stillinjc wrote:
The rabid leftist bitch Maddow has no answers to Hillary lies so she's shooting the messenger (Comey). That is all she can do.

In conservative circles, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts used to be a respected figure, held in high regard. Roberts enjoyed a lengthy record as a center-right jurist, and when then-President George W. Bush nominated him to the high court, Republicans everywhere were delighted.

Roberts did not, however, stay in the right?s good graces. After the chief justice voted to uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act ? twice ? quite a few conservatives, and even some Republican presidential candidates, turned on Roberts, questioning his judgment, intellect, and integrity.

Right about now, I suspect FBI Director James Comey can relate to how Roberts must feel about his former admirers abruptly changing their opinions.

Comey, in case anyone?s forgotten, is a lifelong Republican who served as a top official in the Bush/Cheney Justice Department. He cut his teeth as a public-sector attorney in the 1990s, when Comey signed on ?as deputy special counsel to the Senate Whitewater Committee,? where he went after, of all people, Hillary Clinton.

I?m not aware of anyone on the right questioning Comey?s abilities or professionalism ahead of yesterday?s announcement in the email matter. On the contrary, Republicans gave Comey a vote of confidence as recently as June. Politico published this report one month ago today:

Should the FBI not recommend an indictment of Hillary Clinton following its investigation of the setup of her private email server, House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) on Monday said he and his Republican colleagues would ?probably? accept the outcome.

?Oh, probably, because we do believe in [FBI Director] James Comey,? the Utah Republican said during an appearance on Fox News? ?Outnumbered.? ?I do think that in all of the government, he is a man of integrity and honesty.?

Yesterday, however, Chaffetz said the exact opposite, and accused Comey of failing to carry out his duties. Other GOP members of Congress made related arguments, while some Republican pundits adopted an even harsher posture.

The pattern matters. John Roberts was an excellent justice, Republicans said, right up until he strayed from the partisan script. Trey Gowdy was the perfect person to lead the GOP?s Benghazi Committee, they said, right up until he failed to dig up dirt on Hillary Clinton.

And Jim Comey was a fine FBI director, right up until he left his party dejected by exercising independent judgment.

In reality, Roberts, Gowdy, and Comey aren?t guilty of corruption or partisan betrayals ? their ?failures? exist solely in the minds of lazy ideologues. What their Republican critics don?t seem to appreciate is that their ostensible allies asked them to go too far, ignore their responsibilities, abuse an otherwise legitimate process, and look out for the ?team,? whether the facts warranted it or not.

Comey didn?t play along with a partisan game, and his reward is a round of condemnations from the same people who, up until 24 hours ago, sang their praises.

hero69 wrote:
wow. seeing mike tyson support trump def makes me want to vote for trump. did tyson beat his wife?

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

SOS wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Trump could learn a few lessons from Atsushi's Japan.

Japan's top court has approved blanket surveillance of the country's Muslims

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor ... slamaphobia-a7109761.html

Shame on Japan! Maybe I should give up my Japanese citizenship.

But I've been here since 1992, and I've never voted in Japanese election (except for one municipal election). I'm not responsible for what Japan does or does not.

I'm surprised that you responded to that trolling idiot. Those Trumpies can be counted on to bully and behave like assholes - in the image of their demigod - the Donald.

Since there are a handful of Muslim's in Japan, and no refugees, keeping an eye on them should be easy. How many mosques are in Japan??

Muslim demographics

The Muslim community in Japan has a history of over 100 years, although some sources disagree. Historian Caeser E. Farah documented that in 1909 Abdul-Rashid Ibrahim was the first Muslim who successfully converted the first ethnic Japanese, and in 1935 Kobe Mosque?Japan's first Islamic building?was constructed.

Some sources state that in 1982 the Muslims numbered 30,000 (half were natives). Some ethnic Japanese women during the economic boom of the 1980s converted when large numbers of immigrants from Asia came and mixed with the local population. Most estimates of the Muslim population have been around 100,000 total. Islam remains a minority religion in Japan, and there is no evidence as to whether its numbers are increasing. Conversion is more prominent among young ethnic Japanese married women, as claimed by the The Modern Religion as early as the 1990s. The true size of the Muslim population in Japan remains a matter of speculation. Some Muslim organizations and media reports have put the number of Muslims in Japan at up to 100,000. The most serious work on this question has been done by Japanese scholars such as Hiroshi Kojima of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research and Keiko Sakurai of Waseda University. Their estimates suggest a Muslim population of around 70,000, of which perhaps 90% are resident foreigners and about 10% native Japanese.

