A.M. Links: Trump Won't Promise to Abide by Election Results, Filipino President Vows to Cut Ties With U.S., Battle for Mosul

|

  • CNN

    Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump faced off last night in the third and final presidential debate.

  • Poll: 52 percent say Hillary Clinton won the final debate, 39 percent say Donald Trump won.
  • Donald Trump on whether he will accept the results if he loses the 2016 election: "What I'm saying is that I will tell you at the time. I'll keep you in suspense."
  • Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte says he intends to sever economic and military ties with the United States. "I realign myself in your ideological flow and maybe I will also go to Russia to talk to Putin," he said. "There are three of us against the world. China, Philippines, Russia."
  • Tesla Motors will soon include self-driving technology in all of its electric cars.
  • "France's foreign minister is warning that up to a million people might try to flee the fighting in the Iraqi city of Mosul, and says authorities must check each one to make sure Islamic State extremists aren't escaping among the civilians."

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

NEXT: Clinton's False Assurances About Her Respect for the Second Amendment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump faced off last night in the third and final presidential debate.

    Who won? Was it me?

    1. Every time.

      1. You can see this cat is bad hombre
        (Shut your mouth)
        But I’m talking about Fist
        (Then we can dig it)
        He’s a complicated man
        But no one understands him but his woman

        1. But no one understands him but his womanmom

      2. You get the drugs, I get the cash. That’s how it works.

        1. That seems fair.

    2. how drunk did you get?

      1. Rather than get drunk off it, I didn’t even watch it.

    3. Hello.

      52% huh? I swear I live in a different world from the majority of morons.

      1. It was CNN, take it with a grain of salt, since they likely had their “Hillary won” stories ready to go before the debate even happened.

      2. All media is not trusted now for good reasons. Drink. Heavily.

      3. You know what they say about winning at the Special Olympics.

        1. What’s better than winning a gold medal at the Special Olympics?

          Not being retarded.

    4. Are you a stand up comedian?

      1. “Did you see this? Did you hear about this? Apparently Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were on television last night arguing about something. [pause] And you thought Moonlighting had too much will they/won’t they tension! [HUGE LAUGHS]

        1. +1 Jimmy

    5. It sure wasn’t Project Veritas.

  2. Three. Just three more months left of Block Yomomma.

    As always, this is assuming of course that he actually agrees to leave office voluntarily.

    1. I thought you weren’t even acknowledging that he has actually been president. By your own “logic,” this means you want to fellate him.

    2. Alas, we’ll still be stuck with you.

      1. What if we’re not, though? What if, come January 20th, Mike M. just fades away, like a fart in a windstorm?

        1. Not while Hitlery Clitdong wields the reins of power!

          1. As a borderline clever construct, “Hitlery Clitdong” is far beyond Mikey’s meager skills at nicknamery.

              1. Shitlary Bad-mom Blocktron, probably.

                1. Shitlary Bad-mom Blocktron, probably.

                  I lol’d

  3. 247) Why we trust Donald Trump’s accusers but didn’t believe Bill Clinton’s

    Man, what a conundrum. Why do “we” (i.e. author Caitlin Flanagan and other liberal journalists) believe Trump’s accusers but didn’t believe Clinton’s? Hmm. [fingers tapping, rubbing jaw] What a tough nut to crack. Wait a minute?Caitlin has a thought!

    “?we now understand that sexual assault can exist within a complex pattern of human behavior, and that no attitude or subsequent action of the woman excuses a criminal act.”

    My God, Caitlin has hit on it! Do you remember the 90s, when everybody saw human behavior as simple, and men could rape women left and right with no consequences if the woman didn’t act the right way afterwards? Lord, we’ve sure moved on from then!

    Phew, I’m glad we got that figured out. It’s not that we’re hypocrites. We just didn’t know any better back in the 90s. Back to Trump-bashing!

    1. Of course, none of that means they’re going to actually do anything but continue to defend Bill Clinton.

    2. Somewhat related, I had 3 women admit that they actually believe Juanita Broaddrick and Paula Jones (but not Willey for some reason) and that despite believing Bill had committed rape, they would nonetheless vote for Clinton over any but the “most moderate middle of the road Republican”. None would even agree they take Romney over Bill. So principals > principles.

      1. If Romney isn’t middle of the road, who the hell is?

        1. Yeah… I didn’t know how to respond. I guess its basically “always vote for the Democrat”

        2. Middle of the road = roadkill

      2. My sister is an old world liberal feminist and is thoroughly disgusted with Hillary Clinton and women who support her. She was an enabler and married to a pig. Anyone with a balanced moral compass would not vote for her.

        Financially, you have to be a retard to believe the stupidity of her position promising free stuff without impacting the deficit. A supreme fucking idiot you have to be.

        1. My sister is an old world liberal feminist and is thoroughly disgusted with Hillary Clinton and women who support her.

          That’s a surprise. Hillary’s biggest supporters are second and third wave feminists, from my observation.

        2. Welcome to ‘merica.

      3. Bill might be a rapist but at least he isnt a republican.

        1. I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists Republicans!

  4. 52 percent say Hillary Clinton won the final debate, 39 percent say Donald Trump won.

    52 percent of what?

    1. 52% of CNN polled Democrats.

  5. 52 percent say Hillary Clinton won the final debate, 39 percent say Donald Trump won.

    So nine percent think I won?

    1. You win the early vote. Unfortunately someone else has voted for you.

  6. “What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense.”

    Donald Trump promises to bring back public hangings!

  7. What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense.

    Does anyone ever care what the loser thinks?

    1. Or what the other loser thinks?

      1. heh

      2. For a second I thought you meant Glenn.

        (Guess who he’s endorsing?)

  8. “There are three of us against the world. China, Philippines, Russia.”

    Bet Cuba’s really regretting its rapproachment with the United States now.

    1. Sure, until China decides they’d like an even bigger presence in the South China Sea.

      1. Yeah, that is what is completely looney about this – China’s party leaders have to be grinning like sharks at the thought of fishing the living shit out of Philippine waters, snapping up atolls near oil and mineral deposits and firing up the NPA again.

        1. I’m seeing this as the Philippines deciding not to fight the Chinese on this. They never had that strong of hand in it. What leverage they had was the US Navy – and the whole of the US interest was supporting its allies.

          So how many dead US sailors are the sandbanks of the South China sea worth?

          1. Hard to say except in retrospect.

            “How many dead soldiers are the Sudetenland worth?”

      2. It’s called the South *China* sea, not the South *other people* sea.

    2. I used to think that Bush’s Axis of Evil was the most stupid, childish, and dangerous foreign policy formulation imaginable.

      However, the recent characterizations of Russia and Putin by Clinton and Obama are far worse. Their jingoism, which is inherent to their rhetoric and accusations, is much more dangerous than a lame demonization of a few third-world despots. And their evidence of Russian malice and American righteousness is completely absent, whereas Colin Powell could at least present a case to the UN that provided evidence of yellowcake and dual-use aluminum pipe purchases, even though it was later demonstrated to be fraudulent and he could reasonably claim at that time, “Okay, we defeated Germany. Now Germany belongs to us? We defeated Japan, so Japan belongs to us? No. What did we do? We built them up. We gave them democratic systems which they have embraced totally to their soul. And did we ask for any land? No, the only land we ever asked for was enough land to bury our dead. And that is the kind of nation we are.” Obama and Clinton have done no such thing: they have left northern Iraq and Syria to ISIS, most of Afghanistan to Taliban, Libya to al-Qaeda in the best case or ISIS in the worst case.

  9. Let this comment soak in for a second….

    I’d argue that more people died under Bush than Stalin. It’s all due to the strange double standard we use when defining who a victim of capitalism is, versus a victim of communism.

