JaneAusten

Yes, she's working herself to death. If this woman is spending her last moments on earth and final breaths to save us from fascism, then maybe people should pay attention to the [!@#$%^&*] that matters. Ugh, this election is going to kill me. I don't mind the working herself to death part because I can interpret it to mean she is working really, really hard, and I think it's okay to wonder about her age. But I thought the HD TV comment was tacky as well as thinking there is something going on there... You're reading too much into it. If you ask me reading these shows that old men can be bitter little gossips also.

Frankly that's less damaging than the other stuff about how he thinks Trump is deranged, talks about Flynn(Trump's military guy) being off kilter and how he was fired from his prior post due to his behavior, and his dishing the Cheney's and Rumsfeld. Not that anyone cares about the later two at this point.

I actually heard Chris Cuomo just today in a clip I was watching during lunch in an interview with David Axlerod that they do and should handled Clinton differently because she has years of political experience. I think even Axelrod was floored. I wasn't surprised to hear this but it gets back to grading on a curve and honestly being completely tone deaf. We are not talking about auditioning for a reality show, we are talking about the most critical job in the world. I don't think any of these people really have any clue what Americans have to deal with on a daily basis. And I honestly can't believe that this Newsweek story hasn't gotten a lot more traction yet. Hell the GOP claiming to be the super patriots that they are, this should raise red flags everywhere. All of the conflicts of interest when it comes to foreign policy, an area the president actually has some autonomy over, is the scariest thing of anything to me. Who knows maybe they figure Trump will end up dead or impeached within a year so they don't care. I have no clue. But none of these people even McCain who has become a doddering old blowhard are who I thought they were. Russia I am honestly not as worried about as I am China. They are probably salivating and they sit back and keep quiet while Trump runs all over himself praising Putin.

So Nate Silvers polling numbers now give Trump a 1 in 3 chance of winning. Scary times folks. Silver is comparing this to Brexit where the numbers started shifting weeks before the vote but still were leaning towards staying the day before the vote. And we see how that went. Bloomberg poll in Ohio taken the past 4 days in the midst of deplorables and health scare has Clinton down to Trump by 5 points.

Can we keep this man for another 4 years? He's such a great campaigner. And like Bill Clinton actually better than Clinton, he has such an ability to crystalize anything. And this campaign stop got a ton of coverage EVERYWHERE yesterday. He talks about the new economic report that showed wages increasing by the highest percentage since the 1960's in 2015 and poverty decreased. Now is it a wonder why his approval ratings are now close to 60%. I wouldn't be sad if HRC laid up for another few days and let him campaign on her behalf. http://www.msnbc.com/live-online/watch/live-obama-campaigns-for-clinton-764048451987 And Vee I have no idea what Trump's campaign was thinking. It's obvious the man is not in good physical health. He's overweight, his face is often beet red, with his diet of soda and fast food, he has to have high cholesterol, blood pressure, and I can't imagine any of his bloodwork being good. People have talked about his stamina but there have been rumors circulating that he takes amphetamines.

Holy crap that email stuff from Powell is pretty scathing. He has the media's number and basically slammed Paul Ryan also and layed out the entire motivation behind the birther movement. So doesn't conflicts with National Security basically disqualify him from office. If this doesn't get the GOP to drop his ass nothing will.

Another day totally frustrated with the MSM and I think I need to tune out for a while. While I might agree with Vee that they don't want Trump, everyday I watch they make a case for him. Every news outlet talks about HRC's lead shrinking(yeah I know it's been mostly stagnant the past 2 weeks) but I just don't get it. And again I see talk about the Clinton Foundation and how Bill is going to step down but not one word about the Trump Foundation and what's going on there even as it's being overcovered by the Post to an extent. I know the debates are going to move in HRC's favor but really, the MSM is a sham and these execs who run them who control the narrative IMO should be ashamed. If the unthinkable happens and Trump manages to somehow win they have to look long in the mirror, not that any of them would care. Vent over!!!! Sept 13, 2016 There are five articles in NY Times today on Hillary's health, 3 A1 Plus an editorial, a column, and an op-ed Nothing on Trump Foundation The Post on the flip side has balanced coverage today and one article on her illness along with several blasting Trump. Even Jennifer Rubin that nutjob has changed.

They still have him on. I mean he was banned from twitter and you know how much it takes for that to happen and MSNBC the alleged champion of progressives(vomiting) has that clown on. Disgusting. He had to be on with either Chuck Todd or Chris Matthews. Frankly I am glad she said it. Finally people are talking about Trump's nastiness where they have all been tap dancing around it. I see your point and that is a positive result. It comes down to the way she phrased it, and @Juliajms earlier said it perfectly. The trait (racism, sexism, etc) is deplorable, not necessarily the person. On the flip side, you would think that at some point in the life of someone that was taught to hate based on race, sex or orientation has an epiphany and realizes their false beliefs. Julia was right and many of those people deserve pity but I can't feel sorry for someone who thinks just because someone is brown(their word) or wears a scarf they deserve to be beaten up or set on fire.