(In Japan the government does not take religion into account as part of the demographic concern under religious freedom. As Michael Penn states, "The Japanese government does not keep any statistics on the number of Muslims in Japan. Neither foreign residents nor ethnic Japanese are ever asked about their religion by official government agencies.")

"The beasty is called an American Trump.
Its skin is bright orange, its figure is plump.
Its fur so complex you might get enveloped.
Its hands are, sadly, underdeveloped."

Those lines were written not by Dr. Seuss, but by actor, comedian, and author Michael Ian Black.

In "A Child's First Book of Trump," Black attempts to explain the presidential campaign and the phenomenon that is Donald Trump, especially since children may ask, "Why is that man screaming at everyone on television? Is he really going to president?"

The book, which is illustrated by Marc Rosenthal, depicts Donald Trump as something other than human ? as a creature with hair covering his eyes, miniature hands, and self-assured ego.

user1111 wrote:
The orange man is now vetting Chris Christie for VP LMAO what could possibly go wrong ? two losers in a pod smh

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

SOS wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Trump could learn a few lessons from Atsushi's Japan.

Japan's top court has approved blanket surveillance of the country's Muslims

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor ... slamaphobia-a7109761.html

Shame on Japan! Maybe I should give up my Japanese citizenship.

But I've been here since 1992, and I've never voted in Japanese election (except for one municipal election). I'm not responsible for what Japan does or does not.

I'm surprised that you responded to that trolling idiot. Those Trumpies can be counted on to bully and behave like assholes - in the image of their demigod - the Donald.

We simply want good governance for the benefit of the people, without letting political correctness hold the rights of criminals and terrorists above victims.

Japan is setting a great example for the world to follow and I'll bet you won't find these attacks going on there.

We'll spend the next few months writing about every jot and tittle of what Trump and Clinton say and do on a daily basis. But always remember that this isn't an even fight at the electoral level. The map ? before a single ad is run or a single state is visited ? clearly tilts in Democrats' favor.

Last year, it was rare to hear Republicans praise Hillary Clinton. The Former Secretary of State had gone from elder stateswoman to being, once again, one of the most polarizing politicians in America. Republicans, as well as some progressive Democrats, attacked her to an unrelenting drumbeat.

But things got noticeably warmer as summer started.

A number of prominent Republicans have endorsed Clinton this month, and others have complimented her. Hank Paulson, the former Treasury Secretary under President George W. Bush, said last week he would vote for her, and the prominent Republican national security advisor Brent Scowcroft also joined her corner. Former Bush Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage endorsed her the week before.

And in the last few days, more Republicans have offered her tepid praise. Mitch McConnell, the Republican Senate Majority Leader, said on Tuesday that Clinton is ?smart and capable.? Mark Salter, a prominent former John McCain adviser, said this week that Clinton ?acts like an adult, and understand the responsibilities of an American president.? Even former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said that while Clinton is ?wrong? she?s wrong within normal parameters.?

Clinton is, of course, still deeply unpopular among Republicans. The GOP leadership has lined up behind Donald Trump, albeit begrudgingly, and the Republican National Committee regularly blasts Clinton?s judgment, calling her dishonest and reckless.

But the difference this year is Trump, whose stormy weeks on the campaign trail and provocative comments have made many Republicans uneasy. Much of the Republican establishment, which has long been aghast with Trump, finds more in common with Clinton even if they are supporting their party?s nominee.

The praise for Clinton comes after a slew of Trump controversies, including racially-charged attacks on a judge presiding over a lawsuit against him and Trump?s off-key response to the Orlando shooting.

McConnell told NY1 news in an interview that Trump is not yet a ?credible candidate.?

?Trump clearly needs to change, in my opinion, to win the general election,? he said. ?So my hope is that he is beginning to pivot and become what I would call a more serious and credible candidate for the highest office in the land.?

When asked about his relationship with Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, McConnell was complimentary. ?She?s an intelligent and capable person, no question about it,? he said.

