Slashdot Mirror


Anonymous Declare 'Total War' On Donald Trump, Threaten To 'Dismantle His Campaign' (businessinsider.com)

An anonymous reader writes from Business Insider's article: Hackers affiliated with the Anonymous hacktivist collective have vowed to relaunch cyber-operations against US presidential candidate Donald Trump [on April Fools' Day]. They threaten to "dismantle his campaign" by taking his election websites offline in a large-scale and orchestrated distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack. In December 2015, Anonymous officially "declared war" on Trump after a radical speech in which he said Muslims should be banned from entering the United States. The operation at the time resulted in a number of websites being targeted by hackers, but failed to have lasting impact. A new video statement has been posted to YouTube which claims the "loyalists and veterans" of Anonymous have decided to ramp up cyber-operations against Trump -- dubbed #OpTrump -- on a far larger scale than ever before. "Dear Donald Trump, we have been watching you for a long time and what we see is deeply disturbing. Your inconsistent and hateful campaign has not only shocked the United States of America [but] you have shocked the entire planet with your appalling actions and ideas. You say what your audience wants to hear but in reality you don't stand for anything except for your personal greed and power."
The websites targeted in the attack (so far) include trump.com, donaldjtrump.com, and trumphotelcollection.com. In addition, the hacktivists are also planning to release some of Donald Trump's personal information including a SSN, phone number, and contact information of his agent and legal representative.

741 comments

  1. Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    In December 2015, Anonymous officially "declared war" on Trump after a radical speech in which he said Muslims should be banned from entering the United States.

    And not a single person has lost a second's sleep over it. Saber-rattling (or would it be katana-rattling?) by lamers is nothing to get worked up over.

    1. Re:Yawn... by AchilleTalon · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The brain dead script kiddies declare war on Trump. Really?

      Do they know anything about democracy? Let the people not choose Trump as President and that's all. Left the democracy alone and get a life anonymous kids.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    2. Re:Yawn... by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

      Has to be a media stunt. Funny they oppose the Illuminati yet they attack said anti establishment candidate. Sad part is for the US there are only two options left, collapse within a Ponzi scheme or relive one of the bloodiest wars in it's history, political theatrics isn't going to fix that.

    3. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ---
      The brain dead script kiddies declare war on Trump. Really?
      Do they know anything about democracy? Let the people not choose Trump as President and that's all. Let the democracy alone and get a life anonymous kids.
      ----
      This. Plus, Anonymous has so far gotten away with their bullshit hactivisim because their targets were largely powerless to track them down. The US government takes a very dim view of foreign nationals interfering with their elections and they have the capability to track you down anywhere on the planet. US citizens who do it get felonies and jail time. Foreign nationals get no due process and may wake up with a bag team blowing down their door and an indefinite stay in Gitmo if not before the elections, certainly after if Trump does get elected. Not very bright.

      Beyond that, this kind of militant lawlessness by the far left is what is driving the Trump movement. The radical left has swung the pendulum too far and too fast, and it is coming back the other way with a vengeance. The more you target Trump, the more you reveal the fascist mentality on the left, the more his support will grow, and God help your sorry ass if he gets elected, he will fill Gitmo or just drone you from 40k feet, Obama style.

    4. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Anyone can claim to be part of Anonymous, ranging from script kiddies to people who can actually have some impact. I wouldn't completely dismiss the possibility that Anonymous could have a significant impact on the Presidential election. That said, I agree with your sentiment. For all the faults of the United States, we have always peacefully elected and inaugurated our President. I'd like to think we're capable of getting the right candidate (not Trump) elected using the First Amendment freedoms. It would be a terrible precedent for the use of force to significantly influence the Presidential election. Because we classify cyberwarfare as a form of warfare, I think we can also consider what Anonymous is threatening to be the use of force. As much as I despise Trump, we need to let the democratic process play out. We've elected some truly awful Presidents in the past, like Fillmore, Pierce, and Buchanan, I'd like to think we learned our lesson from that era about the use of force. I think Trump would be every bit as awful, but I also think Congress wouldn't let him do most of what he wants, and there'd be plenty of bipartisan support against him. Honestly, Trump might unintentionally do what Obama and Bush weren't able to do -- unite Congress to get work done.

    5. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except their either anarchists or people who feel like democracy has failed them, either they feel their vote is insignificant due to the numbers of votes it's counted among, feel the system is corrupt or they're too young to vote. They therefore feel this is a way to effect the change they want when they can't through normal means. Of course it won't work, if anything they'll just fan the fire.

    6. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The radical left has swung the pendulum too far and too fast, and it is coming back the other way with a vengeance

      Exactly this. I wonder if all those morons shouting "we stopped Trump" in Chicago realize that they're only giving Trump free publicity.

      And then of course there is CNN, a "news" network that is very close to the U.K.'s political correctness these days, endlessly showing the same 30 seconds of footage. CNN used to be my primary source of news, but I'm forced to switch between Fox Noise, CNN and MSNBC these days.

      Trump is the choice of many Americans these day, and we don't need left-wing or right-wing bullies (looking at you Cruz) to tell the American people whom to elect.

      And a big disclaimer: I like none of the candidates, so I'm probably not voting at all.

    7. Re:Yawn... by johanw · · Score: 1

      Radical left? In the US? Where? Everywhere else, even Bernie Sanders wouod be called a center to moderate right-wing candidate. The US has lost its perspective because mostly they can only choose between extremely right-wing (Democrats) and fundamentalist right wing (Republican). Trump is - for a Republican - fairly moderated, compared to say a religious fundamentalist like Cruz.

    8. Re:Yawn... by johanw · · Score: 2

      "Because we classify cyberwarfare as a form of warfare"

      You mean the US has already declared war on the rest of the world with the NSA's actions?

    9. Re:Yawn... by erapert · · Score: 1

      So if you're not a foaming-at-the-mouth Marxist then you're one of those fundament-- er-- despicable sub-human right wingers?
      Also, since when should the US care about how the rest of the world runs their countries?

    10. Re:Yawn... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      That is correct.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    11. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to shatter your college brainwashing (actually no I don't), but the real political spectrum is organized by level of freedom or conversely level of government force and looks like this:

      Left wing: Totalitarian/Authoritarian/Centralized power of government; this includes socialists, dictators, monarchs, communists and fascists to varying degree (fascist means bundled together, as in central authority controlling all the marbles, or in this case, branches of the country). As the government grows in power and responsibility, the power and freedom of individuals in the society shrinks to non-existence. Both candidates for the Democrat party fall into this category to varying degrees, and want to make the country less free. Just look at what 7 years of Obama has brought us: limits to "hate speech" are actually attacks on the first amendment, Dems want to abolish the 2nd amendment, Barak Hussein Obama has steamrolled religious liberties with the Little Sisters of the Poor/Obamma care and ramming Homosexual marriage down the throats of Christians who sincerely believe it is wrong and who just want to practice their religion in peace, destroying their businesses and persecuting them. The left wing thinks they know best and they want to fundamentally transform the country and take away our freedoms. Bitch and moan all you want, the aforementioned are just facts, feel free to lie to yourself about it all you want. If you like all these changes, congratulations, but imagine if a Trump gets elected and decides to take the same approach, but in the opposite direction to your desires, how will it feel with the shoe on the other foot?

      Moderates: Limited government with some powers; this includes constitutional democracies, republics and parliamentary forms of government with clearly delineated limits to their power. This is where most of Republicans besides Rand Paul/Ron Paul fall. They want the government to have those powers which are outlined in the Constitution and to leave the citizens alone beyond those few reasonable powers.

      Right wing: minimal to no government; typically the libertarians and anarchists fall into this category. Rand Paul falls into this category.

      In the 60s, the liberals realized that it was difficult to win an argument when one side was arguing from a moderate position and the other was arguing from a left wing position, so they colluded with the elites in academia to muddy the waters by re-defining the political spectrum. They put anarchy (total lack of rules) far left, then communism (no freedom, govt control of daily life) next left and put Nazism and Fascism far right. A 6 year old child can tell that the spectrum makes no sesnse. How does one go from socialism to communism, which are both dramatic reductions in personal freedom and massive increases in government power and control, and then, suddenly at the far left, you have anarchy, where there is no government at all. It makes no rational sense, and the only reason for doing it was to redefine their position in a better light. The other side makes even less sense. Nazi it'self means "new socialist" in German (hint: they were socialists by everyone's definition at the time). The Nazi party were socialists, but never mind the facts. Fascism again was an offshoot of the liberal left wing and is a form of Communism where the government controlled and owned all property and therefore controlled all aspects of their citizens lives so they would all "share" together. Feel free to google classical or linear political spectrum, you will find it, and it is rational, unlike the modern version.

      Conservatives are by their nature conservative, we want to live our lives in peace and raise families and enjoy the freedom that our forefathers bought with their blood. We typically only pay close attention to politics when shit has gone seriously sideways, so we didn't really catch this small change, or care for a long time. However, just because some pointed headed academic with a few letters after his name says something is so, doesn't change reality, and such is the case with the political spectrum.

    12. Re:Yawn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was what was known as surveillance, and has no impact on your life unless you are plotting harm to the US. If you want to see how the US responds to a cyber attack, note the significant infrastructure damage to the N Korea internet backbone after they attacked Sony. When your internet and telephone doesn't work for a few months, that is how you know that the US is pissed at your bullshit and may be treating it as cyber warfare.

      If you are a collection of foreign nationals not affiliated with any nation and in countries without extradition and you screw with US elections, be prepared for a black bag team to snatch you in the middle of the night never to be heard from again. If your country has extradition, prepare for an extended stay in federal prison on felony election tampering and/or cyber terrorism charges. Even with all the touchy feel-y BS these days, they still take that very seriously. Just saying...

      The correct antidote for lies and half truths in a free and open democracy is the truth. If you have the truth on your side, you focus on getting it out, legally and above board. If you are just really pissed or scared and want to break the law to hurt someone, but don't have the truth, it's time to re-evaluate your life.

    13. Re:Yawn... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      If anything, this is counter productive. Trump's campaign is feeding on the media circus. He's like something out of a bad horror movie, your attacks only make him stronger.

      The best way to attack Trump is plain facts. He inherited his money, four of his business ventures have declared bankruptcy, he openly cheated on his wives, he's lying about his current net worth. His primary claim to fame is his brilliant business sense, and it's a lie.

    14. Re:Yawn... by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      indeed. Nowadays I read the Guardian (in the UK, its a paper who will happily tell us how many migrants we need to be compassionate over and bend over backwards to accommodate because they're fleeing war and horror and they're all so desperate and good for the economy) and Breitbart (who tell us of gang rapes by said migrants who we accommodated) in order to get some semblance of the truth - hopefully balancing the left and right to get something in the middle.

      You should vote though - do not be one of the lazy "who cares" non-voters. Go down there and put "none of these fuckwits" on the ballot paper, just to show you care enough to take the effort. Bonus marks for drawing a picture of a Hillary taking Trump's cock on the ballot too (or vice versa!)

    15. Re:Yawn... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Vote Vermin Supreme.

      He's as close as we've to to Screaming Lord Setch.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re:Yawn... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      If ultra-leftist criminals are shitting their pants, it must mean something good is happening.

  2. Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    EVERYTIME some group has "declared war", insulted, demeaned, became "outraged", etc. about Trump or supporters, his popularity and support grew.

    The actions of this immature group of mother's basement dwelling mouth breathers will only cement their reputations as such and make more Trump supporters.

    Just from a rational point of view, shutting down political speech is never a good thing, no matter what that speech is. Because if they can do it to one candidate, it can be done to others.

    1. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by The-Ixian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is how I feel as well.

      It is eerie how similar the Trump rise to the head of the ticket is to the Obama rise. From Iowa in 2008 nobody expected Obama to win anything, then, every state after that where Obama won it was an "upset" to the establishment.

      I see the same exact thing happening again.

      People want change and they love an underdog.

      The more people tell them they are wrong, the more it cements their position.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Spot on. This is just going to turn into another case of Trump getting free publicity on all the news networks.

    3. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by gweihir · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just from a rational point of view, shutting down political speech is never a good thing, no matter what that speech is. Because if they can do it to one candidate, it can be done to others.

      Indeed. A fascist approach does not become any better because some "good" guys use it or because the goal is "noble".

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

      Besides, how many people are going to say, "Well, I wanted to support Trump, but his web site wasn't working, so I guess I'll vote for Cruz instead."

    5. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ive noticed this as well, its become more and more clear over the past 3 weeks that is the case. I blame Political correctness and SJWs for the rise in trump. its the rubber band effect. the side of political correctness has pushed too far, now its bouncing back in the opposite direction where people are starting to relate to trump due to what some see as non political correct and what others call hate speech. It was bound to happen

      ~ganjadude

    6. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      It is eerie how similar the Trump rise to the head of the ticket is to the Obama rise.

      Apart from that one detail you noted, it really isn't. Unless you still think those are the "Whitey Tapes".

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    7. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EVERYTIME some group has "declared war", insulted, demeaned, became "outraged", etc. about Trump or supporters, his popularity and support grew.

      Just like petulant rebellious adolescents do. "Everybody HATES it so I like it!"

      The actions of this immature group of mother's basement dwelling mouth breathers will only cement their reputations as such and make more Trump supporters.

      It's like a cliques in high school isn't it? it's as if all these adults - Trump supporters and the protestors - had never left their high school mentality behind.

      Just from a rational point of view, shutting down political speech is never a good thing, no matter what that speech is. Because if they can do it to one candidate, it can be done to others.

      It's just a website. His biggest mode of communication online is Twitter and his email list.

      Anyway, watching the dynamics of Trump supporters vs. Trump protestors leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I thought the Electorate was better than that. Alas, I now truly understand why our founding fathers made the USA a republic and not a democracy. I used to think they were arrogant aristocrats but they turn out to have known human nature quite well, indeed.

      As the writer of "Idiocracy" said recently, he didn't intend to write a documentary. Trump is Camacho.