    Today, thousands of people, most of them children, will die of easily prevented diseases the world over. Their governments are powerless to help because they’re in debt to the World Bank, the ultimate tool of capitalism’s ability to grab a country by the balls. All the ‘low cost, high return’ infrastructure projects that they persuaded developing countries to invest in turned out to be the opposite of all of that, and soon they’re struggling just to make interest payments.

    When that happens, the World Bank can force the country to make whatever concessions they like. Mining precious natural resources and selling them for a fraction of their value. International corporations controlling water and gas. Healthy and nutritious traditional crops ploughed over and replaced with quick cash crops like coffee. Healthcare and education go to ruin, and why? Because they’re not profitable for the World Bank.

    Sure, we can point to 40 million people who Stalin shipped off to the gulags. But it’s more difficult to point to 10 milllion needless deaths per year in the developing world and call them victims of capitalism, because: either there’s no figurehead to point at, or worse, the figurehead is us.

    1. Another day in the derp mines, eh?

      1. He’s moved on to Everyday Derpism.

      2. Granted, you don’t have to dig very deep at reddit. It’s more like clamming.

        1. These euphemisms, etc.

    2. So…..George Bush runs the World Bank? I’ve learned something new today!

    3. Here’s my favorite line:

      “Healthy and nutritious traditional crops ploughed over and replaced with quick cash crops like coffee.”

      1. Damn those capitalists, forcing people to be able to make money in a global market instead of scraping by on subsistence agriculture!

      2. People who spout lines like that have obviously never gotten anywhere near a farm other than the petting zoo at the annual fall corn maze run.

        1. They’ve also never set foot in a Third World Country. I’ve been in a lot of TWC and without exception, the most notable aspect of the local economy was the vibrancy of the local agricultural trade. The early morning street markets are frickin’ awesome. I don’t have a clue what the World Bank does or doesn’t do, but it doesn’t do it there.

      3. Huh. Coffee takes at least five years to produce a crop. Real quick crop.

    4. So…even accepting the logic that capitalism is killing these people for the briefest of moments, this moron is basically saying Bush ruled the world.

      And by the same logic, Obama the Light-Bringer killed just as many people as Bush. I’m not clicking the link, but did anyone point this out to them?

    5. Holy motherfucken McCrackhead mother and daughter of God.

      I just can’t…

      1. Canadian masturbation euphemisms are weird.

    6. That…that is the most retarded thing I’ve ever seen. I’m actually horrified.

      1. It’s just a reminder that these people exist.

    7. World population under Bush: 6.5 billion
      Human death rate under Bush: 100%

      World population under Stalin: 2.5 billion
      Human death rate under Stalin: 100%

      Therefore, more people died under Bush than Stalin.
      QED

      (I feel like this method was slightly less ridiculous than blaming the World Bank.

      1. This reasoning is at least clever (though ignores that Stalin was in power for almost 25 years, vs Bush’s 8). It’s silly, but not horrifyingly stupid.

    8. Shit like this must be one way you get real Stalin’s. A total denial of reality. A complete denial of the suffering of millions. Those 20-40 million genuine dEad people? Meh Rich people have shit I don’t and that is what counts.

    9. “…quick cash crops like coffee.”

      That really made me laugh

    10. I argued with someone in the UK over their vacation policy. I pointed out that while the US doesn’t have mandatory leave, most full time workers get around 10 days of vacation after 1 year on top of 8 paid holidays.

      He rambled on about the UK’s policy and how he felt sorry for us. Note that they get 28 days but that include holidays so the difference isn’t that huge. Also, you are only guaranteed 8 days of vacation pay that you don’t use or something.

      He thinks the government should be involved with setting a vacation policy. I pointed out that we accomplished almost the same thing without any government involvement. It didn’t really set in.

      1. When did being lazier than Americans become a virtue? It’s baffling.

      2. I get 5 weeks plus holidays. Why would I want the government limiting my vacation?

    11. They think that Ukraine is game.

  10. Poll: 52 percent say Hillary Clinton won the final debate, 39 percent say Donald Trump won.

    9% upset the cubs won.

  11. A metaphor for the election

    An Asbury Park High School student was injured when she jumped out a window to avoid taking a test Wednesday morning, police said.

    The 15-year-old student leaped from a second-floor window at the high school at 8:44 a.m. because she didn’t want to take a test, said Officer Michael Casey, spokesman for the Asbury Park Police Department.

    1. Looks like she failed the “jumping out of window” test

      1. I hope it was a physics test, if so, she may have ended up learning something.

      2. “True/False: Jumping out of a window is a rational, intelligent way to get out of an inconvenient situation.”

    2. She was Born to Run Get Hurt.

      1. It was a death trap, a suicide rap.

      2. Dangit, didn’t anyone ever teach her than windows are for cheaters and winners use the door?

    3. An Asbury Park High School student was injured when she jumped out a window to avoid taking a test Wednesday morning, police said.

      The 15-year-old student leaped from a second-floor window at the high school at 8:44 a.m. because she didn’t want to take a test, said Officer Michael Casey, spokesman for the Asbury Park Police Department.

      Well, did it work?

      1. Was he playing ‘Growin’ up’ by Springsteen?

    4. “Alright, children. The first word is: Defenestration. De-fe-ne-stra-tion.”

    5. At least she wasn’t in Prague.

  12. and says authorities must check each one to make sure Islamic State extremists aren’t escaping among the civilians.”

    I like that they make it sound like the act of checking is the hard part not the detecting of extremism.

    1. “Okay, this guy’s get an honest face. Next!”

    2. Simple vetting process. “Take a look at this cartoon of Mohammad. No problem if we make that your passport photo?”

    3. Crucifixion?
      Yes.
      Good. Out of the door, line on the left, one cross each.
      [Next prisoner]
      Crucifixion?
      Er, no, freedom actually.
      What?
      Yeah, they said I hadn’t done anything and I could go and live on an island somewhere.
      Oh I say, that’s very nice. Well, off you go then.

      1. +1 Brave New World

    4. Eat this BLT or go home.

      1. Mmmmmm bacon.

  13. Al Gore still thinks he won the 2000 election, and Hillary agrees with him. 16 years on, Al Gore hasn’t accepted the will of a democratic electorate. Where’s the pearl clutching?

    1. Al Gore conceded at the time.

      1. After taking it to the Supreme Court after rescinding his first concession, and then backtracked again after the fact.

        1. He rescinded his first concession because Florida state law mandated a recount. And it was Bush who took it to the Supreme Court. Finally, Gore said he disagreed with the decision but still conceded.

          1. 1. Gore did not rescind his concession because Florida law mandated a recount. He rescinded his concession to get a recount.
            2. He disagreed, but conceded? Can you explain what that actually means after losing in the Supreme Court? That Al Gore wasn’t going to start a violent revolution? It’s the definition of sour grapes and it’s the exact same as anything Trump could realistically do after this election. Tell his supporters they were screwed.

            Meanwhile, John Kerry thinks Bush stole the 2004 election, as well:
            http://dailycaller.com/2015/12…..-election/

            1. “Selected not elected” has been consigned to the Memory Hole.

          2. Saying the magic words while not actually conceding isn’t the same thing as accepting the results of the election.

            For those who were magically sprung from under a rock in the last 2 years; a major chunk of the progressive block (basically everyone at HuffPo) still maintains that Bush stole the election in the courts – recount results be damned.

            So the pejorative use of “pearl clutching” is certainly warranted.

          3. The point is those elections became stuff of ‘woe is us’ urban myth and it permits them to ‘believe’ in the idea of Bush being evil.

            And they did make a stink about and still do.

            If memory recalls, Gore was babbling like a baby too. I could be wrong.

  14. There are three of us against the world. China, Philippines, Russia.

    He is Filipino, hear him roar. (Sorry, those are the only two Helen Reddy songs I know.)