In a blog post, Salter railed against Trump, calling him a ?charlatan? responsible for ?cheating investors, subcontractors and his own customers? during his career, adding Trump has a ?shaky psyche,? is ?insecure, angry, scapegoating? and ?small.?

Clinton, on the other hand, got some faint praise?and an endorsement. ?Whatever Hillary Clinton?s faults, she?s not ignorant or hateful or a nut,? Salter wrote. ?She acts like an adult, and understands the responsibilities of an American president. That might not be a ringing endorsement. But in 2016, the year of Trump?s s campaign, it?s more than enough.?

Romney, speaking in Aspen, Colorado, at the city?s Ideas Festival, repeated his resolution not to vote for Trump or Clinton. He said that Trump was branding the Republican party ?in a negative way.? In the past he?s called Trump a ?phony, a fraud.? In Aspen, Romney said, ?Hillary Clinton is wrong on every issue, but she?s wrong within the normal parameters.?

SOS wrote:
Quote:

Atsushi wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Trump could learn a few lessons from Atsushi's Japan.

Japan's top court has approved blanket surveillance of the country's Muslims

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor ... slamaphobia-a7109761.html

Shame on Japan! Maybe I should give up my Japanese citizenship.

But I've been here since 1992, and I've never voted in Japanese election (except for one municipal election). I'm not responsible for what Japan does or does not.

I'm surprised that you responded to that trolling idiot. Those Trumpies can be counted on to bully and behave like assholes - in the image of their demigod - the Donald.

TRENTON ? Gov. Chris Christie is among the people being vetted as a possible running mate for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, according to a report by the New York Times that explores how the New Jersey governor has become a powerful figure in Trump's campaign.

The report said Christie has also pleaded with GOP donors who have been against giving money to Trump's bid.

It said the governor was one of the top Republicans who privately urged Trump to fire campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, which the billionaire businessman did last month.

And it said Christie, the leader of Trump's transition team, has hired Richard Bagger, his former chief of staff in Trenton, to help with the effort to get Trump ready for the Oval Office should he win.

Is Christie in line to become Trump's chief of staff?

Christie was one of 16 opponents who ran against Trump in the GOP primary. When he dropped out in February, the governor was one of the first major Republicans to endorse the former Atlantic City casino tycoon, whom Christie has been friends with for more than a decade.

Christie has long been considered a possible pick to become Trump's vice president, though this is the first report to say he is actively being vetted.

Asked last week whether Trump's campaign is vetting him, Christie said: "Not that I know of."

There has also been talk the governor could become U.S. attorney general or White House chief of staff.

The Times report said some allies have said Christie has already taken on a role in Trump's campaign that's similar to chief of staff.

Former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean Sr., a fellow Republican, told the newspaper that Christie is deeply involved in Trump's activities.

"He was advising him on speeches, he's advising him on policies," Kean told the Times.

"He's in a position to be a good adviser," Kean added, according to the report. "Whether Trump will listen to him or not, I don't know."

JCMan8 wrote:
Trump could learn a few lessons from Atsushi's Japan.

Japan's top court has approved blanket surveillance of the country's Muslims

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wor ... slamaphobia-a7109761.html

Et tu, Trey?

A day after the House Benghazi committee released a final report that left Hillary Clinton relatively unscathed, conservative activists ? the conspiracy-minded ones who pressured House leaders to appoint the committee in the first place ? rounded on Chairman Trey Gowdy for failing to deliver the goods.

?To say I was disappointed would be an understatement,? retired Adm. James ?Ace? Lyons complained at a meeting Wednesday afternoon of the Citizens? Commission on Benghazi,
a coalition of far-right ?foreign- policy types. ?Chairman Gowdy is not a stenographer. .?.?. He was there to make findings and conclusions. He had the information. He copped out, which is consistent that we?ve seen with all our congressional leadership.?

Retired Gen. Thomas McInerney agreed that ?the American people want to know from a group that spent almost two years on it what the conclusions are. That?s what we pay you for, Mr. Gowdy.?

Charles Woods, the father of Ty Woods, one of the four Americans killed in Benghazi, lamented that ?I really don?t have closure as far as who made the decision not to rescue.? And Roger Aronoff of Accuracy in Media, which convened the Citizens? Commission at the National Press Club, complained that ?they put a bunch of transcripts in there, interviews, but they didn?t weave it all together.?

