicitly mentioned, our political process is certainly critical. And while they’re a hodgepodge of separate state-run systems, together their security affects every one of us. After everyone has voted, it is essential that both sides believe the election was fair and the results accurate. Otherwise, the election has no legitimacy.

Election security is now a national security issue; federal officials need to take the lead, and they need to do it quickly.
471

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... -machines/

[Scot Dutchy]

"Hanging chads" anyone? Disenfranchising any black person who shares a name with a convicted felon in another state?

That is only a couple of many. Registration is the biggest problem. Next I would say are voting machines. So easy to fraud on those buggers. We tried them here once but no guarantee could be given on the software. As a programmer I know it would take only a couple lines of code and who would notice.

[DRSB]

"Lost contracts, bankruptcies, defaults, deceptions and indifference to investors—Trump’s business career is a long, long list of such troubles, according to regulatory, corporate and court records, as well as sworn testimony and government investigative reports. Call it the art of the bad deal, one created by the arrogance and recklessness of a businessman whose main talent is self-promotion."

http://europe.newsweek.com/donald-trump ... 6091?rm=eu

[DRSB]

George W. Bush Delivers Critique of Donald Trump’s Policies
Former president stops short of putting his remarks in the context of the 2016 presidential campaign

http://www.wsj.com/articles/george-w-bu ... 8?mod=e2fb

[Scot Dutchy]

"Lost contracts, bankruptcies, defaults, deceptions and indifference to investors—Trump’s business career is a long, long list of such troubles, according to regulatory, corporate and court records, as well as sworn testimony and government investigative reports. Call it the art of the bad deal, one created by the arrogance and recklessness of a businessman whose main talent is self-promotion."

http://europe.newsweek.com/donald-trump ... 6091?rm=eu

Really discusting. His whole life is a sham and that wants to be President of the USA

Just one quote from that article:

Amusing as those fiascos are for those of us who didn’t lose money on them, the most painful debacles to witness were many involving licensing agreements Trump sold to people in fields related to real estate. There is the now-infamous Trump University, where students who paid hefty fees were supposed to learn how to make fortunes in that industry by being trained by experts handpicked by Trump; many students have sued, saying the enterprise was a scam in which Trump allowed his name to be used but had nothing else to do with it, despite his claims to the contrary in the marketing for the “school.” The litigation has already revealed plenty of evidence that the endeavor was a scam. Particularly damning was the testimony of former employee Ronald Schnackenberg, who recalled being chastised by Trump University officials for failing to push a near-destitute couple into paying $35,000 for classes by using their disability income and a home equity loan.

This cunt should be barred from normal life.

[Svartalf]

remember, anybody who actually want to be elected to high office is most likely pure scum, and I have the last 4 or 5 French presidents as testimony of that... not to mention all of our ministers who were caught in corruption cases.

[Scot Dutchy]

remember, anybody who actually want to be elected to high office is most likely pure scum, and I have the las 4 or 5 French presidents as testimony of that... not to mention all of our ministers who were caught in corruption cases.

Not like Trump. They have brains which is something Trump lacks.

[Svartalf]

so frum is pond scum rather than pure scum, still scum..
.and I'd credit him with more brains than you do, with all the bad deals, bankruptcies , actionable frauds and whatnot he's done, if he lacked brains, he'd not be in position to campaign for POTUS, because he'd not have the $$ to finance said campaign, as , him being thoroughly hated by the mainstream Republicans, he doesn't have access to most SUPER PACs that normally serve to finance a Republican campaign.

[DRSB]

And we forget he was actually nominated. But who else could have the Republicans nominated? The creationist Cruz? The pervert ideologist fond of the death penalty?
The whole party must be banned if this is the choice they come up with.