    8. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by hey! · · Score: 2

      And the thing is the real hotheads among his supporters crave the catharsis of a confrontation. Being declared "war" against suits them right down to the ground.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    9. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by bahrdo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Indeed. Obama ran on "Hope and Change". Trump is running on "Make 'em Change". Hell, even Bernie's running an anti-establishment campaign in most respects. Unfortunately; Washington is so incredibly polarized that one person has no chance of effecting change, even if that person is the President. Any time they try, their efforts are poisoned by the opposition and then blamed for the outcome. Obama's been learning this for the past 8 years, and you can bet it would be no different if Trump were to win. People need to concentrate on Congressional races if we want to see any real change. We need to vote out the "do nothing's" and the "hardliners" and vote in some players who understand the importance of compromise. Then as we vote in these anti-establishment candidates to the Presidency, they might actually have a slim chance of delivering.

    10. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Exactly.

      Perhaps they shouldn't take down his sites, but distribute the movie that Trump himself suppressed. He threatened to sue any broadcaster who aired the movie, which was really created to show celebrity businessmen.

      And that was 25 years ago. Either it's a bunch of lies and Trump is right, or there's some real content in there that perhaps shouldn't be released?

    11. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by fluffernutter · · Score: 1, Funny

      Except for the fact that Obama was the underdog because he made too much sense, and Trump is an underdog because people think there is no way in hell a radical bully loudmouth like that could ever be an American president.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    12. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump is anonymous.

    13. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by fluffernutter · · Score: 0

      It's like a cliques in high school isn't it?

      On the other hand, Trump's attitude reminds me much more of being in elementary school.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    14. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      "The internet thingie is down again, I'll vote for Trump so that he can fix it."

    15. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that in the Democratic primary race 8 years ago, Obama actually sounded like a sane candidate. Most candidates dropped out after Iowa. And from then on Obama was the front runner and never the underdog. But people didn't think of him as a frontrunner from some reason. Despite any possible Democratic candidate providing change over Dubya's administration, Obama was the only one pushing that message. Clinton was running on a campaign of "I'm the inevitable winner so you may as well vote for me now".

      Most of the candidates other than Obama were longer term insiders than Obama, so that probably helped him out a lot. Probably a lot of people tired of both Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush years. Edwards in third place was the only other candidate to get any delegates, there was not a long drawn out multi-way race like we have this year with Republicans (and I swear, I can't remember a damn thing about Edwards campaign). Obama really was very similar to Rubio; first time senator yet treated like an outsider, young with appeal among younger voters, occasional breaches of established party doctrine, etc (I'd have expected Rubio to do much better if the Republican demographics skewed a bit younger).

      As for Trump, he didn't even start as an underdog, everyone assumed he was just there because he was bored and needed something to do with his money. His incessant claims that Obama wasn't a citizen meant most politicians of all stripes thought he was a kook so he was ignored. But he never acted like an underdog, from the very start he campaigned as if he were the best and most popular candidate, he just will never shut up about his poll numbers. He actually acts more like a rabid dog than an under dog, always on the attack. And this is really confusing political pundits because he's doing everything wrong and it seems to be working.

    16. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Politicians need to learn that their party is only in power temporarily.

    17. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      They were both arrogant aristocrats as well as knowledgeable about human behavior.

    18. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by mrclmn · · Score: 1

      How is it that a self declared "billionaire" who was born into a wealthy family can be considered an "underdog"?

    19. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by quantaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is how I feel as well.

      It is eerie how similar the Trump rise to the head of the ticket is to the Obama rise. From Iowa in 2008 nobody expected Obama to win anything, then, every state after that where Obama won it was an "upset" to the establishment.

      I see the same exact thing happening again.

      People want change and they love an underdog.

      The more people tell them they are wrong, the more it cements their position.

      I honestly see almost nothing in common.

      Obama came from relative obscurity starting small and expected to stay small, Trump was already a huge celebrity starting huge who people expected to implode.

      Obama was seen as a current and future star of the party (just not the nominee that year), Trump was first seen as a joke and then an existential threat.

      Obama sold hope, Trump sells fear.

      Obama is a minority, came from a relatively middle class family, and stayed middle class for much of his adult life, Trump is white, from extreme wealth, and more or less stayed that way.

      Obama's fundamental appeal was leading forward progress for a better tomorrow, Trump's is forcefully repealing progress to return to a better past.

      Aside from the fact they were both underdogs they're almost polar opposites.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    20. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

      From Iowa in 2008 nobody expected Obama to win anything, then, every state after that where Obama won it was an "upset" to the establishment.

      That's not true. Obama led all of the polls after Super Tuesday in mid February.

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

    21. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump and Sanders (yes, he is an instigator too, now resist the urge to be butthurt and pay attention) are a mere hint of what's coming down the pike if the Republicans and Democrats both continue to shit on the plebeian and equestrian classes. Read up on the terms and you may learn a few things about the fall of the Roman Republic and the impending fall of the American Republic.

    22. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "From Iowa in 2008 nobody expected Obama to win anything"

      That is simply not true. I remember vividly during one of GW Bush's speeches (Inauguration or State of the Union, I can't recall) where the reporters were going ON AND ON about Obama, and I thought, "Who is Obama? (I think he was a freshman Senator at the time), and I said to my wife, "Oh my God, he's going to be the next President."

      Obama was cherry-picked/ordained/chosen. I did vote for him at least once because of the alternatives, but still, Obama was completely planted into the Presidency by some power structure.

      That post-Bush-speech media hype about Obama is the moment I lost all faith in US national politics.

    23. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by gtall · · Score: 2

      You might be able to count on the Congressional races, if by that you mean the House. But I doubt it. The Republicans have been very effective in gerrymandering districts. This makes me think they based their party on two lies: 1. they were popular because they looked at the House and the state governments and saw many Republicans, and 2. that the rank and file actually believed their philosophy after they chased most of the Bill Buckley types, who could think without blowing a gasket, out of the party leaving them with a party of eejits. And they campaigned so hard against the government they were supposed to serve that now they have someone in Trump who'd like to drown them all the Potomac, they have the temerity to complain.

      The Democrats are no better, but this post is already too long.

    24. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      There's also the fact that Obama doesn't actually want change. He's perfectly happy to take bribes/lobbying from corporations and billionaires, agree with mass surveillence, oh and he's coming over to the UK to tell us to stay in the European Union, such is his love of huge centralized bureaucracies.

    25. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      because he made too much sense

      Here we see an Obamadrone at work, someone who actually thought that much of anything he said during the 2008 election cycle (or since) has made sense.

    26. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Obama sold hope to the blind and stupid only look what he really did spy on your country and half the world.

      I am no fan of trump and not American but the way i see it Trump is not you president only a candidate if you don't want him don't vote for him and stfu.
      What Trump really sells is a little truth and a lot of bullshit and it is a lot more truth than any candidate in decades and that is the difference. politicians have all sold out many times over before they become a candidate Trump as a business man is a lying pos shit that is truthful at times which people are not accustom to in the land of corruption incorporated.

    27. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that in the Democratic primary race 8 years ago, Obama actually sounded like a sane candidate.

      And Obama failed to Change. He failed to give Hope. He failed to reform the failed system that had become the United States.

      So the public won't vote for the "sane candidate" this time. They'll vote for the loon, the wingnut, the half-baked clown, because they are just that desperate to find a way of fixing a broken down country.

      If Trump fails too, who knows who they'll vote for next time.

    28. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's working because he's tapped into two demographics Angry at Obama. Old white people who watch Fox News and think Obama is the second coming of Satan, and white supremacists. He's been endorsed by nearly every white supremacist political party. His rallies are FULL of white supremacist supporters. People yelling the N word and other racial slanders.

      They like him because when an Asian American born and raised in the US with no accent asks him a question his first response is either "are you American" or "your English is very good". Or his proclamations against Mexican "rapists" or Muslims, these are all hate group staples and could be taken right of the KKK newsletter. He treats all people of color or of different races as non American and that's a direct appeal to White nationalism and white supremacists. This basis though probably derives from his silver spoon private school upbringing. I could bet money there wasn't a single non white person in his prep school.

      Yea there are some normal people in there, mostly older people like the guy that sucker punched that black guy. Mid 60's to 80's hates almost everything is a demographic he is strong in. He gets the nomination and he's going to get absolutely stomped in the general election. What's funny is he's about as RINO as they come, he's always advocated NE liberal policies. He's flipped position on so many issues for this campaign it's hard to believe people are falling for all his BS. But he's manipulating all that Faux news propaganda to his advantage and bringing home to roost all the stuff the Republican party has cultivated during the Obama years. It's going to absolutely explode on the party with Trump and the party will likely fragment afterwards.

    29. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Magius_AR · · Score: 3

      It's working because he's tapped into two demographics Angry at Obama. Old white people who watch Fox News and think Obama is the second coming of Satan, and white supremacists. He's been endorsed by nearly every white supremacist political party. His rallies are FULL of white supremacist supporters. People yelling the N word and other racial slanders.

      You are vastly understating his popularity. He's polling near 50% with Republicans, across almost _all_ demographics and _all_ states. ~25% of this country is not "old white people and white supremacists".

      He gets the nomination and he's going to get absolutely stomped in the general election. What's funny is he's about as RINO as they come, he's always advocated NE liberal policies

      These statements stand in stark contradiction. Once he doesn't have to pander to the base anymore, I see him as a strong general election candidate w/ across-the-aisle support. I also don't know why the Dems are so against him. Between Cruz and Trump, Trump has _far_ more liberal policies/tendencies. He'd actually raise taxes if they pushed for it.

    30. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by rtb61 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Based upon "Anonymous" past actions, with a huge focus on defending and promoting freedom of speech and exposing secrets this smells just a teensy bit off. Now based upon the recent history of campaign activities, specifically the DNC saga with supporter lists and Clinton's campaign getting full access to Bernie Sanders lists and nothing said and then 3 months latter access being provided to Clintons supporters to the Bernie Sanders and one Clinton insider accessing within minutes of it being available and then huge complainst and much complicit main stream media campaigning. This actually comes off as a Clinton hack, sure fine, anyone can use 'Anonymous' for any reason but do not expect and positive response or even worse think you can avoid a hugely negative reaction.

      Now for the compulsory political question, "Where was Bernie Sanders during the health care debates, right behind you bitch (the word in this case is application appropriate)" http://www.esquire.com/news-po.... When you sink to lows in politics expect people led repercussions.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    31. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free brown shirts to all Trump supporters!

    32. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by rahvin112 · · Score: 1, Informative

      ~25% of this country is not "old white people and white supremacists".

      Actually it is, haven't read up on your demographic data have you? Besides he's not got 25% of the vote. He's got about 40-50% of the registered republican vote, which is about 30% of the electorate. In other words he has at best about 15% of the electorate. He gets the nomination and there is NO guarantee that all those people voting for Cruz will even bother voting. Think he can with the general election with 15% of the vote? Blind supporters like you fail to realize the independents are near 50% of the electorate alone and democratic numbers are growing with every election just like they have for the last 12 years.

      These statements stand in stark contradiction.

      No they don't. He's not a centrist candidate unless he stands up and proclaims everything he said before hand is garbage. That's a political death sentence. All the crap he said as part of the primary is going be used against him later and he can't walk any of it back without being a flip-flopper and that's a death sentence in the general election. Besides he flip flops and the conservative voters stay home, that's all the fucking people voting for Cruz, 30-40% of the republican party.

    33. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      That's just it though. Bernie isn't anti-establishment at this point. He's pro establishment. He just represents a different portion. The establishment has long since grown to encompass the 'anti-establishment' left wing social polices of the 1960s and 70s as baby boomers moved into government. They are now integrated into state policy and are law. Of course, he wants to take it further, but I wouldn't call that anti-establishment at this point. It should be no surprise that they are being used to trample liberty in the same way taxation and inflation hobble middle and lower class wealth. Just more tools to use against the rest of us.

      Compromise? That's all they do in washington now. Every time they 'compromise' and 'reach across the aisle', they're only agreeing on how much more liberty to take away and how much more money to borrow off our backs. They're going to compromise us all right off a cliff with what's really just rampant indecision. None of them have the balls to LEAD us somewhere new because they're all too afraid of being labeled as 'against' something, god forbid. This is probably a big reason why trump has appeal. Washington is run by spineless, passive aggressive twats.

    34. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No obama was the 'underdog' because he used language that made progressives wet. Trump is the underdog because the left is now the establishment and trump is criticizing their broken policies with just enough truth to resonate.

    35. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      I guess it depends how you define 'progress.' Obama sold hope, which went down easily, but turned out false. Trump sells fear, which goes down harder, but may have more truth in it than some want to accept.

    36. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's working because he's tapped into two demographics Angry at Obama. Old white people who watch Fox News and think Obama is the second coming of Satan, and white supremacists

      I went to a Trump rally. It was about 40% brown peoples. Your move, ignoramus.

      The people who are impacted most by lax immigration policies are minorities.

      Actual Mexicans love Trump's Wall idea: They would build one themselves to cut off the drug trade if their cartel corrupted politicians would let them, so of course Mexico would help us replace the current border fence with a better border wall.

      You left leaning fools haven't ever actually watched a Trump rally, even though they're on youtube. Fox10 typically has the best stream. You disparage the straw man you've been told is "Trump", even though the man is the only candidate actually attacking what slashdotters have been complaining about for decades. Trump's fucking the 2 party system by running an independent party platform within the existing system. He's funding his own campaign to remove pressure of special interests on his politics. He wants to help would be economic migrants make their own countries great again, so they don't have to flee in the first place... and yet morons call him "Xenophobic" for saying that people shouldn't have to flee their own countries.

      -- Anonymous leftist who stopped believing media lies, went to the source, and now loves Trump.

    37. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Altus · · Score: 1

      Obama was also in a dog fight for most of the primary, not totally dominating everything they way Trump buy and large has.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    38. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      As opposed to the endless ideological newspeak 'compromise' and beating around the bush of modern day 'progressive' politics? It's a co-competing compromise that ends up sticking it to the demographics they claim to represent. Both parties figured out it's easier to compromise the interests of the constituents, who aren't present for the discussion, rather than on each other's for the constituents' benefit. Btw, the republicans are half this equation. They abandoned liberty focused, conservative principles long ago. They deserve trump as much as the left does. Politicians like trump happen when reality is collectively denied for too long. Why? because people get frustrated with this and will vote for anything that promises to break the wasteful/oppressive stalemate.