House Republicans released their report on the attack on the 2012 U.S. consulate in Benghazi on June 28. Here are the 5 most serious accusations in the report. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

There were murmurs of agreement from participants when Lyons said of Gowdy: ?Regretfully, I don?t think he measured up yesterday.?

A woman in the crowd floated a new Benghazi conspiracy. ?Has someone in the GOP leadership gotten their fingers involved in watering down some of this to benefit Secretary Clinton?? she asked.

Nobody rebutted this idea.

Herein lies a lesson for Republicans who are perpetually trying to appease the far right: It?s a fool?s errand. They went to the tea party ? and now they?re taking Donald Trump to the prom. Likewise, then-House Speaker John Boehner named the Benghazi committee because activists were dissatisfied that seven previous congressional investigations had failed to uncover major scandal material. Now an eighth has produced more of the same ? and the agitators are as agitated as ever.

Two GOP members of Gowdy?s own committee were dissatisfied enough to write their own narrative drawing more sweeping accusations against Clinton and President Obama. Gowdy must feel the need for some cover: A day after delivering what was supposed to be the definitive account of Benghazi, his committee called in another witness for an interview. Democrats pointed out that the interviewee had just removed from his Facebook page the hashtag #IfYouVoteForHillaryYouAreBeyondStupid.

The Citizens? Commission on Benghazi, which held Wednesday?s event, is not the most reputable outlet. It dropped ?former CIA officer? Wayne Simmons as one of its 11 members after the former Fox News commentator, who it turns out had no military or intelligence experience, pleaded guilty to fraud charges this spring.

Even without Simmons?s creativity, the group managed to produce a 73-page Benghazi report this week full of inventive accusations. They found ?troubling evidence that Obama and Clinton were deeply and knowingly involved in running guns to al-Qaeda in Libya,? as well as ?a clear case of official U.S. government submission to the Islamic Law on slander.?

They determined that the Obama administration ?switched sides in what was then called the Global War on Terror? and ?benefited this country?s worst enemies.? They wrote that Clinton herself blocked U.S. military forces from attempting a rescue mission, and they attributed the decision to oust Libya?s Moammar Gaddafi in part to financial interests of the Clinton Foundation.

They judged that Obama ? one speaker referred to him as ?Barack Hussein Soetero Obama? ? had ?an ideological commitment? to expanding the Muslim Brotherhood. They even gave longtime Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal credit for the administration?s ?support for the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood-led al Qaeda militias.? In one elaborate theory, they tied those guarding the U.S. facilities in Benghazi both to Blumenthal and to the wife of a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

They even faulted Ambassador Chris Stevens, who died in Benghazi, saying he ?rather romanticized the Libyan jihadis.?

?We see a field of smoking guns,? Aronoff said.

Clearly. But the Benghazi committee didn?t. Gowdy ?notably refrained from assigning blame or demanding accountability,? Clare Lopez, of the Center for Security Policy and an adviser to the Ted Cruz presidential campaign, told the gathering. ?He also did not draw a connection between the dots.?

?I think he had his reasons ? political,? McInerney said. He speculated that congressional leadership had approved ?black operations? to run weapons from Benghazi to Islamic State forces in Syria. ?That?s the dirty little secret that nobody wants out,? he said.

Aha! So Gowdy himself is in on the Benghazi conspiracy.

The scandal surrounding ?Trump University? is already an albatross for Donald Trump?s presidential campaign. The entire enterprise has been accused of being a con job, ripping off ?students? who trusted the developer?s name.

But as it turns out, there?s a new, related controversy surrounding the ?Trump Institute,? which is something else. The New York Times reports today that the Republican candidate ?lent his name, and his credibility? to this seminar business, which offered Trump?s ?wealth-creating secrets and strategies? for up to $2,000.

The truth was something else altogether.

As with Trump University, the Trump Institute promised falsely that its teachers would be handpicked by Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump did little, interviews show, besides appear in an infomercial ? one that promised customers access to his vast accumulated knowledge. ?I put all of my concepts that have worked so well for me, new and old, into our seminar,? he said in the 2005 video, adding, ?I?m teaching what I?ve learned.?