Frankly I am glad she said it. Finally people are talking about Trump's nastiness where they have all been tap dancing around it.

By the way off topic, did everyone read about what happened yesterday at many of the NFL opening season games. I guess the president had a pre-recorded message to attendees prior to the game regarding the anniversary of 9/11. People booed him. Seriously you may not like the president but show some respect at least for the men and women who died on that day. Hypocrites. It's ok to boo president Obama and his tribute to the Americans who died on 9/11 but not ok for NFL players to kneel when the National Anthem gets played. And Vee Mike Pence - he also said he hasn't heard anyone who seems to care about seeing Trump's tax returns. WTF is he talking about. They are asked about daily.

I don't really have any interest in seeing Trump elected trust me. He would be a disaster in every respect but in terms of foreign policy, a total buffoon. I am just so disgusted with our MSM and frankly I don't buy that the exhausted aspect. At least WaPo is actually investing time and resources in this Foundation story so why not collaborate. Let them do this and get the times digging into his Russian connections. And if they are exhausted by Trump, why are they not exhausted by years of email crap with Hillary? Probably because it's easy pickings even if there is NOTHING there. I'm still angry the AP ran that story about the Clinton Foundation insinuating Pay for Play and when nothing came of it, did a tiny little retraction. Unike Carl I don't think the debates will be rigged. I saw enough flack after the CIC forum. Matt Lauer justifiably got eviscerated but not just him. The subtleties were also against HRC. Her stool was too high, there was a constant flow of people walking way behind her while Trump got a stool just high height and no constant flow of people behind him. And even the MSM could see the questions were light weighted for Trump.

Frankly it looks more like a Clinton ad to me.

What I said was that Democrats are always happy to help Democrats lose elections. I never said, "Gore would have won if all Democrats had fallen into line." I do think that they helped contribute to his loss, because they zeroed in on things that shouldn't have mattered anywhere as much as they did (like attacks on his personality). There are always Democrats, every year, who pop up with criticisms and contrarisms just to get their name out there, be contrary, and sandbag their party. Odious Lieberman used to be one until he was booted out in 2006. Ed Rendell is another. And Axelrod. Oh I get that. I personally think Gore lost because he distanced himself from Clinton. Yeah I know about the scandals blah blah blah but by the time his campaign started, people had already tired of the Clinton beating and public opinion was already in Clinton's corner. I am not suggesting he should have married himself to Clinton, but he waited until the very end to finally leverage it and by that time IMO it was too late.

So Trump just stupidly turned the news cycle back to him http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/trump-no-debate-moderator-228016 He wants a moderatorless debate. No one is going to buy this. I was wondering how he was going to slither out of the debates.

Ok when exactly have democrats lost. Yes I know they have blown the senate and house and have let the GOP take over the states stupidly. I blame the DNC for the later. But in terms of the presidency when? Gore. Many Democrats would not go anywhere near him because of years of antipathy and apathy. These "experts" are always popping up to get attention, and yes, I do think they help Democrats lose. Well that hasn't happened with Clinton. Axelrod is the only one I have seen do this and he's done it long before today. I have no idea what his agenda is to be honest. I haven't seen democrats running away from her. And what basis do you have that Gore was going to win. History has shown that it's difficult to get a third term of the same party. Bush Sr. was the first in how many years. And FDR doesn't count. Now you won't get an argument from me on state level offices, even the senate and congress. Democrats have done a terrible job at the grass roots level as well as getting people out to vote in interim elections.

Ok when exactly have democrats lost. Yes I know they have blown the senate and house and have let the GOP take over the states stupidly. I blame the DNC for the later. But in terms of the presidency when? You do know Sanders or Clinton, the cards were already stacked against a democrat winning. 2 terms of a democrat already, a lukewarm economy, etc. And let's be honest if her opponent was anyone other than Trump(and maybe Cruz) she would be struggling right now. I actually blame both parties(Dems and GOP) for putting forward such lackluster candidates and not grooming real viable forward thinking talent. As for the media, I don't think they necessarily want Trump to win. In fact they are probably salivating at a Clinton win do that they can continue to drum up a lot crap and keep the negativity in the news cycle. They love beating up on her.

I think as Vee has said they want it to be a horserace. I don't even know that they care who wins. It's all about ratings. The thing is if Trump were to win they are so dumb IMO to think he's continue to cowtow to them. I have no doubt he'd freeze them out and call them every name in the book. The need to push Trump to make him equal is transparent IMO. They continue to talk about how the polls are tightening(they normally do) but then refuse to talk about how states like Georgia and Arizona are neck and neck. Arizona not having gone democratic in how many years? Yet what blue states are turning red or close to. None.

If her campaign is smart they will do that. But this is the Clinton's remember it doesn't matter. Listening literally to years of email BS that was NOTHING, we all know how the media will spin it. Remember the media doesn't cover real issues. Hell she released her plan on mental health and crickets, her fantastic speech in Nevada, very little. I guess we'll see how it settles.