    39. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by nucrash · · Score: 2

      I agree. I think now is the time to go underground, train, and enhance our skills. This megalomaniac seems to feed on attention. Attacking him will only vindicate his authority. Once he steps out of line, we must infiltrate and dismantle his operation from inside.

      Until then, we use every legal method to keep him out of power. Vote! Encourage others to vote. Don't let anyone stay home on the day of the election. We must have lots of power to subvert these angry masses and bring an end to the few who feel that this hate monger needs to be in power.

      If your moment has past, your state cast their ballots; go and beef up every skill you have available. If he takes office, war is coming and the U.S. is not going to be on the right side of history on this one.

      --
      Place something witty here
    40. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by swb · · Score: 1

      Politicians like trump happen when reality is collectively denied for too long.

      I think this is it. For whatever the reason, it does appear that there are number of dubious narratives that the media and various forms of the establishment (government, business, etc) have become invested in that have an emperor's new clothes quality about them. These narratives seem to fly in the face of common sense reasoning and direct evidence.

      I think after a while anyone who's willing to describe reality as commonly accepted is given a lot of latitude on other subjects.

    41. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      People want change and they love an underdog.

      Too bad Neo always turns out to be just another level of control.

    42. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      This is how I feel as well.

      It is eerie how similar the Trump rise to the head of the ticket is to the Obama rise.

      What the racism, fascism, division and inciting of hatred and violence? Eerie....

    43. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet, oddly enough, the California chapter of the KKK denounces Trump and endorses Clinton.

      And which candidate do the Mexican supremacists endorse? And the black supremacists? The Jewish supremacists? Please, don't tell me you're racist and you only focus on white supremacy.

    44. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm neither old nor a white supremist. I also have a masters degree which also goes against the supposed 'low education' theme. The Hispanic friends I have all voted for him. Turns out legal Hispanic immigrants aren't that fond of illegal Hispanic immigrants. Who knew?

    45. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell are you talking about? And you think Trump is the crazy one? How's the fallout shelter coming?

    46. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copy/paste error. Link should be here, instead

    47. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ive noticed this as well, its become more and more clear over the past 3 weeks that is the case. I blame Political correctness and SJWs for the rise in trump. its the rubber band effect. the side of political correctness has pushed too far, now its bouncing back in the opposite direction where people are starting to relate to trump due to what some see as non political correct and what others call hate speech. It was bound to happen

      And you'd be right. And it's the same reason why Rubio and Cruz lost somewhere around 1m twitter followers between them after they started going off on the "Trump is really the one responsible for what happened in Chicago bit." People are tired of the regressive left doing something, and everyone going "but they're really not to blame...IT'S THE OTHER GUYS...HONEST..." And the second that Kasich decided that the "Illegals are the bestest things evar, and I'm going pro-amnesty" he started dropping in in the polls and losing followers faster then a rock dropping from orbit. People have simply had enough of the establishment pulling this.

      Couple of other examples to back up your point, would be the University of Missouri, and the 20% loss of first year students, the $32m budget shortfall, problems retaining students on campus. Their solution? We're gonna do everything we can to get students in! Tell your friends! The email from the temporary dean even went as far as saying that "anyone who'd applied would be accepted as a student." If that doesn't people what happens when absolute craziness from the regressive left and SJW happen, it should by that point.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    48. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bernie should retire because he has already had 30 years to do something worthwhile for the country. Clinton has already served 8 years as co-President and served as Secretary of State and has also contributed nothing more than controversy. Cruz has shutdown the government once and threatened 2 other government shutdowns to get his way. He failed and the public paid for his hubris and total disregard for the citizens. Trump has managed to piss off every political establishment in the US and across the world. He has been attacked by every media outlet in the country. At the same time he has been able to tap into the feelings of people who feel the government no longer serves their interests. He is course and often times a little short on facts but he is beholden to no one. When people donate large sums of money to support a candidate they expect a return on their investment. End of story. Bernie, Clinton, Cruz, and Rubio are bought and paid for.

    49. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ultranova · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I blame Political correctness and SJWs for the rise in trump.

      How about blaming the Republican voters who are voting for him?

      its the rubber band effect. the side of political correctness has pushed too far, now its bouncing back in the opposite direction where people are starting to relate to trump due to what some see as non political correct and what others call hate speech.

      If Republican voters find Trump to be the candidate who best embodies their political ideas, that's the fault of said voters and their party, not their opponents.

      But it's always good to get a reminder of what conservatives actually mean by "personal responsibility": never their fault.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    50. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that 60 years ago, the US was 90% white, but is now only 60% white. Why can Japan, Israel and Africa have their own peoples, but whites from the US and Europe must be diluted. Are they not good enough in your eyes?

    51. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a bunch of bullshit. Go check out the Legal Immigrants For Trump. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm6LGITkiz4

      Obama's support base was at odds with Hillary/traditional Democractic machine. Trump's support is at odds with the Republican machine, but also with the unrestricted capitalism of Cruz (#NeverTrump).

      Oh, and Hillary and Obama were totally for Robert "Exalted Cyclops" Byrd.

    52. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. (Hermann Goring in an interview during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials,18 April 1946).

    53. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by DrJimbo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I blame Political correctness and SJWs for the rise in trump.

      The Republicans have also been blamed for resorting to the politics of hate. The best explanation I've seen has two components:

      1) The inclination of some people to turn to authoritarianism when times get rough.

      2) The concentration of wealth into fewer and fewer hands is making things rough for the working class. Things aren't really bad yet (like in the great depression) but people's prospects are bleak. They are worse off now than they were 10 years ago without much hope in sight.

      If this simple analysis is correct then the problem is not Trump. There are always Trumps around. The problem is that economic times (more accurately, prospects) are bad enough that a sizable fraction of the population is turning to a strongman/bully who promises to protect them even if those promises don't make any rational sense.

      This has several implications. First, if there is a successful large-scale terrorist attack in the US then this could easily raise the overall level of fear enough to sweep Trump into the White House. Second, if the powers-that-be stay in power and continue their policies of transferring wealth away from the working class then the levels of economic distress and fear will grow, creating even more support for Trump or the next authoritarian strongman/bully who comes along.

      The only real solution is to stop waging economic warfare on the working class. Unfortunately, even if Bernie Sanders gets elected, it is going to be nigh on impossible to quickly change the course of the best government that money could buy.

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
    54. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 2

      I went to a Trump rally. It was about 40% brown peoples. Your move, ignoramus.

      Hmmm...50% of Mobile, Alabama's 200,000 residents are black. But none of them seemed to make it to Trump's rally there.

      http://i.imgur.com/y9j49Dh.jpg

    55. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "His rallies are FULL of white supremacist supporters. People yelling the N word and other racial slanders."

      This sounds like a bunch of BS. Have you been to several of "His rallies"? Or, is this some propaganda
      you swallowed from your liberal leaning blog sites?

    56. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed the most important point, while hurling childish insults... Donald Trump is not the disease. He is a symptom. He's not the dangerous one, it's his legion of gullible, criminally stupid supporters who are just following the person who is offering to lead them where they want to go who pose the clear and present danger to civilized society.

      The solution is education, though some authorities on the subject will dispute this, such as Ron White, modern American philosopher, when he famously stated, "You can't fix stupid."

      That all said, it would be better if they instead of declaring total war, just kept a running list, publicly available, of Donald Trump supporters, and attendees of his "rallies". That way, when you next need to hire someone for something, you can check that name against the list of bigots and angry sub-morons who supported him, and exclude them from being asked to do anything important, since they've demonstrated a clear lack of critical thinking skills, an inability to evaluate spoken and written statements for truth or falsehood, etc. They simply can't be trusted or counted upon.

      "I'm sorry, Mr. Jones, we cannot offer you employment at this time, as you once indicated you were considering supporting Donald Trump, and we simply can't trust you with the responsibility of mopping our kitchen floors. There's no telling what such an angry, stupid, bitter, asshole with a raging inferiority complex might do if we were to make the mistake of hiring you."

      I wonder though, if you sampled the blood and urine of Donald Trump supporters, would you find elevated levels of toxic heavy metals such as lead, mercury, or other neurotoxic elements or compounds? I bet you would. Or brain-eating parasites? Or something else, like... damage from juvenile alcohol abuse? Sexually transmitted and mind-altering diseases... like, syphilis? Perhaps.

    57. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Solandri · · Score: 3, Informative

      I suspect that's his strategy. Despite the media portraying him as a looney out in right field, Trump is actually the most moderate candidate still left in the race. Even you point out he advocates liberal NE policies. His stance on core issues aligns pretty closely with the American mainstream.

      How does a moderate candidate get past the primaries to run for President in our polarized two-party system? By highlighting his few extremist views to appeal to extremists in one party during the primaries to win the nomination, then coming back to center in the general election to win over the mainstream.

    58. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I blame Political correctness and SJWs for the rise in trump.

      You seem to like him. Go vote for him, then!

    59. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Bernie, a career politician
      > anti-establishment
      Pick one.

    60. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by davester666 · · Score: 1

      No. When things go wrong, it is ALWAYS the other guys fault. And things are going very very wrong.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    61. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 2

      This is properly insightful and fact-based analysis. I would add a third component to Trump's rise: the development of an echo chamber on the right that prefers compelling stories to truthful stories. From Swift Boats onwards. While this phenomenon has always been around, the volume (in both senses) has increased dramatically, especially in the past eight years. By the time Trump came onstage, the audience was well and truly warmed up.

      It's all grotesque.

    62. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      How are the Democrats no better?

      I think this "a plague on both your houses" rhetoric is just that -- rhetoric, without basis in facts.

      For sure, the Dems have behaved badly many times. But their sins have remained forgivable. They haven't gone to Washington with the express purpose of shitting in the bed and then complaining about the stink.

    63. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      Let's hear your list of solutions, then! Why don't you set out what you'd do differently? Some specifics would be nice.

    64. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Boronx · · Score: 1

      They're all crooked as the day is long except possibly Sanders, and who knows with him. Trump may not be beholden to the same moneyed assholes that the rest of the candidates are, but he never closed an honest deal in his life.

    65. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Boronx · · Score: 1

      How about "the Iraq war was a bad idea". He was the first major candidate for either party to take that position, and therefore the first to make any sense WRT the Iraq war. It's interesting how Trump hasn't been hurt too much by taking the same position. Republican voters aren't as stupid as the Bushies think they are.

    66. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I also don't know why the Dems are so against him. Between Cruz and Trump, Trump has _far_ more liberal policies/tendencies. He'd actually raise taxes if they pushed for it.

      Perhaps because they are morally outraged by the idea of a politician rising to power on the back of policies last enacted by Nazis: bans on a religious group entering the country, a national register for a religious group, etc? I do know that my grandma, if she were still alive, would slap me in the face for forgetting our family's history and her murdered aunts, uncles and cousins, if I so much as contemplated voicing even mild support for Trump. And she'd be right to do so.

      Whether he believes in these policies or sentiments is besides the point. He is creating a safe space for these ideas to creep back into political life, and that is a pernicious legacy that will cause great harm irrespective of whether he is elected or not.

    67. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Boronx · · Score: 1

      You are right to some extent, but two things about Trump that appeal to a wider audience. He's against the Iraq War and job sucking trade treaties. There are huge constituencies for these positions. Neither party caters to them. These voters may overlook his racism, violence, insanity.

    68. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      would be the University of Missouri, and the 20% loss of first year students..... The email from the temporary dean even went as far as saying that "anyone who'd applied would be accepted as a student."

      wow

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    69. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, don't mistake "beholden to no one" with "cares about you"

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    70. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Boronx · · Score: 1

      OTOH, if a true fascist is rising in power, what means should be used to stop him?

    71. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree, it is perfectly rational to shut down some political speech. You may not like it, but people in general get their ideas through repetition. For most people (and that's what counts in a democracy) the more they hear a particular point of view repeated, the more they think it's a legitimate point of view and possibly attractive to them. Conversely, most people don't generally have an opinion on every political question. They make up their mind only when needed, based on a sampling of viewpoints that they are exposed to.

      That is why censorship of extreme ideas makes sense. From a statistical point of view, if an political idea is rare, it may as well not exist because most people won't know about it, and won't want to vote for it.

    72. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Boronx · · Score: 1

      Hillary needs to forget the Obama strategy. Obama swung as far right as he could in the general, because he knew neither McCain nor Romney would dare to move left of him. Trump will jump to the left of the Hillary in an instant if he thought it would help him. He already has on more than one issue.

    73. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by TM22721 · · Score: 0

      Trump is the long anticipated revolution.

      Burn the mutha down.

    74. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by jandersen · · Score: 1

      I see the same exact thing happening again.

      People want change and they love an underdog.

      The more people tell them they are wrong, the more it cements their position.

      What worries me is the similarities to situations we have seen before, like in Italy in the 1920es or Germany shortly after - people feel squeezed, they call for a strong leader, up pops somebody who 'speaks tough', and condones the violent behaviour of his followers. And the moderate majority didn't stand up to them, either because they were cowed or complacent. I'm not saying - yet - that Trump is a fascist of the same shape and size as Mussolini or Hitler; but the same dynamics are at works once again. It is potentially a very dangerous time for America - and the world.

    75. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not their fault all the other candidates have been sissified by the SJWs.

    76. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I also don't know why the Dems are so against him
      They are against him because they are scared to shit they will lose the election.
      Not because of any policy he has.
      Other than the immigration thing maybe.

    77. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of Democrat voters that are going to vote for Trump.

    78. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this? His opponents are so lame that he looks good by comparison.

      As one of the groups Trumps supposed to be "Racist" against, I'm more disgusted by those liberals who feel the need to speak for me.

    79. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      Just from a rational point of view, shutting down political speech is never a good thing, no matter what that speech is. Because if they can do it to one candidate, it can be done to others.

      Indeed. A fascist approach does not become any better because some "good" guys use it or because the goal is "noble".

      What about opening up instead of shutting down?

      I'm very curious about the emails of both Trump and Clinton.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    80. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before running as a republican he was a democrat.