Reality fell far short. In fact, the institute was run by a couple who had run afoul of regulators in dozens of states and been dogged by accusations of deceptive business practices and fraud for decades. Similar complaints soon emerged about the Trump Institute.

Yet there was an even more fundamental deceit to the business, unreported until now: Extensive portions of the materials that students received after forking over their seminar fees, supposedly containing Mr. Trump?s special wisdom, had been plagiarized from an obscure real estate manual published a decade earlier.

All things considered, when Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) referred to Trump as a ?con man,? the senator may have been onto to something.

Consider the revelations from recent weeks:

* Those who ran ?Trump University? have faced credible allegations of stuffing their own pockets by preying on the vulnerable, selling unsuspecting students snake oil at indefensible prices and through misleading claims.

* Trump has boasted at great length about the millions of dollars he?s given away through charitable donations ? though many of these donations don?t appear to exist and many of the promises he made publicly went unfulfilled.

* A considerable chunk of Trump?s campaign fundraising went to Trump corporate products and services, giving rise to a new word for the political lexicon: ?scampaign.?

* And now the ?Trump Institute? is facing allegations of being yet another fraudulent operation, complete with bogus claims, shady characters, and ?the theft of intellectual property at the venture?s heart.?

The Times? report added:

The institute was another example of the Trump brand?s being accused of luring vulnerable customers with false promises of profit and success. Others, besides Trump University, include multilevel marketing ventures that sold vitamins and telecommunications services, and a vanity publisher that faced hundreds of consumer complaints.

Mr. Trump?s infomercial performance suggested he was closely overseeing the Trump Institute. ?People are loving it,? he said in the program, titled ?The Donald Trump Way to Wealth? and staged like a talk show in front of a wildly enthusiastic audience. ?People are really doing well with it, and they?re loving it.? His name, picture and aphorisms like ?I am the American Dream, supersized version? were all over the course materials.

Yet while he owned 93 percent of Trump University, the Trump Institute was owned and operated by Irene and Mike Milin, a couple who had been marketing get-rich-quick courses since the 1980s.

I realize, of course, that there are many voters who trust Donald J. Trump?s word. I?m less clear on why.

Most here are old enough to remember Seinfeld. One of the most memorable episodes was "The Smelly Car". In that episode, Jerry leaves his BMW with a valet parking attendant and after he retrieves it, it reeks of body odor. And when Elaine and others ride in the car, they, too, wind up smelling like B.O. And they can't get rid of it. By the end of the episode and after several attempts to clean the car, Jerry winds up having to abandon the car - but even the guy who takes the keys from him won't even take it.

The moral of the story: Donald trump IS the valet parking guy. He reeks. And everyone and everything who comes in contact with him or associates with him winds up reeking of the same stench that Trump emits. Consider the story about James Dobson and his tacit acceptance of Trump's alleged Christian conversion. The moment Dobson accepted the very tenuous story about Trump, he owned Trump's smell. Now he is going to have to spend weeks, months, or years trying to cleanse himself of it. And in the end, he'll still be known as the poor sap Christian leader whose name is next to Trump's. Trump's path is littered with people who have the Trump B.O.

Jay Caruso said it here:

Sorry Trump supporters. You don't get to lay down the results of your bad decisions at our feet. If Trump is the nominee and he loses, you're to blame.

Because you made it happen. You made your decision. You live with your decision.

And conservative radio host Charlie Sykes was equally pointed:

Because I've cautioned my fellow conservatives, you embrace Donald Trump, you embrace it all. You embrace every slur, every insult, every outrage, every falsehood. You're going to spend the next six months defending, rationalizing, evading all that. And afterwards, you come back to women, to minorities, to young people and say, that wasn't us. That's not what we're about. The reality is, if you support him to be president of the United States, that is who you are, and you own it.

James Dobson owns it. Chris Christie owns it. Rick Perry owns it. Bobby Jindal owns it. Every single person who decides to support Donald Trump is stuck with the B.O. that is Trump's identity. If you are a Trump supporter, you will smell just like him. But people won't say "It's B.O.!" - they'll say "Oh, he smells like a Trump Supporter" and they will avoid you like Seinfeld's car. The problem is, you won't be able to throw it away like Jerry did. You're stuck with it. Permanently.

Monroe wrote:
The Benghazi report just confirmed what we knew all along-Hillary lied about what happened. To the entire nation, and the families of the those killed.