    1. “That ain’t no way to treat a lady(boy)”

      1. I was going to laugh but the parenthesis ruined it. WORK ON IT.

        1. A scolding from Papa Fist is the worst punishment there is.

    2. I’ve learned that isn’t a winning combo from playing Risk.

        1. Too many borders! *Trump*

    3. Peelings, only peelings.

      1. Hah – I think you need to know native Tagalog speakers to get that one.

  15. Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte says he intends to sever economic and military ties with the United States. “I realign myself in your ideological flow and maybe I will also go to Russia to talk to Putin,” he said.

    I’m led to believe that this is verbatim what Trump has said, also.

    1. That Asian pivot is going really well for the White House.

      1. About as well as the Russian reset. Foreign policy victories all around!

        1. And the Arab Spring. The man can do no wrong!!

          1. Smart motherfucking DIPLOMACY!

          2. Hey, at least we got Syria right.

            1. I’m thinking there’s a punctuation error:

              Hey, at least we got Libya, right?

      2. What else can you do but pivot when you’re in the center of a circle jerk?

    2. Duterte is a retard. The Philippines is basically a shithole. Don’t let the headless chicken hanging on the porch hit you on the way out.

      1. +1 game of Smiles

    3. I believe that’s also what the Turks said for years in order to play off the US and the USSR against one another. Gimme some free shit or I’ll go buddy up to your enemy. (I don’t think that’s what Duterte is actually doing, that guy’s just nuts.)

      1. I heard rumors that Duterte is the head of a drug ring and uses the cops as his hit men. That’s enough for an extrajudicial assassination, right?

        1. Plus he’s a pinko.

  16. I think it’s a contest to achieve maximum intersectionality

    BRUJAS, which identifies as a “free-form, revolutionary feminist collective,” formed in 2014. Beyond skateboarding, the all-femme crew works to organize community events and support intersectionality efforts throughout New York City ? ranging from medicinal plant workshops to an “anti-prom” held in conjunction with the BUFU collective earlier this year, celebrating those who may feel marginalized by conventional prom standards. “We imagine a world without prisons and know that our role as political actors working in the legacy of the Underground Railroad requires action from us,” they wrote on Instagram.

    1. Peak intersectionality, like other forms of peak derp, will never be reached. People will still keep trying because it’s a good way to be a more special snowflake than thou without saying anything new.

    2. Witches, eh?

      1. Dig through the ditches,
        Burn through the witches
        I slam in the back of my
        Dragula

        1. Herman Munster approves.

    3. Looks like they’re making quite a BRU-JA-JA about it, eh?

      1. I smiled until my gaze narrowed.

  17. Tesla Motors will soon include self-driving technology in all of its electric cars.

    They will have the ability to explode with minimal driver intervention.

    1. The car will then drive to your home and catch it on fire.

      1. “Hey, look! A docking port for my Samsung 7.”

    2. Has their driverless system figured out the difference between the sky and a light colored truck yet?

      1. That difference is statistically insignificant.

  18. Donald Trump on whether he will accept the results if he loses the 2016 election: “What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense.”

    I’m not getting how this is controversial. What’s he going to do, parade around saying he’s the real POTUS?

    1. It would be awesome if he did. Like, he just tried to start moving into the White House.

      1. He could demand that the contestants on the next season of Celebrity Apprentice address him as “President Trump.”

      2. He’ll repaint his plane in Air Force One livery and start putting the presidential seal on everything at Trump Tower.

    2. Maybe something like this?

  19. I’m confused as to how (1) Vladimir Putin is interfering with the elections through hacking, cyberattacks, etc., but (2) it’s terrible, terrible, terrible that Trump could possibly question the integrity of the election.

    1. You just take ‘Putin bad” and combine it with ‘Trump bad” and this is the result

    2. the integrity of the election.

      This is the most absurd claim of all.

  20. Madonna threatens to give a blowjob to anyone who votes for Hillary

    And remember ladies, this is Madonna, you are not safe either.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-h…..ve-blowjb/

    1. Some boys kiss me
      Some boys hug me
      I think they’re ok
      If they don’t vote the proper way
      I just walk away

      ‘Cause we are living in a Hillary world
      And I am a Hillary girl
      You know that we are living in a Hillary world
      And I am a Hillary girl

      1. Sounds like an Itunes number 1 hit

      2. NEEDZ MOAR CELEBRITY “FIGHT SONG” KARAOKE!

    2. I’m holding out for a rim job from Streisand.

      1. That ain’t right.

        1. I’m holding out for anal with Melania.

    3. Will she remove her dentures first?

    4. Nothing remotely interesting has ever resulted from Madonna opening her mouth.

    5. Madonna is empty inside. So it’s only natural she will support someone who is also empty inside.

      Misery loves company in a material and power hungry world starving for attention.

      So. Will she rewrite ‘Like a virgin’ to ‘Like a slut’?

    6. No thanks.

    7. First in line………Sean Penn

    1. I can’t believe they fucking apologized and took down the picture.

      Someone have some fucking balls to tell these SJWs to fuck off.

      1. They do have guns while the populace doesn’t…

    1. then you’ll just grow a vagina

      1. What happens if I just eat the dark meat?

        1. You’ll never go back.

        2. You get cuckolded.

    2. Must be the secret chemical ingredients the Colonel puts in the chicken to make you crave it fortnightly. The Pentavirate always triumphs.

      1. You’re lucky. I only get to eat it about once every 2 weeks.

      2. The secret ingredient is fentanyl.

    3. That must explain why you’re always parading around in high heels.

      1. Are you judging me?

  21. …authorities must check each one to make sure Islamic State extremists aren’t escaping among the civilians.

    The TSA is standing by to assist.

    1. “The TSA is standing by to assist.”

      So all the innocent civilians will be horribly inconvenienced and the terrorists will still get through anyways??

    2. If there is scarring around the anus they’re ISIS. It’s not constipation. Everyone there has the runs from dirty water.

      1. Ass cyst? Is that what you’re going for?

  22. Apparently, the DNC, the White House, and Hillary’s campaign are illegally coordinating without outside groups to incite violence at Trump rallies and commit widespread voter fraud.

    I’m sure Reason has addressed this massively corrupt criminal enterprise, but I can’t seem to find the article anywhere.

    1. They will have an all day event covering this on November 9

    2. Not only didn’t they address it, but last night Suderman had the gall to once again talk about how dangerous Trump was because of violence at his rallies.

      1. Seriously? Well, it’s Suderman. His case of Trump Derangement Syndrome is one of the worst I’ve seen.

    3. What’s amazing is she cited violence at Trump violence in the debate. She played it beautifully. She can fabricate violence and match his rhetoric to violence.

    4. Every newshead this morning was telling us to recoil in horror from the fact that she’s sending goon squads to his rallies.

      Haha, JK. We’re supposed to be recoiling in horror from his rigging assertions.

  23. Donald Trump on whether he will accept the results if he loses the 2016 election: “What I’m saying is that I will tell you at the time. I’ll keep you in suspense.”

    Who cares? Does the superbowl hinge on the concession of the losing team? No, the winners dump gatorade on their coach and then tell the cameras they’re going to disneyworld. Losers lose whether they acknowledge it or not; having a tizzy because Trump refused to answer the way the press wanted is some teenage-girl shit.

    1. Also, what if he’s right and it was rigged?

      1. It really only matters in a close election, if the margin of victory is within the margin of fraud. I have no idea whether this election is going to be close or a blowout.

        1. I have no idea whether this election is going to be close or a blowout.

          Well, it’s always a blowout. Whichever team wins 51% to 49% it’s a MASSIVE mandate to ram their policies down the throats of the other 49%.

          1. There is no way it’s going to be 51/49 on the popular vote. At least 10% is going to LP, Green, and other.

            The MASSIVE mandate will not even have majority support..