    81. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      ~25% of this country is not "old white people and white supremacists".

      It is in the eyes of the Democrats. MSNBC isnt lying about their demographic.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    82. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he's manipulating all that Faux news propaganda to his advantage

      One thing that can be said for Trump is that he absolutely knows how to play the media. This isn't just FOX News. His practically daily calls with shows like The Today Show (NBC, alleged liberal bias) have a lot of sway with people who wouldn't particularly declare themselves Republican. They see somebody who doesn't shy away from taking questions and answering them (even if the answers are non-answers/evasive) and without a spokesperson filter (thus the flip floppering; but that just means that on Monday he gets the people who like the flip and on Tuesday he gets the people who like the flop, and not two people that are both angry at the flop/flip respectively), and they like it. There's no daily calls with Clinton, Rubio, Sanders, etc. and at this point, the networks wouldn't even want any; Trump sells and if in the process that means they just make him more and more popular, that's not the media's problem.

    83. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do they teach grammar at this University of Missouri?

    84. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is never too late for remedial education.

    85. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If one read Obama's books, (no, I don't mean 'books' - financial ledgers, I mean his part-biography, part-policy, publications - books ! ) there was no else that a person with a pulse could consider.

      If you think Trump or Bernie are throwing out common-sense Molotovs, read Obama (and if you are really a masochist for honest analysis, go back to Jimmy Carter's 1976 campaign - these new 'tough guys' are total wimps wimps compared to Carter's plan to overthrow the American Oligarchy)

    86. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      The ONLY way things will ever have a chance of changing is if you quit voting for the Status Quo.
      ( I believe Slashdot, as a whole, is a very vocal supporter of this concept )

      However, it seems that voting against the Status Quo is only acceptable as long as you vote for the
      local favorite candidate. :| Vote for anyone else and you must be an idiot or something. As evidenced
      by the sheer amount of Trump bashing that goes on in here.

      Personally, I'll give him his chance to prove everyone wrong. I don't want someone who is politically correct.
      I want someone who tells you what they think and acts the same way. I'm tired of the two-faced kowtowing
      mindset that our leadership seems to embrace.

      Hillary is THE poster child for the same old shit camp. Sanders has some decent ideas but he also wants to
      tax the hell out of everyone to pay for them. Better idea there Bernie, quit playing World Police and cut the
      defense budget in HALF ( to start ) and you should have more than enough to pay for your little projects.

      I'm sorry, but I cannot vote for someone who wants to take even more money from me without first looking at
      how wasteful their spending already is. No matter how grand his ideas may be.

      Since Hillary ( pathological liar, suspected criminal, entitlement attitude ) is absolutely out of the question, I simply
      think Trump is the best choice of the current candidate field. My opinion of course, yours will likely vary and that
      is how it's supposed to work.

      None of the existing power structure wants Trump to win because they know he's not going to play ball according to
      their rules. You know the saying: " The enemy of my enemy is my friend. "

      I AM TIRED of the same old bullshit, year after year, that we get in our elected leadership. Obama was supposed
      to be THE CHOSEN ONE who finally broke the mold and young voters got a good taste of how politics truly works in
      this country. Hopefully, they remember how sour that taste is when they vote in the future.

      I can only hope that no matter who wins in the end, something changes for the better in this Country. It has to. I
      don't know how much longer we will survive our current rate of decent to the bottom.

    87. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      If Trump fails too, who knows who they'll vote for next time.

      probably independence, or at least some states might start to consider that route. it only takes a couple of politicians to think "I could be king" and a heap of disaffected citizens to think "can't get any worse" to kick the ball rolling,

    88. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      The "do nothing's" and "hardliners" are popular enough with their constituents to keep getting reelected. In the House, redrawing districts to be competitive might help but that would require the Democrats actually caring about winning state legislature elections.

    89. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's working because he's tapped into two demographics Angry at Obama. Old white people who watch Fox News and think Obama is the second coming of Satan, and white supremacists. He's been endorsed by nearly every white supremacist political party. His rallies are FULL of white supremacist supporters. People yelling the N word and other racial slanders.

      You are vastly understating his popularity. He's polling near 50% with Republicans, across almost _all_ demographics and _all_ states. ~25% of this country is not "old white people and white supremacists".

      He's projecting his own bias onto people who disagree with him on issues. Everyone who disagrees with rahvin112 is an "old white supremacist" in his eyes. And that's really all there is to many folks on both sides. Disagreement with their view of the world labels you as some form of "-ist". It's childish and tiresome, eventually when you encounter people like this, the best thing to do is to veer the conversation towards something else and wait for the next bright shiny object in the room that draws their attention elsewhere.

    90. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " I also don't know why the Dems are so against him."

      The character limit on slashdot is too small for me to adequately discuss that topic. But I can summarize:

      Cruz is Tea Party whackjob.
      Rubio is a pretty boy puppet.
      Trump is the only serious candidate in my 47 years of living that could actually a) turn the USA into an authoritarian fascist state, b) start a third global war c) start the second American Civil War.

      I would never in a million years vote for any one of those morons. But if one of them gets elected, I hope its the whackjob or the puppet. At least all they will do is rip off the middle class some more. Trump will do that plus destroy all remaining credibility of the USA in the world, most likely plummet us into war (civil or global) and shred what remaining civil liberties are left out there (unless you are white and wear a Trump armband and actively help round up the 'uncooperatives')

    91. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best response to unpopular speech isn't to shut it down. It's to shine a light on it exposing it for all to see and pass their own judgement.

    92. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i dont like trump, ive never liked trump

      but all the hate on trump is making me like him so i stand by my statement

      ~ganjadude

    93. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      no he wasnt. Ron Paul was saying as much from day one. here is where you say he wasnt a major candidate but neither was obama until he was

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    94. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People believe that Trump's arrogance and ego will not let him capitulate to the shadow government. They know the others will do as they are told by the banksters.

    95. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      you do know the nazis came into power using the tactics bernie supporters used in chicago right???

      did you also know that a person who actually worked with the nazis is funding them (george soros through moveon.org) but yes, lets compare trump to nazis, not the ones actually using nazi tactics being funded by a nazi

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    96. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much the entire political establishment (left and right) have disenfranchised a number of supporters and they're looking elsewhere. For most people that means going full on fringe and that'll either lead you to Trump or Bernie. Stop acting like this is a problem that fell from the sky. Both major parties have shown disregard with the voice of the people on issues and continue to push an agenda lead by a select few. People are sick of it and as the Democrats continue to sabotage Bernie's bid they're bolstering Trump by proxy. I don't see it going any other way in 2016 but hopefully it'll send a message and both sides will start to give to the people instead of the taking that they've been doing for decades but I doubt it.

      Do you want to start the process? Write to your leaders and let them know that trampling our rights isn't a way to warm our hearts, for starters. Why do you think the libertarians have gotten such a boost this year? People are sick of it. Stop trying to cage us in with laws. It isn't working.

    97. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      You do realize that the establishment, middle-of-the-road, country-club, wall street, and Chamber of Commerce types hate Trump.

      You do realize that social conservatives are not happy with a pro-abortion, pro-planned parenthood, pro-gay marriage guy. So these "extreme" conservatives hate him.

      You do realize that a lot of people who have NEVER voted before are voting for him and registered to vote because of him.

      You do realize that many Democrats have voted for him - either because they support him or strategically gaming the system.

      And you do realize don't you that Trump is only getting 35% of the Republican vote. (And a far, far less percentage of those who considered themselves Republican one year ago.)

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    98. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Swift Boat wasn't true?

      Didn't Kerry say"just ask those who served with me?" And then 22 of the 23 said they disagreed and publicly came out for Bush?

      What about this was untruthful?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    99. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      obama sold fear as well (to anyone who questioned his hope and change)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    100. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      i see more comparisons to the nazis coming from the liberal wing, supported by former nazi george soros through move on .org. i mean this man WAS a nazi...and hes funding these near riots at trump events his buddy hitler would be proud of him

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    101. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Project much?

      Stop making assumptions are look at his base. His base are not those who have voted in previous elections.

      Social conservatives don't him because he is pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage.

      And main stream republicans despise him. (Including the hated Koch Brothers).

      His support is from the disaffected labor and working class who had been voting Democrat but started not voting as the Democrats became more and more progressive (and less and less of a labor party).

      Example (in case the above statement is not clear): A labor party would be for the Keystone Pipeline. A progressive part (more in tune with environmentalists) would be against the pipeline.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    102. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      Swift Boat wasn't true.

      HTH!

    103. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      So what are the facts?

      Did Kerry proclaim himself to be a war hero with 3 purple hearts proving his point. (It was a little shaky - but he wouldn't have been the first politically ambitious man to have gone to war to give himself stature. Fine).

      Then what does he do he says "ask the people I served with. They will tell you." And they did. 22 out of 23 (AFAIR) said they did not support him.

      So - where do the above statements go wrong? If they aren't wrong then why pretend that Swift Boating means to falsely accuse/to smear an opponent?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    104. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Isn't the RNC considering giving the nomination to one of the other candidates if Trump "wins" the popular vote?

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    105. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      You should hang your head in shame for what you have said about Soros. He was 13 when the Nazis occupied his homeland, Hungary. Thirteen, and a Jewish boy. And you think he "worked with the Nazis".

      Have you no sense of decency? Can you not tell the difference between good and evil, between the truth and a lie? The moral contortions required to convince yourself that he wasn't actually thirteen, or that a small boy is morally culpable in the face of tyranny that killed at least two thirds of all Hungarian Jews... words fail me. Thinking you have won an argument on the internet in support of Trump may make you happy, but the stain on your soul that will be left by a lie such as this will be indelible. Rather than respond to me, take a step back and think about what you are doing. Is this truly the person you want to be? When you are 80, and you think back to this moment when you accused a Holocaust survivor of being complicit with his Nazi oppressors, will that be a moment you can live with?

      As for "actual Nazi tactics", my relatives were put on actual Nazi registers of Jews and faced actual Nazi travel bans on Jews and suffered actual Nazi violence and some were killed in actual Nazi concentration camps. So I'm aware of what an invocation of the Nazis means. To me, it means something in my guts: visceral emotion. To you, based on your posts, it means one-upmanship and winning arguments.

    106. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      As they say of jazz, if you have to ask...

      Seriously, I'm well aware that there are a group who believe that they continue to tell truth to power on Swift Boats, while everyone else thinks it is a venal and disgusting lie. That was the point of my first post. The fact that you are part of the group: bully for you. The fact that you will think you've won because I'm not going to engage in an inordinately lengthy discussion of all sorts of intricacies with you, in the same way I just CBA to engage with climate change deniers or anti-vaxxers or creationists or flat earthers or various others, well, bully twice for you. Enjoy your feeling of victory. Life is too short to waste time arguing this kind of tripe.

    107. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      Facts are facts.

      Refusal to continue to discuss a position after bringing up facts and having these facts / propositions ignored is one thing.

      Refusing to mention any facts; and more than that refusing to dispute a stated fact / proposition is another.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    108. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      his own words "it was the happiest time of my life"

      you wanna try again???

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    109. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Based upon "Anonymous" past actions, with a huge focus on defending and promoting freedom of speech

      I've never really seen that out of Anonymous. Most of their actions seem aimed at shutting people up. Just name any one of their campaigns and I'll tell you who they're trying to silence. In the case of Trump, it's pretty obvious.

    110. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      if soros has any integrity he would not be using the tactics that hitler used to come to power to try and get bernie (or hillary by making bernie supporters look bad) elected

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    111. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love Trump too. He always says the stuff I'm thinking.

      -- Anonymous White Supremacist who likes to shove little black girls at Trump rallies

    112. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ultranova · · Score: 1

      he's coming over to the UK to tell us to stay in the European Union, such is his love of huge centralized bureaucracies

      Or maybe he's read history and knows that Europe without EU makes Middle-East look peaceful, as well as provide more opportunities for Russian superpower comeback.

      Also, what would you prefer to bureaucracy: anarchy or arbitrary tyranny? Rule of law works better than either of those, even if it requires more manpower, and means you can't always have your way.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    113. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by DrJimbo · · Score: 1

      Refusing to mention any facts; and more than that refusing to dispute a stated fact / proposition is another.

      LMGTFY

      If the Wikipedia and all of the articles it references, and common knowledge are all wrong (or part of a giant "left-wing" (ha ha)) conspiracy then the onus is on you to provide facts that prove/show this. The mountains of evidence that are only are simple Google search away are not proof positive but your demand that someone else do this simple Google search for you is ridiculous.

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
    114. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by jangstrom · · Score: 1

      ... I blame Political correctness and SJWs for the rise in trump. its the rubber band effect. the side of political correctness has pushed too far, now its bouncing back in the opposite direction where people are starting to relate to trump due to what some see as non political correct and what others call hate speech. It was bound to happen

      I disagree with your explanation of the ideological reasons behind Trump's massive popularity. The opposite of "we have a problem with illegal immigrants" is not "all of those illegal immigrants are racists and we should build a wall to make them stay out". You can agree with the former without resorting to the viciousness of the latter.

    115. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      I'm old enough to remember this. The fact I stated stand. Respond to them. The Swift Water group later expanded their scope and tried to make a name for themselves.

      That is not the point. I didn't bring up everything the group published a year and two years after they responded to John Kerry's claim.

      Q1: Did Kerry make claims about his war service.
      Q2: Did Kerry say (something along the line of) "ask the people I served with"
      Q3 Did 22 out of 23 (or there about) disagree with Kerry?

      These are the essential points. The fact that members of the group months and years later tried to capitalize on their fame is a separate and distinct issue.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    116. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EVERYTIME some group has "declared war", insulted, demeaned, became "outraged", etc. about Trump or supporters, his popularity and support grew.

      The actions of this immature group of mother's basement dwelling mouth breathers will only cement their reputations as such and make more Trump supporters.

      Just from a rational point of view, shutting down political speech is never a good thing, no matter what that speech is. Because if they can do it to one candidate, it can be done to others.