To hyper partisans who have no shame, it's all good.

Still hoping to exploit the 2012 Benghazi attack as a 2016 campaign issue, Donald Trump declared on Twitter last week: ?If you want to know about Hillary Clinton?s honesty & judgment, ask the family of Ambassador Stevens.?

For Republican conspiracy theorists, that may not be the best idea. The New Yorker?s Robin Wright spoke this week with Dr. Anne Stevens, Ambassador Chris Stevens? sister, about whom she holds responsible for the terrorism that claimed his life.

?It is clear, in hindsight, that the facility was not sufficiently protected by the State Department and the Defense Department. But what was the underlying cause? Perhaps if Congress had provided a budget to increase security for all missions around the world, then some of the requests for more security in Libya would have been granted. Certainly the State Department is under-budgeted.

?I do not blame Hillary Clinton or Leon Panetta. They were balancing security efforts at embassies and missions around the world. And their staffs were doing their best to provide what they could with the resources they had. The Benghazi Mission was understaffed. We know that now. But, again, Chris knew that. It wasn?t a secret to him. He decided to take the risk to go there. It is not something they did to him. It is something he took on himself.?

Dr. Stevens went on to lament the degree to which her brother?s death has been ?politicized,? while also complaining about Congress? reluctance to ?focus on providing resources for security for all State Department facilities around the world.?

She added, ?With the many issues in the current election, to use that incident?and to use Chris?s death as a political point ? is not appropriate?. I know he had a lot of respect for Secretary Clinton. He admired her ability to intensely read the issues and understand the whole picture.?

It should be interesting to hear Trump and other conspiracy theorists explain why Anne Stevens? perspective doesn?t matter.

Before moving on, Vox flagged a paragraph from the House Republicans? new Benghazi report, which was emblematic of the party?s larger problem.

?The assets ultimately deployed by the Defense Department in response to the Benghazi attacks were not positioned to arrive prior to the final lethal attack on the Annex. The fact that this is true does not mitigate the question of why the world?s most powerful military was not positioned to respond; or why the urgency and ingenuity displayed by team members at the Annex and Team Tripoli was seemingly not shared by all decision makers in Washington.?

Think about that one for a moment. For years, Republicans have argued that the Obama administration could have deployed military forces, which were positioned to make a difference, but failed to do so. This, they said, was proof of how awful the administration?s handling of the crisis was.

Now, however, Republicans are arguing that the Obama administration couldn?t have deployed military forces, which weren?t positioned to make a difference, which should nevertheless be seen as proof of how awful the administration?s handling of the crisis was.

After all of the countless hours of investigation, the hearings, the interviews, the depositions, the conspiracy theories, the media chatter, the bizarre social-media messages written by our crazy uncles who watch Fox all day, the event that received the most congressional scrutiny in the history of the United States turned out to be exactly what reality-based observers said it was.

The conspiracy theorists were completely, demonstrably wrong. Regrettably, the best Republicans could do with their special, select committee, was take what the Obama administration said, reword it to make it sound like a condemnation, and package it in an 800-page report that took two years and $7 million ? in our money ? to produce.

Don?t be too surprised if the right starts to turn on Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), whom conservatives invested so much hope in. The far-right South Carolinian was supposed to bury, not exonerate, Hillary Clinton, and his inability to deliver a useful campaign weapon will likely be seen as both a failure and a betrayal.

Clinton has a 79 percent chance of winning, compared with Trump's 20 percent, according to FiveThirtyEight?s forecast.

"We're at halftime of the election right now," Silver said. "She's taking a 7-point, maybe a 10-point lead into halftime. There's a lot of football left to be played. She's ahead in almost every poll, every swing state, every national poll."

Silver said "both candidates have a lot of room to grow," but the only recent candidate to blow a lead like the one Clinton holds was Massachusetts' then-Gov. Michael Dukakis in 1988.

"Trump has never been ahead of Clinton in the general election campaign," Silver said. "He did a great job of appealing to the 40 percent of the GOP he had to win the election, the primary ? a lot different than winning 51 percent of 100 percent."

Silver called 49 states correctly in the 2008 presidential election and got all 50 in 2012.