Informing the public? Is that what they claim? There is a tiny part of me(ok sick maybe) that hopes Trump wins .I would relish seeing him turn on the press and media even more. If anything he knows what sleeze they have become. If he does anything well it's manipulating them and they have fallen for it hook line and sinker. I read one writer from The Atlantic who has bashed the Clinton's for years talking about if Trump wins history will not look favorably on her. That's rich. The ones who history would not look favorably on is the press and media. You should have seen the blasts coming his way telling him who's really responsible.

I don't know in this case it's going to matter what the media says. Clinton will win handily and I think people will see that. I'm more concerned about this health issue and what that says. Personally I think Trump's camp will stay quiet. They are going to let the media, you know the liberal media, again talk about her lack of transparency and Trump may use this to court undecided or Clinton voters who might have been wavering, without having to attack this latest issue. This is far worse that anything that's happened yet because it's the appearance of again a coverup. All the doubts people have resurface. The question becomes when asked Sunday, why didn't they disclose it right away. That would have been much better. They could have spun the narrative of her wanting to tough it out for the sake of the campaign and voters and how hard working she is. Now it just looks like another attempt to keep information quiet. Sure they did disclose it eventually but it was likely only at a point where they knew she was going to have to rest for a couple of days. Honestly 2 more months of this is dreadful. I am on election fatigue. I realize most people don't pay as close attention to a lot of what's happening from day to day, but it's still exhausting.

I'm sure Mark Halperin will be very concerned, yes. The average voter is not going to give a fück about that. They're going to care she was out there plugging away. That I agree with for the most part. How many people engage on social media compared to the voting population. I think myself included, most Americans don't sit and watch news channels all day and engage in social media slamming. I do agree that some read the paper and maybe a couple of news sites but they don't sift through the comments. The things people seem to care about in the election cycle are the conventions, and the debates. That's pretty much it.

Well at this point the only choice she has is to release medical information. It's not going to go away until she does this. She already released her medical records back when she declared. She had to in order to get in front of that whole thing about her past concussion. I'll be honest, if she were up against anyone other than Trump I'd be worried about this but the bottom line is that anything can happen in two months. Trump could wet his pants during the debate. Pence could get caught pulling a Larry Craig. There's probably going to be one or two more mass shootings before the election. I'm kind of surprised that the right wing hasn't claimed she was faking the whole thing for sympathy points. They seem to go back and forth between Lying Hillary and Dying Hillary. The problem is it just adds fire to the conspiracy crap and CNN and Fox(yes CNN is worse IMO now) just take it and run with it. Isn't that why Obama ended up releasing finally the long version of his birth certificate(don't get me started on the racism and bias the media had with that) was to settle the issue finally. At least the media stopped talking about it endlessly.

Well at this point the only choice she has is to release medical information. It's not going to go away until she does this. It sadly now overshadows that basket of deplorables stuff which I thought really could have helped her,

The more I am reading the more I think this was a potential brilliant move on the part of the Clinton camp. No one has challenged Trump on his racist and divisive comments all campaign, even after her speech in Nevada. What a brilliant way to get her emails out of the news cycle just as the press seemed to be starting to move away and shift the narrative. If they talk about it it opens up the dialogue about the Trump campaign because you can't talk about her comments without addressing the reason behind them and going back and showing footage of Trump rallys' is a great tactic also. IF they don't talk about it, the Trump campaign likely gets pissed. His surrogates and now the new great white hope Paul Ryan going after Hillary and the press giving them airtime plays right into the Clinton camps hands. She's too careful with her words and such. And while I was critical of her saying it at the forum she was at, perhaps it was the only one where she was confident she wouldn't get a few gasps. And trust me I am no fan of that audience she was speaking to. It also shows IMO while she did backpedal a bit, she really didn't. And demonstrates she's will to accept responsibility, the mark of a true leader. Honestly maybe the best thing to happen is to watch some start challenging her statements and watch Trump's surrogates and even some of the media go after her. In this case all Clinton's surrogates have to do is going out REAL EXAMPLES continually of Trump and his minions and keep beating that drum. Joy Reid has been on fire by the way.

So Greg Sargent, blogger with WaPo just posted on twitter that apparently in an interview with Michael Smerconish, Tom Ridge, former Republican Govenor of Pennsylvania and head of Homeland Security, just told him Pennsylvania is no longer in play for Trump. I asked him why and he responded back and suggested reading this. So I guess those white suburban moms really don't like Trump. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/09/08/liar-narcissist-racist-these-suburban-women-really-really-dont-like-trump/?utm_term=.4cdaa1710c1e I guess the biggest challenge is in the Philly and Pittsburgh suburbs. So I doubt Hillary's elitist gaffe (right as she might have been) will sway them in Trump's direction. The split piece is interesting. It bought support for Toomey I guess since he didn't endorse Trump. It also might explain why Elizabeth Warren has been on a few campaign stops the past couple of weeks with Kate McGinty the democratic senate candidate.