      Germane to the discussion of Trump you all may be interested in the list of companies in the US shipping jobs overseas.

      http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/popups/exporting.america/frameset.exclude.html

      And here is a list of some of the Americans killed by illegal aliens

      http://www.ojjpac.org/memorial.asp

    117. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's typical of the Marxist/leftist/anarcho creedo that speech they don't like is speech no one should express and they will do anything to suppress it. The left does not care about freedoms of speech and expression as long as they are the only ones doing it and yet it is the right that is constantly blamed for being oppressors. It's a fucking hypocritical world we live in.

    118. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by rochrist · · Score: 1

      Of course you do. Bless your heart.

    119. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      So you are not only vile; you are stupid too. In this clip, Soros describes himself as 14 years old. There is a witless and evil assertion, in the form of some written text that, "Soros was in charge of confiscating the land of the Jews of Hungary". And your thought on watching this is that it is true. It doesn't occur to you that there are no conceivable circumstances in which the Nazis looked at a 14 year old boy and said, "let's put him in charge of confiscating the land of the Jews of Hungary". Nor that he says nothing -- not a single thing -- in that entire clip which could substantiate such a ridiculous and vile calumny.

      If ever proof were needed that you are genuinely very very stupid, you have provided it in spades here.

      Even bigoted idiots like Coulter don't claim Soros *ran* land confiscations for the Nazis in Hungary. (And the pathetic claim they actually did make stands not the slightest bit of scrutiny or critical thought.)

      Your stupidity, your vile behaviour, your willingness to repeat terrible lies about your enemies -- these are examples of the behaviours my grandma described to me when she talked about Vienna in the early 30s. But you'll stick by your strongman, I know. I'm trying to get you to think about a previous aftermath, and begin a process of admission of wrongdoing. I realise it's futile, but the words "you are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to desist from it" hang heavy on me at the moment. Stop lying to yourself, to me, to others, about Soros, about Trump, about Sanders, about the Nazis. Start listening to those whose personal histories actually matter in this.

      A previous aftermath: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    120. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      obama wasn't an upset. he was hand-selected and groomed by democratic leadership for his current job from the moment he won his senate seat.... his state senate seat.

    121. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you actually read some history? This Trump = Hilter bullshit is (1) wrong and (2) has been used on ever Republican in the last 20 years. No wonder people think you're idiots.

    122. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama middle class! Are you kidding, do you know which high school he went to? Have you seen his house in Chicago?

    123. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama? Middle class? What the hell? Look at his upbringing and schools. He's a rich kid with a degree of privilege that most people don't dream of. Obama has been a socialist and statist from day one. Just another rube who believes a member of the Chicago machine cares...

    124. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 1

      He's tapped into a third demographic, a fact which the Democrats ignore at their peril: Organized labor is very sympathetic to his attacks on the various international trade agreements.

    125. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Change" isn't the issue. Obama offered his change and I got it all right...in the form of super high healthcare and rest of the world laughing at us since he's so inept. The big difference is...Trump know's his a$$hole from a hole in the ground, and Obama doesn't.

    126. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm...we register people all the time for many things under both democraps and republicans (gun registries, sex offense list (which Hitler had too btw)). Don't think every Muslim isn't already on a watchlist. If they weren't we'd have a lot more terror attacks. He's saying what has already been done or is happening. Obama and Shillary will just lie to everyone about it, but its already happening.

    127. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      i didnt even watch it, i only listened to it. i wanted to hear his own words, and i did

      so do whatever helps you sleep at night, but like it or not, this man is using nazi tactics there is no denying that fact

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    128. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by werepants · · Score: 1

      the right that prefers compelling stories to truthful stories.

      To be fair (and I say this as someone who strongly dislikes the right) this describes the vast majority of the electorate. How closely do you scrutinize articles that agree with your own bias? It's rare to find someone who challenges their own beliefs regularly, and the way to really be better than the Trump supporters isn't by poking holes in right-wing ideology: it's being committed to introspection and skepticism of our own beliefs, so that we can't be taken in by our own kind of Trump.

      "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

    129. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like groups like anonymous are for "free speech" as long as it is theirs. They shut down everyone else.

    130. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Mizzou accepted, more or less, everyone who applied 30+ years ago when I went there.

      Of course they lose a large % of freshman. The Engineering school's freshman class is typically a majority of the engineering school at the start of the year, granting many of those transfer to easier programs (first CS than business) and succeed.

      There have always (living memory anyhow) been a large % of unprepared and unqualified students at most American state colleges. Many stay for years by never taking any difficult courses. A few even graduate, none with degrees worth getting.

      Even 30 years ago the 'loony left' ran the humanities departments. The 'get me some muscle' bitch would have fit right in, even then.

      Don't get me started about the J-school. Pure indoctrination, leaving the graduates unequipped to detect the most transparent BS.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    131. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, Hillary or Bernie best embodies all your political hardons? Hell no they dont, they just the last ones standing.
      At least the ucking conservatives are done with Bush.
      And if you think liberals are more personally responsible in anything, then you might just be a moron.

    132. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You do realize many of the 'core republicans' are voting for Sanders for exactly the same reasons democrats are voting for Trump?

      The real question is how many are actually changing sides and how many are gaming the nomination process.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    133. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Wikipedia is useless for political subjects. Duh.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    134. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      In the states that democrats control, they do nothing remotely like 'redrawing districts to be competitive'.

      But don't let facts get in the way of a rant.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    135. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You think the Sunni/Shia war restarted itself?

      The Iraq war was a brilliant move. Create a power vacuum and wait for the diaper heads to do what they do.

      Of course they couldn't talk about the real reasons, or it wouldn't have worked.

      Now all we have to do is maintain the stalemate until alternative energy makes oil much less relevant. Things are going just as planned.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    136. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      Are you trying to claim you read the words without any context? Without knowing of the claim made that he had somehow been involved in collaborating with the Nazis? If not, what is the point of your claim? You read the words, linked them back to the claim, and condemned a man for his recollections of his actions as a 14 year old Jew hiding from Nazis, despite those recollections making no mention whatsoever of anything even vaguely worthy of condemnation.

      You who would condemn the oppressed. You have stained your soul. You have chosen the path of injustice and it will haunt you all the days of your life.

    137. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      That happened in 2008 when Rush said to vote for Hillary to cause confusion. I really don't think it's happening this year. Dem turnout is really low. And establishment Reps are voting for anyone but Trump. I don't think many would be voting for Sanders as opposed to Rubio, Kasich or whoever they think is their best shot at stopping Trump and Cruz.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    138. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Obama was clearly a red diaper baby.

      But many of those people end up with really clear eyes regarding leftists. David Horowitz it a prime example.

      I don't think Obama believes any of the Marxist BS. He just wants/wanted the power.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    139. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      I never claimed they were saints - no one in government is. Considering that Republicans control vastly more state legislatures than the Democrats (numbers here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...), clearly the problem is likely more prevalent on their side. I come from a state with a 60-40 vote split (R-D) in national elections with a 10-3 representative split (R-D). I have no doubt the Dems do it the same way in their states (mine was as a kid but I didn't care about politics as a kid) - and now that I've moved to one as an adult, I get to see it in action.

      I think a more balanced legislature would lend itself to better compromise. Maybe even a push to take the legislature out of district drawing like a few states already do (Alaska, Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana and Washington). Though I don't know all their processes, they could be shit too.

    140. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The concentration of wealth into fewer and fewer hands is making things rough for the working class.

      Yes this is the real problem right now with life in the US.

      If this simple analysis is correct then the problem is not Trump. There are always Trumps around.

      Actually it is Trump or him and his type. Trump is one of the 1% that is sucking the life out of our country. You are right there will always be Trumps there will always be liars and thieves but should we promote these types to greatness or tar and feather them? Seems the people promote the exact people who are draining us dry.

      I really didn't think I lived in a country were people are so stupid they will put the noose around their own necks and smile about it.

    141. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      ...... i dont believe in hocus pokus but thanks?

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    142. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by DrJimbo · · Score: 1

      Wikipedia is useless for political subjects. Duh.

      I recommended a Google search. Is that useless too? I also referred to the sources referenced by the Wikipedia article. Are those useless too? Is the entire Internet useless?

      I agree that, as with any encyclopedia, the Wikipedia should not be used as the last word on almost any topic which is why I didn't suggest it as such. It is a good starting place, which makes it far from useless. The information GLMDesigns demands is readily available. It is readily available from sources besides just the Wikipedia. Your comment is wrong. Even if it were right it would be irrelevant since I recommended other on-line sources in addition to the Wikipedia.

      Since the overwhelming evidence from a large variety of sources confirms that the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth was a vicious smear campaign that used widely publicized and then discredited claims, the onus is on GLMDesigns to provide proof that those discredited claims are true. Simply repeating the discredited claims does not make them more credible. If GLMDesigns believes that the Internet is useless as a tool for gathering information about this topic then I can understand why they are stuck with their own wildly incorrect personal opinions and are confused about what the truth is.

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
    143. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      1. "Hilter"; "ever"; "you're". I'm not sure you're quite clear on what idiocy looks like, but you do an excellent job of demonstrating it.
      2. "Use on ever [sic] Republican in the last 20 years". Riiiiight. Show me just one of the plethora of quotes comparing Kasich to Hitler that must, apparently, exist.

    144. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      California's is certainly shit. No change in outcome. The Ds just exert control of naming the 'independent' boards that draw the lines rather than the lines themselves.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    145. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It's happening on both sides in a big way this year. We might see two un-electables against each other.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    146. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by shilly · · Score: 1

      It must be so frustrating to be as stupid as you appear to be.

      Hocus pocus is not required for this to haunt you. You will either resile from this position at some future point, or you will not. If you don't, your attitudes and behaviour will seep out from your actions like a stench, and you will be shunned. Not by everyone, and not in a way that you'd notice (at least not without becoming a lot smarter), because relatively few people enjoy a fight, but opportunities will fall away from you. Your life will be the poorer for your behaviour. Of course, because you're stupid and will therefore likely be oblivious to what is happening, you'll be able to protect your self-conception. I'm sure that's important to you. Certainly -- demonstrably -- more important than the truth.

      If by some wild chance you do resile, well, you're going to end up reflecting on your own behaviour, and looking yourself in the mirror, and you will by definition not like what you see (else why resile?) and you are going to have to face the fact that you libelled a Holocaust survivor and downplayed fascistic politics in your own country while falsely accusing others of the same thing. That will be painful.

      So, haunted either way, and no deity involved.

    147. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides it's just another example of the fascist left in the USA. Or maybe I should say 'Stalinist'?

    148. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's what REPUBLICANS mean.

      We conservatives DO understand personal responsibility. But since the Republican and Democrat parties are really exactly the same, regressive, evil people, who merely want to destroy the country, you cannot count Republican==conservative.

    149. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean rather like Obama did? And what did it get?
      Vastly higher taxes
      A continuing decline in the economy
      The Trans Pacific Partnership.

    150. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the election is and was engineered.

      The world is moving away from using the USD as the primary reserve currency and means of global trade. It is transitioning to something similar to Keynes' Bancor that was proposed at the first UN conference in 1944, and what the International Monetary Fund Special Drawing Rights were intended to be after the US unilaterally abandoned the 1944 agreement (aka Bretton Woods).

      The era of free floating exchange rates is coming to an end. This has many important consequences, some good, some bad. The ending of USD hegemony is good for American workers as our industry was gutted because foreign imports were cheaper. That will no longer be the case. It's bad for Wall Street, which primarily subsists by taking a cut of the vast majority of global trade. But, it's good for the very upper echelons of globalism as it makes international investment easier to manage by removing the political risk of variable exchange rates.

      The way you fix exchange rates is by limiting how much money each of the world's nations can create. The supply of money must grow along with the population, otherwise money becomes artificially scarce and those who have money get rich and those who don't get poor.

      For this reason, under a fixed exchange rate system, immigration must end, or at least it must be regulated into the global currency framework - i.e. Country X has to say they want to increase their population by Y% with a commensurate increase in their money supply of Z%, and this would have to be approved by the appropriate UN body.

      Obama was here to use identity politics to distract America from the financial crisis. It's the racists, sexists, and homophobes who are the problem, not the globalist bankers.

      Now Trump is here to implement the final plan, and misdirect populist sentiment to globalist aims.

      Seriously - is Trump even running advertisements? His website is very devoid of details.

      The media has created him, and the media is controlled by a few companies that serve the globalist regime.

    151. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Do they teach grammar at this University of Missouri?

      Dunno, why don't you go find out and let us know. For some of us, english isn't our first language. But it probably it is like the a-typical know-it-all american such as yourself.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    152. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are vastly understating his popularity. He's polling near 50% with Republicans, across almost _all_ demographics and _all_ states. ~25% of this country is not "old white people and white supremacists".

      The OP was using a little hyperbole on the white supremacists bit but 25% of this country (more, really) are absolutely old white people and racists. That's the problem. A bunch of people were closeted racists and Trump is giving them a voice and making it OK to say the things they were already thinking. Racism doesn't always manifest itself directly because until recently society told people they were wrong to think those things but just looking at peoples actions it's obvious. Do you honestly think all the bullshit that was and still is going around about Obama would have happened with a white president? The birth certificate garbage, for example?

      It is vitally important that the very small slice intelligent people out there realize that vast majority of people are horrible, horrible creatures who will never change. Best we can hope for is to force civility out of them, try to instill better values in their children and wait for them to die.

    153. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The media doesn't do shit. Trump does that himself, in every aspect of what he does. He lies, rants, accuses, promises and they lies some more. He had no stance on any issues because nothing he talks about is even sane, let alone feasible. I guess if by media you mean any content or information ever produced or released by Trump or his team then yes, the media is painting him as a looney.

      I can't imagine that his style of extremist pandering is going to get him the mainstream but I'm pretty confident we'll get the chance to see.

    154. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      fuck them. I was considering voting for trump because it wouldn't mean much, and i kinda just want to see what happens if he wins. Now i'm definitely going to vote for him because fuck them.

      they just made this election about the nature of our democracy for me.

      holy shit. paraphrasing hitchens 'who the fuck do they think they are? to decide for me who and what i can hear?'

      fuck them.

    155. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel has decided to annexate Palestinian territories thus I would say they are about 50% arab muslim lol

    156. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and place term limits on House and Senate members.