      2. The big question is: What if he’s right and it is rigged – by the Russians, in favor of Trump. Is Hillary going to accept the results of the election and will the media be shocked and outraged and appalled if she doesn’t? I’m guessing Vegas ain’t offering a line on that particular prop bet.

    2. Who cares? Does the superbowl hinge on the concession of the losing team? No

      They’re kind of implying that the whole thing is a sham, and that they all have to vouch for the integrity of the process or the rubes will realize it.

      Oh, and the way they’re harping on it reminds me of Al Gores campaign in 2000, just before the election, talking about how they could win the EC even if they lost the popular vote.

    3. Losers talk about doing their best.

      1. +1 prom queen

    1. I went to that article hoping from some real craziness. So disappointing. Basically, “Respect your wife’s emotions” and “share the housework.” Not actually sure how either of those are challenging gender norms, but whatever.

      1. It was kind of a disappointing entry in the EF catalog. Being a decent partner is challenging gender norms apparently.

      2. They’re challenging gender norms… from 1963? I get “respect your wife’s emotions,” though – that’s a survival skill on a par with “respect the bear that you bumped into while hiking.”

        1. I think that “respect your wife’s emotions’ has something to do with putting the toilet seat down.

          1. I gotta keep the lid closed anyway because the idiot cats kept falling in.

            1. I gotta keep the lid closed anyway because the idiot cats kept crawling back out.

          2. i don’t get the toilet seat thing. But then again, i grew up with brothers who left it up. Ladies, we can put the fucking seat down without male assistance – ask me how!

            Peeing on the floor, OTOH..

            1. I think of leaving the seat up as a courtesy to let my wife know that I didn’t pee on the seat.

            2. It’s not an up-or-down issue, for me. Close the damn thing when you’re done. Toilets are gross.

              1. Close the damn thing when you’re done. Toilets are gross.

                This. Leaving the seat up is on par with leaving half-eaten food lying around the house – who the hell does that?

            3. Yeah I never got it either.

              YOU (the woman) is sitting down anyway, how friggin hard is it remember to flip your hand behind you and pull the seat down with you in the same process and then grab the edge of it when you stand to return it to the upright position.

              requiring men to do it on the other hand requires us to make a completely unnecessary action of bending down to life the seat up before we can even go and then when we are done bending down again to flip the seat back down

              1. As Derpo said above, When not in use, the toilet should be stored with both seat and lid down, ie., the toilet opening is “closed”.

                1. Why? That’s a good way to get mildew.

                  1. Clearly you shitlords are not woke enough from reading EF.

                    If a man leaves the seat down he needs to be cautious that he’s not sending the message to the wife that she is physically inferior and in need of his protection or help with manual tasks. This isn’t 1950!

                    If a man leaves the seat up, he needs to be sure he’s not doing it to assert his dominance by reminding the wife that only his needs matter.

                    Real men piss in the yard.

                    1. Real men piss in the yard.

                      The ability to do so without my neighbors seeing is a requirement of my next residence.

                  2. So you don’t drop your phone, glasses, or weed in there! Duh!

                  3. “Why? That’s a good way to get mildew.”

                    I’ve never had an issue with mildew in my toilet. But then again, I believe in cleaning it on a regular basis. I mean, it is a shit and piss receptacle.

                    1. We have a beach house. If you leave those lids down for three weeks, mildew.

        2. They’re challenging gender norms… from 1963?

          I’m not reading the link, but I can guess that they just assume every man is a caveman misogynist.

    2. *facepalm*

      I actually started reading that and I think part of my brain died.

      The tl;dr version – effeminate beta man worries that doing “guy” things makes his wife hate him.

      1. Going out on a limb here, that’s probably not why his wife hates him.

    3. From the same site: 6 Things a feminist should look for in men on a first date.

      1. Is #1 “He gives you the opportunity to pay for your own fucking meal” ?

        1. Actually it’s
          1. Who Are His Favorite Authors or Thinkers?
          Here, you also want to pay close attention to whether or not this guy mentions any women authors at all. If he doesn’t think that women’s writing is worth checking out or hasn’t ever found a woman whose work he values, that could be a red flag.

          I’m guessing they wouldn’t accept an answer like Ayn Rand.

          1. Ha, when I read that, I was thinking the same thing.

            Personally, I think it’d be a bigger red flag if the guy listed Jane Austen or Emily Dickinson as one of his favorite authors…

          2. My god, SJW-world must be horrible, horrible place to inhabit. Eggshells and third rails everywhere.

          3. They probably wouldn’t know who Murray Rothbard even is, so I’d be safe …. to excuse myself to the bathroom, then leave them with the check, and congratulate myself on giving them a fake name and a phone number from one of my burners.

    4. Other items from the author.

    5. If he really wanted to be an awesome husband he would have set everything up in the middle of the night and had some vinyl on hand.

  24. I would like to expand on something Fist said yesterday by adding a comment to his statement.

  25. How about we wait and see whether there are any major disruptions, etc., on Election Day before declaring one way or another that the result was honestly got.

    I should add, however, that there is at least some evidence that Hillary’s side is engaging in criminality with respect to the democratic process.

  26. Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte says he intends to sever economic and military ties with the United States. “I realign myself in your ideological flow and maybe I will also go to Russia to talk to Putin,”

    So, add them to the list with Turkey and India and… i presume parts of eastern Europe will also see which way the wind is blowing. Clinton’s Russia-frothing isn’t just for a domestic audience.

    1. Someone should bring Duterte up to speed that this isn’t the ’80s anymore. Sounds like a job for Barack Obama.

      1. Sounds like we need another “reset” button.

      2. He’s no Rudy Gonzales.

  27. Why Isn’t Donald Trump Losing Like Barry Goldwater?

    Goldwater was a sophisticated political operative by comparison (not to mention a much better man). Yet by this time in 1964, it was apparent that the election results would be disastrous for the candidate and his conservative supporters. And indeed, Goldwater lost the popular vote by 61.1 percent to 38.5 percent, and the Electoral College by a margin of 486 to 52.

    In contrast, the polls this year show a relatively tight race, one within the normal historic range for a presidential campaign. What gives?

    1. Could be because he’s running against a corrupt, robotic, warmonger with no moral or political principles beyond a thirst for more power and whose strongest argument to vote for her is “I’m not as bad as Trump!”?

      1. Can you imagine if they had access to LBJ’s memos?

        All things considered, Clinton is just another in a long line of thoroughly corrupt pols.

    2. Idiocracy was much farther away in 1964

    3. “Why am I not ahead by 50 points?!”

    4. Seems kinda obvious to me, straight-ticket voting and party loyalty are way, way up since Goldwater’s time. What more need be said?

      1. I don’t know if that’s actually true, since the Goldwater blowout also saw a Republican massacre in down-ballot races while this race looks like Hillary may win the presidency without Congressional coattails.

    5. My first thought is that since there wasn’t much media outside of the alphabet networks, we never got the chance to learn what a shitshow LBJ actually was (and never really learned who Goldwater actually was).

      1. !!THIS!! If you think the networks are biased now, you would not believe 1964.

  28. Iguana the Democrats’ record on ballot box stuffing, why the hell would Trump close off the option of demanding an investigation of the vote? It isn’t as if the Democrats in general, or Shrillary in particular, are likely to be clever or subtle about it.

    1. “Inagua”? How the hell does “In light of” become “Inagua”?. I guess I have to stop commenting over breakfast, when I’m not awake enough to remember to proofread.

      1. How did Inagua become Iguana?

        1. transmutation

        2. Ask Richard Burton and Ava Gardner. But you need a Ouija board.

      2. How the hell does “In light of” become “Inagua”?

        The Squirrels pine for the bahamas

    2. How late will voting be extended in heavy democratic counties in Florida?

      1. As late as they need to. They may or may not need to “discover” missing ballots in the trunk of someone’s car.

        1. Isn’t that the Minnesota M.O.?

          1. That’s part of the fraud they used to get Al Franken into the Senate, yes.

            1. And it’s why I stopped voting and never will again.

      2. As late as it takes, or until the Supremes step in and put a stop to it. At which point the Supremes will be villified for putting their thumb on the scale by preventing the Florida Supreme Court from putting its thumb on the scale.