SOS wrote:
Trump may come close - within 5% possibly, but won't be able to pull off the win in November. There simply aren't enough racist assholes in the US to push him over the top.

There are many reasons to vote against Donald Trump. Let me cite the most obvious.

He?s an ignoramus whose knowledge of public issues is more superficial than an occasional newspaper reader?s. He casts his intellectual laziness as a choice, a deliberate avoidance of expert views that might contaminate his ill-informed opinions. He excused his failure to consult professionals before commenting on the Brexit vote by dismissing foreign policy advisers in general, including his own. ?None of them are any good,? he said, as he likened running the world?s most powerful government and its foreign policy to opening a golf course.

He?s a charlatan, preposterously posing as a business genius while cheating investors, subcontractors, and his own customers. He?s rich because his father left him a great deal of money. He couldn?t turn a profit with a casino, for crying out loud. The epitome of someone who is famous for being famous, his business model consists mostly these days of selling his surname to a group of (often foreign) investors, who slap it on some vulgar monstrosity that consumers naturally associate with a vulgar reality TV celebrity.

He possesses the emotional maturity of a 6-year-old. He can?t let go of any slight, real or imagined, from taunts about the length of his fingers to skepticism about his portfolio. So shaky is his psyche that he?s compelled to fits of self-sabotage to defend his self-regard, as was the case in his racist, politically devastating attacks on U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel. He views the powers of the presidency as weapons to punish people who?ve been mean to him ? reporters, rival candidates, critics. ?They better be careful,? he warns.

He?s unhinged by criticism from women, most particularly female journalists. Who knows what that?s about, but whatever the cause of his misogyny, minor exchanges provoke it. It needn?t take an insult or criticism; sometimes just a lack of fawning deference will have him spewing abuse at the offending woman.

He?s a bigot or is pretending to be one in order to win votes from people who hold ?others? to blame for the country?s problems and theirs -- other races, other religions, other classes. He asks nothing of his supporters? patriotism. Just elect him and he?ll keep out the Mexicans and the Muslims, start trade wars with China and Japan, confiscate Middle Eastern oil and hey, presto, America?s great again. He doesn?t appeal to a single honorable quality or instinct in our society. He exploits fear and incites hatred. They are the emotions that impel him. He wants us to make our way in the world as he does: selfish, insecure, angry, scapegoating, small.

His election would endanger the security of the United States and our standing in the world. The widely respected geopolitical analysis firm, the Economist Intelligence Unit, declared his election a top 10 global threat. I believe President Obama has been the worst foreign policy president in my lifetime. But he?s Winston Churchill compared to Donald Trump.

Trump encourages the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and hints at encouraging their use. He welcomes relationships with the world?s worst tyrants, even homicidal madmen like North Korea?s Kim Jong-un. He seems to hold rivals in higher regard than allies. He professes admiration for Vladimir Putin, maybe our most determined and dangerous adversary. The current administration has proved half-hearted in its opposition to the ruthless Russian autocrat?s troublemaking. But Trump seems almost to take Putin?s side.

Last week in Scotland, Trump celebrated the Brexit vote as if it were his idea, even though weeks earlier he didn?t appear to know what the term referred to, and despite the fact that Scotland had voted overwhelmingly to remain in the E.U. Even Putin, who believes the U.K. leaving the E.U. will weaken Europe?s ties with the U.S., showed more decorum in discussing the decision. When Vladimir Putin appears more of a statesman than the Republican Party?s presidential nominee, something has gone seriously wrong in American politics.

Trump doesn?t advocate a realist view of the world in which human rights and the global progress of American political values are a secondary concern. He repudiates those values and American world leadership. He calls for murdering the children of jihadists, stealing other nations? resources, torturing prisoners, ending alliances based on shared values as much as mutual interest, fighting economic wars with former trading partners, making common cause with nativist movements in other countries, and letting the world descend into cataclysms of violence and oppression and terror.

As long as no one is making a sucker out of America ? and by America he means Donald Trump ? he?s doesn?t see why we would want to spend time and capital in helping make the world safer, freer, more just and prosperous.

Whatever Hillary Clinton?s faults, she?s not ignorant or hateful or a nut. She acts like an adult, and understands the responsibilities of an American president. That might not be a ringing endorsement. But in 2016, the year of Trump?s s campaign, it?s more than enough.