    157. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by barrygrommit · · Score: 1

      Indeed. People need to concentrate on Congressional races if we want to see any real change. We need to vote out the "do nothing's" and the "hardliners" and vote in some players who understand the importance of compromise. Then as we vote in these anti-establishment candidates to the Presidency, they might actually have a slim chance of delivering.

      I agree with your point. So, please vote out the Senators and Representatives in YOUR state. Take out your Governor, too.
      I will vote to keep my state's incumbents in office.
      That way, my reps will have seniority and command the important committees.

      What, wait? You want to keep your reps? Oh no...you go first.

    158. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the Democrats didn't want to lose the election they would have given Hilary the boot. The only way Trump can win in the general election is face off with someone as unpopular as Hilary. If he had to face off with Bernie Sanders (or just about any Democrat that's not Obama or Anthony Wiener) he'd get stomped.

    159. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      If that doesn't people what happens when absolute craziness from the regressive left and SJW happen, it should by that point.

      Yeah, the only people who can should be able to get in to university are kids who can sentence good and want to do other stuff good too, much like yourself judging from the presented sentence.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    160. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Perhaps because they are morally outraged by the idea of a politician rising to power on the back of policies last enacted by Nazis"

      Reminds me of the fake TV show in GTA5 called "Impotent Rage", where a hyper-liberal superhero - forever viewing himself atop a high horse of moral progressiveness - cant avoid situation-misjudgments, gross assumptions, and self-induced frenzies, all which culminate in him being entirely ineffective and often hurting the cause he sees himself promoting.

      Silly stuff, right?

    161. Re: Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because they're jews. Israelis. They don't like you.

    162. Re:Morons Just Don't Understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's typical of the left though, free speech is okay aslong as they agree with it.

  3. Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by gweihir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think Anonymous is largely irrelevant and powerless these days and its members know it.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. I hope they all get Allahu akbared.

    2. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean "these days"?

    3. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make Allahu Akbar Again?

    4. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      That I have not really checked whether they ever were different ;-)

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      I think that was the case back when they tried to raise a banner against the Mexican drug cartels a few years back... the nanosecond that shit got real (that is, when one of their Mexican brethren got a few subtle threats in real life, as opposed to online), they backed off and shut down that idea almost instantly.

      It's one thing to wield some semblance of power if the thing you're trying to change is solely online, but once you go after changes off-the-wire, it's a whole different ballgame.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    6. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Ian+A.+Shill · · Score: 1
      This is not to disagree, but I think the value of "anonymous" as a brand, lies in its potential use for any sort of false flag operation.

      Evidence suggests that it is all marketing, all the way down. This site. This story, this thread. And this post. Well, not "evidence" exactly.

      I think Anonymous is largely irrelevant and powerless these days and its members know it.

      --
      For hire.
    7. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Quite. Has Anonymous ever actually achieved any meaningful lasting change? I can't think of anything they have ever done that hasn't gone straight back to normal after the DDoS was switched off, or someone they've doxxed has been off the front pages for more than a few days, got over any embarrassment, and had a chance to change passwords, phone numbers, etc.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    8. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are no "members." That's what people (and the media) continue to fail to understand. There is no "organization." It's just some guy who posted a video filled with claims he can't back up. For fuck's sake, /pol/ is almost entirely pro-Trump.

    9. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      They did seriously hurt the church of scientology. The church easily repaired the damage, but it left their reputation in ruins - not a shred of respect left for them, a laughing-stock. Their recruitment was hurt so badly they had to refocus expansion into the developing world, where people hadn't yet heard of their cultish ways.

      That was many years ago, though.

    10. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Anonymous is largely irrelevant and powerless these days and its members know it.

      You take that back!

    11. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anon is from /b.

    12. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Raenex · · Score: 1

      They did seriously hurt the church of scientology. The church easily repaired the damage, but it left their reputation in ruins - not a shred of respect left for them, a laughing-stock.

      Scientology was already a laughing stock before "Anonymous" took up the cause.

    13. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous doesn't even represent 4chan anymore, and probably hasn't for at least 4-6 years now.

      If you go take a look at almost any board on the site and start talking about *politics (or just visit /pol/) you'll see a LOT of people on 4chan support trump. It's not universal, because 4chan's basically designed to be contrarian and there's never a total consensus of ANYTHING there, but you can tell that a lot of 4chan regulars are either completely indifferent or support trump.

      4chan's also about as anti-sjw as you can find on the internet, and SJW beliefs are another thing this "Anonymous" group openly supports.

      I think the last time Anonymous actually reflected 4chan culture at all was during the chanology protests when they started stepping on scientology's toes. Ever since then they've acted more like a pseudo-government propaganda piece.

      *careful doing this, depending on the board you'll get banned either immediately, or eventually, probably.

    14. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by davydagger · · Score: 1

      Anonymous's only relevance was Fox News dubbing them "Hackers On Steroids"

      They were known for fucking with people on facebook when facebook had shit security and people picked weak passwords and they'd password guesss or reset passwords.

      Then they declared "war" on many people almost all of which are still here. I was supprised Chanology lasted as long as it did.

      The Anonymous phenomena only lasted because of the hype that generated intrest, and more people joining in with Low Orbit Ion Cannons.

      There was also the HB-GARY fiasco. They got lucky, and that a contractor that existed to milk the federal government got pwned because their security practices are terribad.

    15. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4chan is not /b

      /b is not on 4chan anymore.

    16. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Rujiel · · Score: 1

      Why don't you ask Aaron Barr, former CEO of now-defunct HBGary Federal, how the US Chamber of Commerce's Operation Themis is doing thanks to Anon? You know, the Chamber's attempt to fuck with the personal lives of journalists in order to silence them? of course, i doubt anything will meet your careful criteria of "lasting change".

    17. Re:Somebody is fighting irrelevance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well much as I think that SOMEONE should have utterly wiped out the Church of Scientology - and L Ron Hubbard along with it - if those 'Anonymous' creeps can actually harm a candidate for election. in any capacity, they should be hunted down and put where they can do no more harm, ever. And that is a major problem. because the whole justification offered for State intrusion into the private affairs of its citizens is that it is necessary in order to winkle out creeps like those. Interfering in the citizen's right to listen to whom he or she pleases and vote as he or she chooses should be classed as treason, and dealt with accordingly.
      We should not confuse a right to justice and freedom with licence to violently disrupt the campaign of anyone we disagree with. The people who do that ensure that ever increasing powers of interference and arbitrary arrest are introduced. It's a fact that you can't have freedom if you are soft on those who abuse it for their own ends.
      And I'm Janfany the Anonymous Coward, not any old anonymous coward.

  4. Friend or Foe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are they trying to help him get elected?

  5. There's a much easier solution to Trump by neilo_1701D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Vote.

    Taking down servers, defacing websites... all petty vandalism. Vote on election day; the one day when your voice is heard and counts.

    1. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      They aren't allowed out of the basement.

    2. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      And they only really #FeelTheBurn when their mom doesn't let their Hot Pockets cool off before she brings them downstairs.

    3. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by pak9rabid · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought you had to be at least 18 to vote ;).

    4. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vote on election day; the one day when your voice is heard and counts.

      * Unless you live in a non-swing state that doesn't assign its slate of electors in a proportional manner.

      * Unless the vote-taking is done electronically by devices running secret code which produce no voter-verifiable results.

    5. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If trump wins the primary, there will be a record voter turnout to ensure his defeat. The majority of Republicans are dissatisified with Trump. There's no way he clears 25% in November.

    6. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Vote.

      Taking down servers, defacing websites... all petty vandalism. Vote on election day; the one day when your voice is heard and counts.

      Yup... now if Anonymous outed Trump's tax cheating and his various shady deals they might make a difference. Nobody gets to be a big-shot in real estate without dealing with organised crime.

    7. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse yet - it's free publicity that will galvanize his idiot supporters.

      That said:
      What sucks most is that some 6.7 billion of us have to deal with your new "leader of the free world", without ever getting a chance to vote for/against him, despite:
      1) our governments being afraid and heavily influenced by the US and meekly sign on to terrible treaties like the TPP etc.
      2) the US economic policy and it's mismanagement being able to easily collapse the world economy [hint: $19.1 trillion debt is not sustainable] - taking ours down with it.
      and
      3) US policy is constantly dragging us into war in some hellhole corner of the world or another so that lockheed, northrop grumman, and all the rest get rich while members of the "international coalition" die. Similarly, if US bellicose policies do ever result in all out war, neighboring countries will be affected as the world will get dragged along into it whether they had anything to do with the initial conflict or not.

      Get your shit in order, America. You're electing someone for a serious position - not for some sideshow reality act.

      Sincerely,
      A Canadian.

    8. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Taking down servers, defacing websites... all petty vandalism.

      I'd argue it's treason. Sure, Trump shouldn't be president, but in the realm of things that shouldn't be, we also have people taking it upon themselves to decide who should and shouldn't be president and doing whatever they please to ensure that the "wrong" candidates aren't able to campaign.

    9. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Anonymous is too cool and hip to actually go vote.

    10. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous should be targeting Muslim countries and their leaders for their strict barbaric rules and restrictions against woman, gays not Trump.

    11. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Canadians:

      Want to rule the world, or at least show up the USA?

      Manage your own currency (CAD) better than every other nation manages theirs. The USD is simply the least worst managed currency on the planet (since 2000, previously Switzerland).

      Get your shit together Canada.

      Sincerely,
      An American

    12. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority of Republicans are dissatisified with Trump

      Yes, but by and large they'll still vote for him if he gets the nod, because that's how party-line types think. No matter how bad Our Guy is, he's better than Their Guy.

      This is in no way just a Republican thing, of course.

    13. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's probable that not all of them are US citizens over the age of majority.

    14. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're electing someone for a serious position - not for some sideshow reality act.

      Canadians just elected a complete retard so you should probably keep your mouth shut. Every single elected President and all of the current candidates, aside from Bernie, are super geniuses in comparison.

    15. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      Vote? Seriously? And your voice will be heard and count?? Pull the other one!

    16. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      I thought you had to be at least 18 to vote ;).

      Nah with these new electronic voting machines anyone who can hack in can vote.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    17. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh BS.

      If Sanders gets in the for the Dems, Trump will win in a landslide. If Clinton gets in for the Dems, Clinton will win in a landslide.

    18. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

      Vote on election day; the one day when your voice is heard and counts.

      Not available in all states nor voting machines.

    19. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      There was a quote by Krugman, who i listen too since he shows his work and you can retrace his steps. And he gets a lot of things right. Talking about Clinton vs Hillary, he mentions something like "I saw the Republicans attack Hillary back when most Sanders supporters were still eating crayons". Most (not all but most) of Hillary's skeletons are exposed. Even odd ones, like attacking her for Lewinsky - vaguely something like "a real woman would satisfy her man".

      Sanders hasn't been attacked yet. Clinton has run a very calm issue oriented campaign (unlike Sanders soemtimes). meaning, he doesn't have much experience defending himself against anyone yet. Come November it would be Swift Boats for Bernie.

      Besides the dirty play, i don't think an America where 35-40% of people would vote for the zero relevant experience demagogue would vote for Sanders. you may be yuuugeee-ly fanatical, that doesnt mean everyone else is.

    20. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      This. Love Bernie however much you do. Love the fact that he pushed Clinton left. But there's a zero percent chance he'd win the Oval Office.

      This election has been nothing but fear mongering. Republicans would fear Bernie more than Trump.

    21. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      or dead

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    22. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      no one wants hillary or bernie to get SCOTUS nods,.... GOP has to win

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    23. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      cant be worse than what we got now

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    24. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      There are Sanders supporters that don't still eat crayons?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    25. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It's a bad choice on ether side.

      An R win would mean the end of deadlock for 2 years. Which would be very bad.

      A D win means Hillary doesn't go to prison. Which would be very bad.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    26. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Until America gives Ecuador the right to print US dollars, the worlds worst managed currency will remain the Euro.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    27. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, get out there and vote, the fish reading it at the bottom of your local river will thank you for it.

    28. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I hate Trump, and as scary as some of the things he has said on the campaign trail sound. What he has done to the Democratic party is scarier. I've had several friends joke he should more or less be murdered. Seemingly intelligent people have decided part of the way to defeat him is petty vandalism of his signage. Now we've gone to full on cyberattacks to disrupt the campaign of someone who is perfectly qualified to run.

    29. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Now we've gone to full on cyberattacks to disrupt the campaign of someone who is perfectly qualified to run.

      Sure, if by "perfectly qualified," you mean natural citizen over the age of 35.

      I'm not advocating violence or sabotage to keep him out, but I find it depressing that people are willing to vote for a president with NO experience in political office, cuz heck, the Presidency is just an entry-level gummit job, innit?

    30. Re:There's a much easier solution to Trump by vandamme · · Score: 1

      If there's a "None Of The Above" party, they'll get my vote.

      In fact, when I went down the line of candidates, Kasich looked better than everyone else, by default.

  6. #OptRump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Given the choice, I always opt rump. I fully support anonymous on this.

  7. War on Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After the Wars on Drugs, Terror, and Trump, I declare War on Spurious Declarations of "War"!

  8. Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who do these assholes think they are, trying to decide the next President of the United States?

    1. Re:Terrorists by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Establishment Republicans

    2. Re:Terrorists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I, for one, definitely get hammered the most.

  9. Stupid Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever hear of the Streisand Effect? Trump can't even get the support of a majority of Republicans. His campaign will sputter out in the general election if Anonymous simply leaves it alone.

         

  10. Who cares about taking down websites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seriously doubt that will impact his campaign

    1. Re:Who cares about taking down websites by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 1

      But they're not going after ALL of Trump's websites!

      No mention of going after cnn.com, msnbc.com, or any of the network news sites.

  11. Free speech...publicizing contacts by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >> taking his election websites offline

    Were they wearing brown shirts when they "declared war" on a candidate exercising his right to free speech? Have they forgotten why free speech is a good thing in the first place or are we just going straight to "thought police" mode?

    >> contact information of his agent and legal representative

    Um...isn't this information public anyway? What's an "agent" or a "representative" worth if they can't be contacted?