    1. That baby grabbing the thumb reminds of Dead Pool. The only redeeming thing about that movie was when he had the baby hand.

      1. Nah, naked Morena Baccarin was definitely redeeming

        1. Season one of Homeland was amazing.

        2. Damn forgot about that. Wish I had a baby sized hand right now.

          1. I’ve got something big as a baby’s arm.

            1. Is it holding an apple?

          2. Dude, wtf? Paging OMWC renegade…

          3. The Donald can give you advice.

    2. I love that they felt the need to explain each photo with a sentence or two.

  29. authorities must check each one to make sure Islamic State extremists aren’t escaping among the civilians

    “Authorities”?

    Who the hell does he think is ‘in charge’? Was he under the impression the mass-migrations from the ME have been very orderly and everyone’s been well-screened up until now?

    1. Well yeah, I have it on good authority that we’ve been stringently vetting all these migrants.

      “What’s your name?”

      “Muhammed.”

      “Do you have any papers to back that up?”

      “No”

      “Alright then. The welfare office is right next to the train station. Enjoy your stay.”

  30. I found shriek

    A man with a deformed skull has been charged with arson and attempted murder after he set his mattress on fire.

    On Monday, at 2:37 p.m., 31-year-old Carlos Rodriguez set his mattress on fire at his home, located at 266 N.W. 61 Ave., according to City of Miami Police.

    1. Goddammit. Nobody wanted to play with that when I posted it in the PM Links last night.

      1. It must be your personality.

    2. Carlos “Hamlet” Rodriquez.

  31. Hopefully won’t mess up this link:

    http://projectveritasaction.co…..gn-and-dnc

    1. Gee, I wonder if the FEC will take this seriously?

      1. I’ll bet that they’ll take it very seriously…

        and jump on O’Keefe with both feet.

  32. There’s going to be a Willy Wonka prequel

    Willy Wonka is getting a reboot. We don’t know when, we don’t know starring who, but according to a report from Variety, it’s happening.

    Warner Bros. has acquired the rights to the famous chocolatier and child-murderer from the estate of creator Roald Dahl. Variety says the movie will not be an origin story, but a standalone film “focused on Wonka and his early adventures.” Perhaps we’ll see something of his trip to Loompaland, where Wonka says he saved the Oompa Loompas from their natural predators, the Whangdoodles, Hornswogglers and Snozzwangers. Well, hopefully not, as the original version of that backstory is extremely racist.

    More likely the film will be some new tale altogether, as Dahl never wrote anything specifically focusing on Wonka. Producer David Heyman is on board for the project, best known for helping to guide the Harry Potter franchise and rebooting it with the upcoming Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

    1. Please… no

    2. This is not a terrible idea–Wonka’s an interesting character–and if we were in another era of filmmaking it might actually result in a decent movie. The chances of that happening in 2016 are pretty close to 0, though.

      1. This is not a terrible idea

        Goodness gracious.

        1. PC: the new Chocolate movie will be Pussy Wonka

    3. ” Whangdoodles, Hornswogglers and Snozzwangers.”

      They all pale in comparison to the Vermicious Knids.

      1. Yeah, but the Vermicious Knids are dealt with in the sequel.

        1. +1 Golden Shower… umm… Ticket.

    4. Willy is traumatized by the Grapist.

    5. Is this news from 2013?

    1. Damn it, was supposed to go with the Willy Wonka prequel.

    2. For those who missed it, South Park is the only thing out there that has a decent take on the election.

      They are basically saying Trump was just trolling everyone when he said he wanted to be president. And now that i looks like he actually is in the race, he’s doing everything he can to throw it. And he’s shocked and surprised that people are still with him.

      Last night they cast him as a standup comic doing a bit about groping a woman at the airport (with the intention of throwing the election).

      Where they turned the knife on us was when they had “Giant Douche” turn to the audience and say “oh, you were with me on all of the stuff about immigrants… but now you are offended?”

      This is a brilliant take.

  33. Poll: 52 percent say Hillary Clinton won the final debate, 39 percent say Donald Trump won.

    I don’t see how that could really be the case. Every allegation of corruption leveled against went almost entirely unrebutted, all she could do when being reminded of the tribute paid to her by Qatar and the Saudis was to scratch her chin and cackle, then pivot away. Trump really got her by pussy.

    1. I thought he did well to challenge her like he did. Nothing crazy at all in what he said.

      AND SHE DAMN WELL IS A NASTY PERSON.

      1. Enough about her vagina

    2. Regarding the absurd 52%/39% split, Americans hate losing and they hate backing a loser.

      I read that as about 40% either think Trump won or back Trump regardless of whether they think Trump won, 40% would back Hillary even if they think she lost, 12% are backing Hillary because they think she’s going to win and they don’t want to back a loser, and the other 8% are split between principled libertarian types, who despise both candidates, and people who are dumb as a sack of rocks.

      1. What’s funny is that CNN decided not to indicate who they overpolled here. In their first two post-debate polls, it was heavily democratic.

      2. What’s funny is that CNN decided not to indicate who they overpolled here. In their first two post-debate polls, it was heavily democratic.

      3. I read it a CNN lying.

        Again.

    3. Hillary looked really good last night. I don’t mean her performance…. her look. She had a nice suit, her hair was nice, makeup was nice. She looked clean and articulate.

      Trump was a bit of a mess (just a bit) and seemed a little sweaty.

      I’m invoking Nixon v Kennedy. She looked better on TV. Therefore, she won.

      1. And she didn’t even have a seizure. sadly…

      2. Her cackling while trump talked of the mistreatment of gays and women in the Mideast was especially endearing.

        1. When accused of having the financial backers as ISIS, she couldn’t even be bothered to deny it.

    4. It’s a CNN pol, so likely very skewed in order to support Hillary, and preemptively try to set the narrative regarding the debate.

      1. I read somewhere that CNN typically over samples Democrats by 6 or 7 points.

      2. Yeah, and after all the flack they’ve received for skewing the demographics of the poll, they opted not to publish what the breakdown was this time.

  34. About the stupid thing about Trump not abiding by the results. Talk about a talking point that made the rounds fast.

    There’s some projection going on, no? I mean, leftists still act like 2000 and 2004 didn’t happen and some grave injustice was perpetuated on the planet and universe.

    I say projection because this is how progressives think to begin with. Up here, it was the same thing when Harper got elected. Despite not a hint of any fraud and him being elected, you know, fairly, suddenly the sticking point was he didn’t win the majority of the plurality. Which only points to the shocking stupidity and ignorance of Canadians since it’s nearly impossible to get a majority plurality. You get a majority in seats in Parliament. It’s how it works. The avg. PM wins with 33% if the popular vote. Not 51%. In Quebec, separatist nationalists have not accepted losing two referendums with their bull shit – in 1980 and 1995 – and are planning to give it another shot. One person admitted they will continue until they get the ‘right answer’.

    Left-wing progressivism. Who will kill it?

    1. It will die when we run out of toilet paper.

      1. “In Quebec, separatist nationalists have not accepted losing two referendums with their bull shit – in 1980 and 1995 – and are planning to give it another shot.”

        Aren’t they pretty marginalized now, though?

        1. Not really. While roughly 10-12% support separation, around 25% support the PQ and its xenophobic tendencies.

          They can make noise. And it’s enough to have made Montreal a second-rate city.

          1. I am surprised that 80%+ of the rest of Canada doesnt support Quebec independence.

      2. It never dies. It goes into remission after you run out of toilet paper. Do you really think that Venezuela in 20 years won’t be back to the same Chavista horseshit? All they need is to get back on to their feet with some capitalist reforms, stabilize the country, and have oil prices rise. Before too long, the complaints about inequality will start popping up and the Good Ol’ Days of Chavez will be fondly recalled. Arguments about the starvation that followed nationalization will be rebutted with Top Men arguments.

        1. I’ve come to understand and realize the ‘inequality’ theme is more rooted in envy than it is financial or economic.

          1. It might be the least sound economic argument that leftists make. Setting aside the useful idiots that buy into the economic arguments about inequality, the issue is entirely about envy at it’s core.

      3. It will die when we run out of toilet paper.

        If it were that easy I’d be burning down every toilet paper factory on the continent.

  35. David vs. Goliath or tick gets crushed? Feds won’t buy stealth boat, or let it be sold. The only caveat here is that the developer went out and built the prototype with private funds.

    But there’s a problem: The Pentagon doesn’t want Sancoff’s boat?and also won’t let him sell it abroad.
    Last year, Sancoff was served government secrecy orders, which means he’s not permitted to show his patents and technology to anyone. Since then, his Portsmouth, N.H.-based startup, Juliet Marine Systems Inc., has had to lay off 17 of its 20 employees, and Sancoff sued the government to recoup damages. “We’ve fallen into a very weird place,” he says. “If the U.S. doesn’t want this, fine. But why not let us sell to friendly nations? We’ve had so much interest from countries like Japan, Korea, Qatar.”

    1. I’d bet that the Feds are purposely devaluing his company so a larger competitor can come in and pick him up for a bargain.

      1. Look, Ratheon already has all those kickbacks in place. Just license this out to them, OK?

        *** I have no knowledge of the status of anything Ratheon is doing. I just picked that as a convenient military industrial complex name.

    2. So it will obviously be used by a supervillian to drive back and forth from his hideout under Volcano Island.

    3. Nothing a donation to the Clinton Foundation won’t fix, but he only has a few more weeks for the check to clear.

    4. This is where you transfer your assets to another jurisdiction, the surrender your citizenship and move abroad and become the citizen of another country.

      As long as you’re not trying to sell really large artillery to the Iraqis you don’t have anything to worry about then.

    5. Japan, Korea, Qatar.

      Probably would have served his interests better if he left out “friendly” countries in the Middle East…

  36. I wasn’t worried about Russia or China, but now that the Philippines have joined them I’m going to go hide in my basement.

    1. You mock, but I won’t be surprised when Filipinos are parachuting into Colorado as part of a Russian invasion.

      1. WOLVERINES

        1. My brother and I plan on picking up Lea Thompson and Jennifer Grey and heading to the mountains.

          Don’t worry JB, I shall avenge you.

          1. Don’t forget the latest edition of Soldier of Fortune when you go

          2. Just watch out for Layne Smith’s kid, he’s a weaselly little bastard

          3. Sad thing about Jennifer Grey, she a got a nose job because her nose was big and she thought it would help her career if it was smaller. But by doing so, she destroyed her distinctive look and her recognizability and ruined her career. Good times.

            1. Muriel Hemingway did the same thing. She was hotter than hell in Personal Best.

      2. So you’re saying Putin is going to liberate us from Clinton?

  37. In other news, the “respect women” thing is working.

    Trump said “nasty woman” last night. My wife was disgusted by this. And right after he said “no one respects women more than me”, which makes it even worse.

    Clinton – in a move that is unprecedented in the last 50 years – called Trump a racist during the second debate… several times. Not even a little peep.

    But calling Hillary “nasty”… that’s a new low for politics.

    Hillary has said she was going to play the “war on women” tribal card for years. And it actually seems to be working.

    And predictably, I am annoyed that people are coming to the right conclusion (Trump is unfit to be president) for the wrong reasons (he said “nasty woman”).

    I just don’t get it.

    Hillary: He is a racist. He is a puppet of Vladimir Putin. He is unfit to be president.

    Trump: She is a nasty woman.

    The Crowd: Trump is debasing the election!!!

    1. And predictably, I am annoyed that people are coming to the right conclusion (Trump is unfit to be president) for the wrong reasons (he said “nasty woman”).

      I agree with the conclusion “Trump is unfit to be president.” My issue is that most of those who are reaching this conclusion mistakenly believe that the next part of the syllogism is “Therefore, Hillary is fit to be president.”

      1. Yes, that too.

        The false dichotomy fallacy. “We don’t know what that light in the sky is, therefore it must be aliens.”

        Trump is terrible – therefore Hillary is great!

        You know a lot of these folks in the media who are on Team Clinton think she’s an execrable human being. Even if they aren’t going to go for Gary Johnson, I wonder why they aren’t pushing Jill Stein to the front.

        I don’t get it. Why tank your profession to support a neo-con in progressive’s clothing when you have a genuine progressive on the ballot?

    2. Hillary should be president, because vagina.
      Far too many people actually believe this idiocy.

  38. I think it’s great if Trump never concedes.

    Anything that contributes to the perception of Hillary being an illegitimate President is a good thing.

    When Hillary comes after our Second Amendment rights, . . .

    When Hillary tries to implement single payer, . . .

    When Hillary tries to implement a climate change treaty that was never ratified by the Senate, . . .

    When Hillary is impeached on corruption charges, . . .

    Anything that contributes to the perception that Hillary is an illegitimate President will be a good thing.

    1. I agree with everything but Clinton being impeached on corruption charges. I’ll be riding a unicorn to work before that happens.

      1. It happened to her husband.

        And it doesn’t need to be over what she did as Secretary of State.

        I’m also talking about the scandals to come.

        She can’t stop herself.

        When she left the White House the first time? She stole thousands of dollars worth of the White House china.

        Taking money from foreign governments while she was Secretary of State wasn’t an accident. This is her entire modus operendi, and it’s been that way since she was in Arkansas back in the 1970s.

        There will be scandals. Plenty more scandals.

        1. And nobody will care. They have billions riding on it. Crony capitalism keeps on turning, and she keeps getting paid. That is how the world works these days.

          Why would they upset the apple cart?

          1. Because the American people won’t put up with it, and because it will be a tremendous advantage for the Republicans to impeach her.

            Clinton survived impeachment after convincing everyone that it was all about sex.

            Hillary can’t manage that.

            Meanwhile, Bill Clinton was actually popular. If America hates any woman more than Hillary, it would have to be some woman who drowned her babies or something.

            She hasn’t had a favorable rating over 50% since July of 2014. Her unfavorable rating was as high as 57% a month or two ago, and her unfavorable rating has been hovering around 55% since January.

            Go ahead and ask me for a link. I dare you.

            1. Clinton survived impeachment after convincing everyone that it was all about sex.

              Hillary can’t manage that.

              I think you’re absolutely right, here. Bill was harder to pin down than a greased-up deaf guy. Hillary has none of his charm or finesse; her only defense so far has been an army of sycophants in the media. Once she takes the White House, well, there’s only so much her plot armor can do for her.

        2. “After they were criticized for taking $190,000 worth of china, flatware, rugs, televisions, sofas and other gifts with them when they left, the Clintons announced last week that they would pay for $86,000 worth of gifts, or nearly half the amount.

          Their latest decision to send back $28,000 in gifts brings to $114,000 the value of items the Clintons have either decided to pay for or return.

          McDaniel discussed the matter Wednesday with Betty Monkman, the White House curator, and Gary Walters, the chief usher, or executive manager of the White House.

          They were reviewing the gifts the Clintons chose to keep after $28,000 worth of items were found on a list of donations the Park Service received for the 1993 White House redecoration project.

          http://abcnews.go.com/Politics…..856&page=1

          When the Clintons come over for dinner, everybody hides the silverware.

        3. When she left the White House the first time? She stole thousands of dollars worth of the White House china

          Did you see one of the Podesta emails revealed that she and her staff made off with a bunch of lamps and furniture from the State Department?