    1. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by neilo_1701D · · Score: 1

      >> taking his election websites offline

      Were they wearing brown shirts when they "declared war" on a candidate exercising his right to free speech? Have they forgotten why free speech is a good thing in the first place or are we just going straight to "thought police" mode?

      No, they wear masks. Guy Fawkes masks, to be precise. I wonder if they appreciate the irony of that position?

    2. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This tendency towards "might makes right" is pretty stupid, even for people claiming to be Anonymous. There are two things that they don't understand. First, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Second, no one really gives a shit what they do anymore.

    3. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Were they wearing brown shirts when they "declared war" on a candidate exercising his right to free speech?

      The irony here, is that the Nazis used disruption to come to power. The Nazis only had a few folks in parliament, but through disruption, they managed to derail the democratic process and grind the operation of government to a halt.

      I bet these "protesters" would be surprised to learn that they are using tried and trusted methods of the Nazis.

      And the most famous "Total War" speech I can think of was the one made by Joseph Goebbels.

      Even Bernie said on the weekend, "You have a right to protest. You do not have a right to disrupt."

      Now if only the people who think they are supporting him would only listen to him.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is declaring war on someone who's running a fascist campaign really the work of brownshirts? I'd think opposing a fascist is anti-fascist.

      Germany and Italy took years to stop their fascist movements. We're putting an end to ours before anyone gets hurt.

    5. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is saying that people have to silently listen to whatever any fool says who walks by?

      The best way to speech you don't like is with more speech... or are you saying that DDoSing a website should be considered protected speech?

    6. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      "I bet these "protesters" would be surprised to learn that they are using tried and trusted methods of the Nazis. "

      On the other hand, it did work.

    7. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Guy Fawkes was incompetent and screwed up the plot, and Anonymous is following in his footsteps. Besides, I thought Anonymous was all about restoring the catholic monarchy in England?

    8. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The problems start when someone says "I'm bored, let's do something for the lulz!" That's what caused Trump to run for president.

    9. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I agree somewhat. However we've sort of twisted ourselves into uncomfortable positions when protesters have to stay within a pre-designated free speech zone. Would we have had an American revolution if the British had told us to keep our protests to one side of the Haymarket and not distrupt the test of Bostonian politics?
      "Please stop, this is not an approved tea dumping site!"

    10. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Competing fascists?

    11. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically, Anonymous is setting fire to the Reichstag and they are too stupid to know it.

    12. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      I dislike protest zones, I think they are illegal, but using a hecklers Veto is about as anti speech as you can get. You have a right to protest, but trying to stop someone else from speaking is a hecklers Veto and it's wrong and it should be illegal.

    13. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by bug1 · · Score: 1

      You may not like the methods Anonymous use to send their message, but they are sending a message.

      DDos should be legal but regulated, like meatspace protests.

    14. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      As the morons in the street attempting to shut down political rallies are using fascistic methods, yes, they are competing with them.

    15. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      And destroyed their country.

    16. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Jahoda · · Score: 2

      Are you *really* comparing the petty threats of Anonymous to deface a webpage, requiring a difficult and time-consuming restore from backup, to the methods used by the Nazi party in the 1920s and 1930s?

    17. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Private rooms and buildings you can keep people out of. But anywhere that is public space should be a free speech zone.

    18. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can guarantee you that we would not have had an American revolution if half of the colonists were SJW-ified anti-gun folks who were more concerned with their image on social media than the future of their nation.

    19. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grinding govt to a halt?
      Like the repub congress?

    20. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, it did work.

      This is the hardest part about disliking Nazis: they were incredibly effective(which benefited everyone except their enemies).

    21. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hate speech is not free speech.

      The Supreme Court (one of the 3 branches of government that I'm sure Donald Trump would love to abolish in his quest to be an emperor) said so.

    22. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      And destroyed their country.

      I take it you haven't been to Germany lately? Or had any experience in Engineering? Or understand the political power balance in Europe right now?

    23. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree somewhat. However we've sort of twisted ourselves into uncomfortable positions when protesters have to stay within a pre-designated free speech zone. Would we have had an American revolution if the British had told us to keep our protests to one side of the Haymarket and not distrupt the test of Bostonian politics?
      "Please stop, this is not an approved tea dumping site!"

      Would we have had a revolution if people were allowed to PUBLICLY organize? Nothing else different... then yah...

    24. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course it worked, that is why they must be stopped. They are neo nazis after all.

    25. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      A situation which developed over two generations later. The people who used the tactics being used by these protesters saw the destruction of their country, not the rebuilding done by those who destroyed it.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    26. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Indeed. What Anonymous is doing is facist. Ironic. I don't support Sanders or Hillary(especially Hillary), but they have every right to conduct their campaign unimpeded.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    27. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is all over. People putting Stalin, Hitler, Marx and Bernie Sanders in one pot. It's like nobody knows what they're talking about and nobody sees the big picture. There's a Storm coming and it scares me.

    28. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not? According to 2/3 of the people here, everything is Nazi like. You start devaluing a word and you don't get to complain when it's used against you. Anything a leftist dislikes has been called "Nazi" for so long, it has now means nothing more than "I dislike it"

    29. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Competently executed DDoS is done through reflection.

      /. effect is not a DDoS. Though it might look like one to the admin.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    30. Re:Free speech...publicizing contacts by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i think the test should be, 'would you still be out there a week from now after the rally closed?' just because it's a public space, doesn't mean that you're free to do whatever the hell you want with it. Presumably, they got a permit from the local government. as you're at you're leisure to do too. And it's still as public as I would want it, because if I or you, or anyone else wanted to, they could get a permit too. But that public space became their public space for 4 hours, because they asked the representative of the public collective real nice for the right to use it for that particular 4 hours.

  12. the vote itself by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As much as I despise DT himself, do they not understand the impact of their self-righteous vigilantism?

    If they'd just *quietly* attacked him, slowly DDOS'ing his sites and businesses, it could have been months before the news got out, all the while doing damage to the campaign.

    But the "look how awesome we are fighting evil" grandstanding is going to resonate in PRECISELY the opposite way with the bulk of US voters who will - I guarantee you - sympathize with him against a 'shadowy internet mafia'.

    The only way they're going to HURT him now is if you're able to hack the voting machines; thankfully Diebold almost certainly installed backdoors for (the Republicans/the Democrats/the Russians/the Illuminati/whatever cabal you prefer to fear) so maybe that's still possible.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:the vote itself by bug1 · · Score: 1

      I dont agree with some of the results of their work. But "quietly" doing something isnt an option for their style of organisation, which is basically an angry mob.

      They need to get the word out and fire people up to have an effect.

      There is talk by "experts" that hating Donald Drumpf only makes him more popular, but thats a pretty lame excuse, it wont scale. All the angry outsiders who are going to support him probably already do.

      Rallying the opposition is a good strategy now.

    2. Re:the vote itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I dont get is attacking him in that way. It only makes him stronger.

      They are attacking a man with no internet shame. Who has pretty much the entire roster of reporters on speed dial. You are feeding him fuel to burn at your expense. You are feeding the narrative of he is the underdog that is being attacked by democrats.

      For some reason I think of the spot in batman where Lucius Fox speaks (with my own variation). You are trying to use shame on a man who has none 'good luck with that'. He already has your tools at his disposal. Do not think he will not use them himself.

    3. Re:the vote itself by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      "The only way they're going to HURT him now is if you're able to hack the voting machines."

      Not quite. Trump has a lot of business and political dealings, and every communications channel is now a target - there's a chance someone might uncover real dirt in one of them. Documents that prove activity so seedy or outright illegal that it could be used against him. Perhaps somewhere there is a record of him actually giving the order to sabotage a rival event, or bribe an official, or an honest assessment of what he thinks of his followers.

    4. Re:the vote itself by Raenex · · Score: 1

      So it's ok to DDoS and hack voting machines for candidates you don't like? Anybody that attempts to do that should go to prison, and anybody advocating for such measures is an authoritarian.

    5. Re:the vote itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the anti-trump propaganda coming out of the media these days is making this exact mistake. People have become extremely disillusioned with the mainstream media on all sides especially with how they attack trump.

      The trouble is, the media keeps lying when they attack him. They misrepresent one thing, misquote another, give air-time to anyone who'll attack trump. 20 years ago - that would've worked.

      But it's the internet age, and people aren't stupid, they have alternative sources of information and they use it. Each time the media lies about Trump or pulls some namecalling crap like the "drumpf" thing, the actual facts spread around not long after through social media or otherwise, and it starts inoculating people to any legitimate concerns raised; now people just shut their ears off. They're not listening to the chicken little/crying wolf media anymore.

      And it shows: No matter what the media does or says about Trump, his polling numbers keep increasing. People are sick of this lugenpresse.

    6. Re:the vote itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An angry mob sifting through his garbage is going to be disappointed to realize that the types of things they could nail Trump on don't usually come with the word "Top Secret" printed in big red ink, his signature/name at the bottom, and a giant "X" like a treasure map. Harassing politicians with skeletons from their past usually requires a level of focus that angry mobs rarely possess.

      Aside from the irony of Anonymous attacking the world's biggest troll, about the only thing this is going to accomplish is providing Rubio/Cruz/the guy who's name starts with a "K" with a smokescreen to leak whatever dirt they've been able to find.

    7. Re:the vote itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anonymous isn't known for their PR acumen... I'd actually say, they behave rather juvenile on such matters.

      Like you said, if they'd had any sense, they would have already started it by now. The slow and neverending DOS to target sights could have been mistaken for general traffic leading up to the election. At least from the laymans position. Only the net admins, and maybe the Secret Service, would have really known what was happening.

    8. Re:the vote itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are right. People have come to understand that the only time you SHUT DOWN speech is when you're afraid of it being true. When a true nut job comes out and speaks, people don't shut them down from talking, they allow them to talk and they laugh. Everytime you stop someone from speaking all you do is solidify their statements as being true to those that believe them and those on the fence. You push people to that side, not away from it.

    9. Re:the vote itself by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Documents that prove activity so seedy or outright illegal that it could be used against him.

      You mean they are going to seize his private email server?

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    10. Re:the vote itself by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      i wasn't an angry outsider that supported him. I was toying with the idea of voting for him because I'm curious as to where it would lead. Interesting times and all, but now... I'm almost definitely going to vote for him because of them.

      they weren't just attacking trump, they were attacking my rights too.

    11. Re:the vote itself by bug1 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you have a lot in common with Anonymous, your driven by vengeance. you value vengeance more than democracy.

      But im not sure i believe you that you where only considering voting for him, it sounds like you are trying to justify a decision you had already made. You shouldnt have to do that, but, whatever helps you sleep at night.

    12. Re:the vote itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It stuns and saddens me that we've become so addicted to drama as a nation that we've chosen the four most unelectable candidates as frontrunners!

      It's like playing Russian roulette with the nation's destiny.

    13. Re:the vote itself by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      :) it's the same as when Scotland wanted to succeed from the UK. I thought they'd be shooting themselves in the foot, and i was hella worried about my scotch... but a big part of me wanted to see them do it, just to see what would happen.

      or what was going to happen to greece, if they left the EU.

      as michael caine said, some people just want to see the world burn.

      trump would most likely be a huge mistake... but you know what? it'd be amusing to watch. I mean, the president is not a king. But what deliciously insane things could he do before he stopped being president?

      and it wasn't going to be "trump or hillary" voting, it would have been "trump/local voting or stay home" I mean, did i really want to spend 2+ hours on a meaningless vote just for kicks? now i'm going to spend 2+ hours out of spite.

    14. Re:the vote itself by bug1 · · Score: 1

      +1 Insightful

    15. Re:the vote itself by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      :), also, my vengeance is my democratic right.

  13. I vs I by HalAtWork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Time to fight idiocy with idiocy?

    1. Re:I vs I by gweihir · · Score: 2

      They do not stand a chance. Trump has perfected that approach.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  14. Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obama orders ten times the number of air strikes as Bush, and nothing, killing thousands of Muslims (many of whom were non-combatants) and nothing . But Trump bloviates about banning Muslims and Anonymous loses their heads...

    No, I'm not a Trump supporter. Yes, I support offering refuge to Syrian refugees.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Obama at least keeps up the pretense of being a modern human being. Trump does not. While the former is pretty bad, the latter is worse as it encourages a lot of cowards to act in the same spirit.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I think having more drone strikes potentially reduces collateral damage. Killing people in small groups requires more strikes than striking weddings and funerals. Obama supposedly put a moratorium on strikes with a high potential for collateral damage (i.e. strikes on large groups of people). It will be interesting to see the statistics on numbers of people/civilians killed through both the Bush and Obama administrations.

    3. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Noble713 · · Score: 1

      Some of that data is already available, from Pentagon internal reports: https://theintercept.com/drone...

      FORMER DRONE OPERATORS SAY THEY WERE “HORRIFIED” BY CRUELTY OF ASSASSINATION PROGRAM https://theintercept.com/2015/...

    4. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Stoicism is a school of Hellenistic philosophy founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium in the early 3rd century BC. The Stoics taught that destructive emotions resulted from errors in judgment, and the active relationship between cosmic determinism and human freedom, and the belief that it is virtuous to maintain a will (called prohairesis) that is in accord with nature. Because of this, the Stoics presented their philosophy as a way of life, and they thought that the best indication of an individual's philosophy was not what a person said but how that person behaved. To live a good life, one had to understand the rules of the natural order since they taught that everything was rooted in nature.

    5. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

      Yes, I support offering refuge to Syrian refugees.

      Awesome. How many can we sign you up for? I don't recommend taking more than 3 or 4 per room in your house or apartment. Don't forget that you need to feed them 2 or 3 times a day, and we will hold you responsible for any crimes they commit.

      Oh, never mind. I read that wrong. I thought you were offering refuge, but you are just in favor of someone else doing it.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    6. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama at least keeps up the pretense of being a modern human being.

      Basically, Obama knows how to "play pretend", and only children and sycophants play along. His extrajudicial murders (yes, murders) are truly reprehensible to those of us who know what "due process" means.

    7. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by manoweb · · Score: 1

      Also, it is pretty evident to me that Syrian refugees are one of the best marketing tools for Mr. D. Trump, not to mention a bunch of far right parties that are coming to power in most European countries.