          What a fucking klepto that woman is.

  39. Hillary was dressed like Dr. Evil last night.

  40. The CNN debate poll has the same validity as the Drudge debate poll meaning absolutely none. Reason you are embarrassing yourself, or would be if you had any shame.

  41. Walking while trans‘ can be a death sentence in the U.S.

    By Daniel Trotta | WASHINGTON

    Sergeant Jessica Hawkins was a male cop for 20 years but it was not until her transition to a woman in 2014 that she understood the trepidation that transgender women feel across the United States…Hawkins became head of the Washington Metropolitan Police Department’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) liaison unit a year after her transition, at a time when transgender women, especially blacks and Latinas, are being assaulted and murdered at an alarming rate in America.

    And what IS that rate?…

    There are no official figures to track murders and assaults on transgender people…

    Oh.

    But!

    …. likely resulting in an undercount of cases

    Sounds legit.

    1. Based only on my totally non-scientific watching of the local news, there does seem to be a pretty high rate of violence against transgendered people in the District, usually by and against blacks FWIW, but DC’s crime rate is not representative of the entire nation by any stretch.

      1. there does seem to be a pretty high rate of violence against transgendered people in the District,

        I think i’ve mentioned before… but Washington DC is sort of like “San Francisco” for Trans-people.

        Cant remember where i came across the statistics; it was one of those studies about the trans-prevalence within the population, and DC has something like quadruple the national per-capita average

        Why? Dunno, but its a thing.

        Washington, D.C. has the highest rate of transgender-identifying residents in the country, according to a recently released study by the The Williams Institute, which is associated with the University of California/Los Angeles School of Law.

        Of the estimated 1.4 million transgender-identifying individuals in the United States, about 14,550 – or 2.77 percent of the total – reside in D.C., according to the think tank, which specializes in “sexual orientation and gender identity law”.

        Theory = Guaranteed jobs? Special legal protections? Politicians LOVE Tranny hookers?….

        Im going with the last one.

    2. “head of the Washington Metropolitan Police Department’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) liaison unit”

      …um, wot?

      1. Yeah, that’s a thing here, unfortunately.

    3. What does “transgender woman” mean? They were men and now aren’t or they were woman and now aren’t?

      1. The former. I can’t keep it straight either.

        Rule of thumb = whatever they’re being called? they’re not.

        1. “I can’t keep it straight either.”

          Best unintentional pun.

      2. It means a man who has decided he now feels like being a woman, but still has his junk intact.

        1. I know one. Hangs out at the bar. Doesn’t hurt anybody and nobody really care. Calls himself “Dolphin”.

  42. By the way, the biggest news that seems to escaped coverage from the debate last night was Hillary Clinton’s stated intention of invading Syria.

    Maybe she meant something other than what she said, but this is what she said:

    “CLINTON: Well, I am encouraged that there is an effort led by the Iraqi army, supported by Kurdish forces, and also given the help and advice from the number of special forces and other Americans on the ground. But I will not support putting American soldiers into Iraq as an occupying force. I don’t think that is in our interest, and I don’t think that would be smart to do. In fact, Chris, I think that would be a big red flag waving for ISIS to reconstitute itself.

    The goal here is to take back Mosul. It’s going to be a hard fight. I’ve got no illusions about that. And then continue to press into Syria to begin to take back and move on Raqqa, which is the ISIS headquarters.

    I am hopeful that the hard work that American military advisers have done will pay off and that we will see a real — a really successful military operation. But we know we’ve got lots of work to do. Syria will remain a hotbed of terrorism as long as the civil war, aided and abetted by the Iranians and the Russians, continue.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/ news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/19/ the-final-trump-clinton- debate-transcript-annotated/

    1. That’s not important, what’s important is that Trump called her a nasty woman.

      1. I know you’re being facetious, but in all seriousness, is she not talking about sending Americans to war in Syria?

        That’s new!

        In all seriousness, why isn’t anyone talking about that?

        1. no, she’s just using evasive language saying, “These are nice goals”, and saying that ‘someone’ is going to do this stuff, and America will help [wave little flags]

          And we won’t be an *occupying* force! (but of course we may deploy some assets in some other role)

          She’s doing what Obama does. Saying what he thinks should be done, but be completely vague about how that is supposed to be accomplished or what authority he actually has in relation to the issue in any case.

          What irks me is that people like Chris Wallace don’t simply ask direct questions like, “What is the US interest in Syria and how do you intend to pursue them?” – (same for iraq) – You have 2 minutes.””

          1. “The goal here is to take back Mosul. It’s going to be a hard fight. I’ve got no illusions about that. And then continue to press into Syria to begin to take back and move on Raqqa, which is the ISIS headquarters.

            I am hopeful that the hard work that American military advisers have done will pay off and that we will see a real — a really successful military operation.”

            She said what she said, and I don’t think average Americans are aware that she’s committed to sending American troops to fight a war in Syria.

            The progressives are going to point back to this and say, “Oh yeah, we knew she was going to invade Syria the whole time”.

            They’ll be lying.

            Average voters have no idea that she just told us that she wants to invade Syria, and average voters do not want to invade Syria.

            1. she’s committed to sending American troops to fight a war in Syria.

              We already have special operations troops in syria.

              You’re pretending there’s some significance to her statements that isn’t simply affirming what the US is already doing.

              she just told us that she wants to invade Syria

              Obama and the Pentagon have already talked about “First Mosul, then Raqqa“, and how this would mostly be accomplished using “other people’s armies”. You seem to think Hillary said something very new and different, when she’s mostly mouthing what is already the bog-standard way of talking about the situation over there. IOW, what i already said above.

              1. When you tell me that Obama and the Pentagon have already talked about it, I didn’t expect to see an article from just three or four days ago.

                This is not common knowledge, and that’s my point. People don’t know that Hillary wants to send U.S. troops to Syria. It’s underreported.

                If there’s a distinction between Trump and Hillary on that point, Trump should certainly make it. I’m certainly going to mention it to people I know who are voting for Hillary.

                1. whatever. my point is simply that its taken for granted that when Hillary or Obama talk shit about “what should happen” in Iraq & Syria, the implication is that its mostly being done with proxy-forces aided by US Airpower and SOCOM. (e.g. January 2016 – planning to retake Raqqa) Which is why they always inject the stupid caveat that they don’t want/need any “Occupation Force”. Its the standard rhetorical approach to this stuff.

                  If it sounds unclear and open to interpretation, that is by design – when the US uses proxy forces (or when Proxy forces *use* the US) both agree to pretend to be pursuing the other group’s interests. They’re not, mostly. But the US wants to make it look like Iraq retaking Mosul, or Syrian rebels retaking Raqqa, are part of “our plans” instead of things they would be doing regardless of US direction.

          2. Dead Syrians for some, tiny American flags for others!

        2. Who’s going to talk about it? The media, who are mostly in the tank for Clinton? They have a narrative to promote, and this issue doesn’t help that.

          1. Well, maybe Trump should talk about it.

            1. Trump should do a lot of things that he ain’t gonna.

    2. I am hopeful that the hard work that American military advisers have done will pay off and that we will see a real — a really successful military operation.

      Boomers just can’t seem to help trying to relive the 60s over and over and over again.

  43. WaPo enages in its normal, calm and dispassionate analysis


    Trump’s breathtaking repudiation of American democracy

    Editorial Board

    Unable to control himself, Trump confirms everyone’s worst fears

    By E.J. Dionne Jr.

    Trump’s breathtaking repudiation of American democracy

    Editorial Board

    In the third debate, Donald Trump erupts

    By Dana Milbank

    The last debate: Donald Trump doesn’t care about democracy, recapped

    By Alexandra Petri

    Sketches from the third and final presidential debate

    By Ann Telnaes

    [*in case you’re too lazy to read the editorials = just look at these cartoon renderings]

    1. Pretty much identical to this site’s headlines.

    2. Is that where Suderman got his talking points?

  44. Haven’t seen anything about this, but it sounds good:

    “WASHINGTON, D.C. ? On Tuesday, U.S. Representative Warren Davidson (R-Troy, Ohio) introduced the “Lead by Example Act,” a measure that would require all members of Congress and their staff to receive healthcare from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).”
    […]
    “My bill will ensure members of Congress have stakes in improving the failing program for our veterans,” said Davidson.”
    http://dailyadvocate.com/featu…..xample-act

    Those who would push gov’t medical care on us should deal with it themselves.

  45. Hillary Clinton Linked to Bogus Dating Site Associated with Julian Assange Pedophile Smear

    Oddly enough, the same people who now hate Julian Assange, all loved him when he exposed the crimes of the Republicans. However, now that he’s making Clinton out to be nothing more than a globalist criminal, they’ve magically changed their minds.

    The two party paradigm is working like a charm ? forcing Americans on both sides of the spectrum to continue to deny reality.

    1. Pretty consistent with how Hillary uses proxies to do her dirty work so she can claim plausible deniability.

    2. Even if he was who cares? The message is important, not the messenger.

    3. Now they’re using foreign policy help reelect her by silencing those who might damage her prospects. But this woman and her political machine are totally the better choice.

  46. “There are three of us against the world. China, Philippines, Russia.”

    Oh Duterte, you know that makes you the Italians in this scenario?

  47. The thing that concerns me the most about driverless cars is whether they’ll be connected to a central network, and their security from hackers. That’s going to end up being a hell of a lot more important than how many airbags or crumple zones are on a vehicle, considering that hackers have already shown the ability to get into a car’s database and take away driver control thanks to this bullshit “internet of things” nonsense pushed by autistic tech-heads.

    1. 1. They won’t be connected to a central network. V2I is dead. Where even moving so quickly past the cars needing to even talk to *each other* that by the time this stuff is ready for primetime V2V will be dead. The worst you’ll have to contend with is short term storage of GPS data (seizable by the cops without a warrant because FYTW) and 50+ different mileage data storage formats as states move from a gas tax (as increasing efficiencies bring in less money and they’re finding that when tax constitutes 33% of something’s price people start bitching about it) to a mileage tax.

      2. Hacking is going to be a yuuuuuuuuuuge danger. The problem is that *appliance* (and cars are an appliance) manufacturers are just complete shit when thinking about security. There’s typically no upgrade path available from the OEM but hardware is constantly updated and support for old stuff is dropped with no warning – so if you’ve had your car for 7 years and a key sensor goes kaput your SOL. That’s on top of things like hardcoding passwords to 0000 for everything and passing data between nodes unencrypted (and wirelessly).

      1. The worst you’ll have to contend with is short term storage of GPS data (seizable by the cops without a warrant because FYTW) and 50+ different mileage data storage formats as states move from a gas tax (as increasing efficiencies bring in less money and they’re finding that when tax constitutes 33% of something’s price people start bitching about it) to a mileage tax.

        Can you imagine how expensive it will be to keep those data storage networks maintained? Fuck me. I wouldn’t be so worried about it if my license registration fees didn’t change in the transition, but knowing how governments work it will probably skyrocket.

    2. My concern is that everywhere I go will be recorded and stored in a database that will (1) not be sufficiently secure and (2) hand over that information to government upon request (which, as we learned from Mr. Snowden, means “always”).

    3. (1) If you can reprogram it, it can be hacked
      (2) If it can be hacked, it will be hacked

      This is why I am not going to early adopt the IoT trend for anything I consider critical (cars, locks, security, anything implanted in my body, anything that can destroy my home if put at the wrong setting).

  48. NPR last night had a segment on differential pricing in the internet age. Of course, they referred to it as “discriminatory” pricing and highlighted the fact that on-line retailers can use the information they’ve gleaned about their customers to set prices based on any number of factors including race and sex and age which is of course a terrible thing. Trying to figure out where this was coming from, I did a google search and found a report from the White House from February 2015 covering the same ground. Why after several hundred years of capitalist economic theory based on pricing being set by “whatever the market will bear” are we still arguing this medieval theological concept of a “just” price?

    Why the hell is it “unfair” to charge people the maximum possible price you can wring out of them based on some factors but not others? How is the idea that some sorts of discrimination are not allowed not itself an example of unfair discrimination? If a retailer wants to quote me a higher price because I live in an upscale zip code that’s fine but not if it’s because I live in an Asian zip code?

    1. I know when I’m looking up prices at Home Depot, they want to know my zip code so they can set my “home store” but I give them a different zip code because the nearest Home Depot to me is in a town where there’s no Lowe’s and the one in the next town over has a Lowe’s just up the street and guess what? The pricing in the HD where there’s a Lowe’s right next door is slightly different than the pricing in the HD where the nearest competitor is 20 miles away. I’ll bet Amazon spits out different pricing based on whether you’re in East Armpit, Idaho where the nearest Walmart is a 4-hour drive away or if you’re in downtown Houston, too. And the price you’re going to find on snowmobiles varies based on whether you’re in Green Bay in January or Miami in July.

      “Whatever the market will bear” depends on what you define “the market” as, and in the internet age “the market” can be each individual person – it’s as if you can haggle over prices on every single item you buy. Why is that a bad thing?

    2. The free market is the most efficient because it has the most information about what people consider a fair transaction and it propagates that knowledge. This is essentially an attempt to create pricing arbitrage by moving on information other people don’t have. Just like picking a security. There’s nothing inherently discriminatory about it, or no more discriminatory than offering a sale to only members of your mailing list. However, I think its pretty short-sighted. As soon as I find out someone else pays a lower price for the same good, I’m going to try to make myself look like that type of person to their filters.

  49. up to a million people might try to flee the fighting in the Iraqi city of Mosul

    Buckle up, every nation on the way to Germany.

  50. After watching the debate, I’m reading Darkness at Noon to cheer myself up.

    1. I lol’d!

      The only question I have is why would you watch the debate?

  51. The dem hacks on the morning shows are quadrupleing down on Trumps in cahoots with the Russians.

    Talk about going full retard.

    1. The Trump-in-cahoots-with-Putin bit is among the derpiest talking points in this epically derpful election cycle. That the MSM gladly took that talking point and ran with it demonstrates that they will parrot anything the Clinton campaign tells them to. Unfuckingbelievable.

      1. What I found most amazing was how universally the media failed to talk about the contents of the emails themselves and were instead entirely focused on the purported link between Putin and the leak, so they could call Trump a Kremlin operative. Everyone ran with that story, with the same talking points.

        At this point, we might as well have a state controlled media, there is functionally no difference at all. In fact, this arrangement works out better for statism than the classic model of state owned media, owing to the pretense of objectivity that the “free press” supposedly has.

    2. Trump is missing a big opportunity here.

      People are accusing him of being in cahoots with the Russians, when Hillary has taken millions of dollars from the Russians and used the Secretary of State’s office to advance their interests. This is an opening to put the Foundation and her corruption back on the table.

      1. He should’ve mentioned the transfer of nuclear material to Russia that was preceded by a hefty donation to the Clinton slush fund.

        1. I should be shocked that that isn’t getting much coverage, but I’m not.

        2. He has. Maybe there was a Reason article on him talking about it.

          HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  52. Am I the only one who thinks its kinda weird to ask a candidate who is basically tied at the polls to give a concession speech three weeks before the election?

    1. And also to declare that something didn’t happen before we see whether or not it happens.

    2. Look how well it worked for McCain. The Press love Maverick again.

    3. That is so misogynist, RC.

    4. I guess you didn’t get the Journo-list memo. They agree that would be unifying narrative point of the day. I think Damon could get you on the email list if you wanted.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.