    8. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      There is a lot of cruelty that happens in war, intentionally and unintentionally. The only claim I am making is that *more* drones strikes doesn't necessarily equate to more collateral damage. It could very well mean less collateral damage (e.g. as compared to the drone strikes under the Bush administration). That said, having more strikes could certainly take a larger toll on the pilots flying these missions. There are some known aspects of human psychology that show we are more likely to empathize with smaller groups of people and especially individuals than we are to large groups of people.

    9. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not just nothing, the right-wing lunatics keep saying Obama works for the terrorists as he bombs them. Our ignorant Conservatives have lost their minds to far-right-wing propaganda.

    10. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Say what you will but Obama put in place some strict restrictions on strikes and he took the fight to the leadership, not the foot soldiers. His campaign effectively neutered Al Queda because the leadership had to stay in such strict hiding. Most of the Bush strikes targeted low/mid ranking fighters often in their homes with kids and relatives present.

      Under Bush one of the first drone strikes targeted a man for being tall. Seriously, they shot a hellfire at a guy for being tall. They also routinely hit houses full of women and kids to get one guy. Under Obama the rules of engagement changed dramatically, the rules now require that there be no known civilian casualties. Most of the time now they watch people for days and wait for them to get isolated in a car with other fighters on some lonely highway before they hit them. The number of civilians killed in strikes has dramatically decreased. The Islamist routinely kill far more Muslims than the US now. In fact this was one of Bin Ladin's greatest fears and why he tried to stop Al Qaeda in Iraq was because they were routinely killing hundreds of Muslims including lots of women and children while the US was occasionally killing 4 or 5 fighters and no women and kids. ISIS has done more damage to the Jihadies sympathies with Muslims than the US could ever undue.Obama deserves credit for halting the indiscriminate killings with bombs and missiles and focusing his fight on the leadership. Something that Clinton had focused on and Bush had thrown to the wayside.

    11. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The former encourages lying through your teeth, which is far more cowardly.

    12. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, if you had a nobel peace prize and the authority to rain robotic death from the sky would you be able to resit the irony? I sure wouldn't.

    13. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I support offering refuge to Syrian refugees.

      I wish there were some kind of contract you could enter into where you would be almost entirely financially and legally responsible for refugees. You want to help them? You can: shelter them, feed them, give them spending money and you can be partially legally responsible for them if they commit a crime (including you paying for their legal defense and you paying for any fines or incarceration that might occur).

    14. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider that Trump would kill fewer muslims than either Obama or Bush!

    15. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's debatable but even if it is somewhat better to be dishonest, is there really that much of a difference?

      I mean, I'll see ardent Hillary and Obama supporters claiming to be outraged by Trump. And I just don't understand that. I could understand being outraged by all three of them. Or I could even understand thinking that all three of them were more or less OK - while perhaps also thinking that politicians Obama and Hillary would be likely to be slightly better for ordinary Americans (e.g. less budget-busting tax cuts for the ultra-rich).

      But I really don't understand how a person could love Hillary but then hate Trump - they're not really all that different when it comes to actual policy positions - and they're also friends who move in the same social circles - going to each other's weddings and spending holidays with the likes of Henry Kissinger, etc.

    16. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I support offering refuge to Syrian refugees.

      I don't. The people who can afford to migrate are the ones who have the wherewithal to stay and fight. The poor folks who can't leave are being abandoned by their cowardly countrymen. Maybe it's every man for himself (and yes, most migrants are fighting age males, not women or children), but I like Trump's idea: Build a safe area in Syria, train the people there to fight back, and make Syria great again so they don't have to flee in the first place. Of course this runs roughshod over the necon's plans to oust Assad using a color revolution (which backfired and became ISIS). However, I don't think starting WWIII over Syria is a good idea and neither does Trump, or Putin.

    17. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't. You just like-Obama/don't-like-Trump so you manufactured an idiotic justification to rationalize your preference despite an air-tight argument that Obama was worse for Muslims than Trump.

    18. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then may they come live with you and those who share your ill-founded views. 21% of Syrians sympathize with ISIS. They are poison wherever they go, even if most are innocents.

    19. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Informative

      Under Obama the rules of engagement changed dramatically, the rules now require that there be no known civilian casualties.

      You do know that this is achieved by decreeing that all males of military age are automatically considered militants? So the rules achieved "no known civilian casualties" by assuming that if you are killed then you were a militant. (Citation)

      The number of civilians killed in strikes has dramatically decreased.

      Citation needed -- including who counts as "civilian" in this decrease.

      Obama deserves credit for halting the indiscriminate killings with bombs and missiles

      Obama has appointed himself as a Judge/Jury/Executioner, and redefined words (such as "imminent threat" or "indiscriminate killings") rather than halted anything. Citation

    20. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By what metric is it worse? You say it encourages bad behavior... but we already have 10x as many air strikes with civilian casualties. Heck, we have drone-based murder of American citizens from afar, even ones whose only real crime was to be related to a bad guy.

      Why is this alleged encouragement of bad behavior so much worse than actually doing 10x as many bad things?

    21. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Obama doesn't kill Muslims merely because they're Muslims, though.

    22. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by KeensMustard · · Score: 1
      Sometimes the scale of atrocities under Bush are so large that it can trip you up. Really, the "number of drone strikes" isn't a good metric unless you think that only drones kill people. Plus at the time, and even now, not a lot of people in the US like to talk about the actual number of people killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, perhaps hoping that those atrocities will slip quietly into the night. But too late. It might help you sleep at night, but some us can't forget so easily.

      The actual numbers are pretty hard to come by: possibly due to the logistical difficulties of gathering information on the ground. However, estimates of the dead in Iraq range up to 500 000 with 250 000 being directly attributed to the war. Estimates for Afghanistan suggest about 92000 .

      Estimated civilian deaths under Obama are somewhat shy of 10000 which is still an astoundingly high number, but an order of magnitude less. Given he didn't start those wars, attributing Iraqi/Afghan deaths to the Obama administration is somewhat skewed. Especially considering those wars were not started with any notion of furthering the interests of the United States, nor, to date, has any plausible reason for invading Iraq been forthcoming, let alone one that justifies even a single Iraqi death, let alone 250000.

      Under normal circumstances, we might regard Obama's actions in killing people (2400 at last count) using drones to be somewhat homicidal. How does one justify something like that? But we forget scale. We forget that Bush, in Iraq, set a new precedent, and we live in a new normal. Back in those days, I could log on to Slashdot and hear people justify Abu Graib, justifications or indiscriminate torture and rape, justify the killing of and dismemberment of children, and lie lie lie to us about why: why were these people killed? Why were kids blown apart? why were people strung up, and hung, why did people have electrical current passed through their genitals?

      So yep, Obama's actions ought to be closely examined and he needs to justify those deaths. But to compare his administration to the butchery under Cheney/Bush administration just show you've already forgotten what happened.

    23. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah yeah, you are right, the one that bombs and kills the most people is the worst, keep telling yourself that and how everybody else is "obviously wrong", then wonder why trump wins

    24. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Obama at least keeps up the pretense of being a modern human being"

      To anyone who isnt a patronizing fucking Yuppie, 'keeping up a pretense' is called being Full of Shit. It is literally pretentious. That is a bad thing.

    25. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by freedom_surfer · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points today. Well said. The parent thread may claim to not be a Trump supporter, but he wears his bias on his sleeve. Insightful? Sad....

    26. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the ISIL map shows how effective Obama's strategy has been. NOT at all!
      We cannot go back and not overthrow Saddam. From here we need to treat them like Japan and/or Germany.
      Go in and tell them we will leave in a couple generations. We have been in our WWII enemy countries for 50+ years.
      Iraq should expect the same and get used to being civilized. Teach the girls math. The better they can add, the less they will multiply.

    27. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      washingtonblog is a blog, not a source of facts. That article mostly cites another person's quotes (also not cited and appears to also be more opinon than fact).

      A civilian is a inhabitant of the area under military action and not actively involved in the conflict. Via Merriam's Dictionary, "a person who is not a member of the military or of a police or firefighting force". In reality, it's usually a little different as I'll go into below.

      [From here I'm going on what I have heard from working in US military acquisition with veterans and don't have active sources other than this word of mouth]

      For combat operations to the US, a civilian is someone who is not trying to harm, directly or indirectly, our forces or those of the government we are trying to protect. In this sense, people are not civilians if they are shooting at you or possessing war materials (most often parts of IED's) or directing in the placement, construction, or training of war materials (falls under "indirect"). People trying to harm civilians for other reasons are "criminals" and are referred to local police (oversimplified).

      One of the problems with OEF / OIF is that many common people are armed (AK != terrorist). Spare weapons were so common that (in one story I heard) fishermen would take hand grenades to go fishing with--they were cheaper and more effective than bait. Further, many people (esp. in Iraq) were being blackmailed or threatened into setting IED's. Additionally, there were people from "outside of Iraq" with "very high levels of combat experience" who were training people to do bad things (won't be more specific). Due to political issues with these people they were treated differently than the standard Iraqi insurgent.

      This took awhile to figure out, and then it really threw a wrench into how to define a combatant vs. civilian. Please bear things like this in mind before laying blame at any one person's feet.

    28. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      sure and if we compare them to Stalin its all roses

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    29. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      I'm a Kasich supporter, but what is the definition of a "modern human being"? One that obsequiously bows to the fascist politically correct groupthink? "Think and do as I say, speak not what's on people's minds, criticize not, or be shamed into submission and ostracized relentlessly".
      True, Trump bloviates, he paints with too broad a brush, he's crass, and he's vague (he needs to emphasize "illegal" immigrants, rather than "mexicans") but sometimes, some of his points, like "anchor babies" for example, are observationally valid. It's a real thing. Liberals, and some conservatives, got offended that he used that term, but no one got offended over the actual exploitative practice? That's a horrible reason to have and use a child. It's twisted that people got upset him over calling it what it is, unless one blindly denies it happens. That's PC for you.
      I don't think he's a "hater", the word has been overused to the point where "hate" no longer means anything meaningful, it's been corrupted by hyperbole. Hate has come to mean "disagree" these days. Indifference is not hate. Disregard is not hate. Defensiveness and misunderstanding are not hate. It dilutes the danger of the people who actually are hateful, and it's insulting to people are victims of true hate.
      But I'd rather see Kasich in office. At least he did good in Ohio.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    30. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

      It wasn't me that made the comparison.

    31. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      apologies , sometimes in threads this big the threading can get a little difficult

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    32. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      If a combatant is stripped of his weapons by his brothers in arms he is counted as a civilian under current rules.

      The fact is those who are making the counting rules have an agenda.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    33. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points today. Well said. The parent thread may claim to not be a Trump supporter, but he wears his bias on his sleeve. Insightful? Sad....

      I never voted for Bush either. If you look through my comment history, you'd be able to find many comments criticizing him as well.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    34. Re:Words mean more than actions to Anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have any source documentation for this?

  15. Re:Go, Anonymous, go! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes it could. Anyone who is currently in our government.

  16. for bernie sanders! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0

    for bernie sanders!

    1. Re:for bernie sanders! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A write-in vote for Bernie in November is the moral equivalent of a vote for Trump.

  17. Re:~50% by arbiter1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet more deserving people get left alone aka Hillary and Obama

  18. Whose side are you on? by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hackers affiliated with Anonymous threaten to "dismantle [Trump's] campaign" by taking his election websites offline in a large-scale and orchestrated distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack.

    Trump isn't running a web-based campaign.

    But he is damn good at demonizing his enemies and making then look like fools when they try to take him down.

    1. Re:Whose side are you on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > But he is damn good at demonizing his enemies and making then look like fools when they try to take him down.

      Radical activists need no help in that regard.

  19. How SJW of them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trump says something they don't like and they whine and try to bully him into silence any way they can.

    Just like crybully SJWs

    1. Re:How SJW of them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your #gamergate is showing.

      Put it back in your pants please.

      You have small hands.

  20. Could you get anymore undemocratic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So I'm not planning on voting for Trump, does that mean I have the right to dismantle his campaign, shout him down where ever he speaks and threaten to kill him like some have on social media? Nope. For all those ignorant asshats out there attempting to compare Trump to Adolph Hitler, or even a neofascist of any sort, go read a history book. While Trump may not make for the best president, we have a system in this nation for selecting our leaders and it has worked pretty damn well over the past 240 years. We've even survived bad presidents because there is a system of checks and balances. You have no right to take away someone else's right to vote for a candidate, hear a candidate speak or their right to run a campaign.

    1. Re:Could you get anymore undemocratic? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      We've even survived bad presidents because there is a system of checks and balances.

      As has been pointed out in several places, like NPR just this morning, the President can do a lot of things within his/her area of power/responsibility - that won't involve checks and balances - like deporting people and bombing places overseas, regardless of whether those things would be good for the US.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Could you get anymore undemocratic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I'm not planning on voting for Trump, does that mean I have the right to dismantle his campaign, shout him down where ever he speaks and threaten to kill him like some have on social media?

      Of course not. That's the media's job.

    3. Re:Could you get anymore undemocratic? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "So I'm not planning on voting for Trump, does that mean I have the right to dismantle his campaign,"

      It's not so much a right, as an obligation ... assuming of course you are a decent human being and not a Trump supporter.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    4. Re:Could you get anymore undemocratic? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      deporting people who dont belong here is a good thing

      obama is bombing the shit out of people

      whats the issue again???

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:Could you get anymore undemocratic? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      so you feel it is your obligation to restrict free speech how very nazi of you

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    6. Re:Could you get anymore undemocratic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have a process called impeachment. This is a worse scare tactic than a really scary thoughtlike Hillary being in charge of all our secrets. She can't even be trusted as Sec of State.

  21. False Flag operation against Anonymous? by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The group that is thought to have killed ORCA (Karl Rove's magic Republican Party database ploy to ficitiously win Ohio) was Anonymous. Their calibre of work is far, far beyond what this announcement promises. I suspect this is a False Flag operation aimed at boosting Trump "victimization" rhetoric while lumping in Anymous with supposed Mexican rapists and Trump's other favourite targets.

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    1. Re:False Flag operation against Anonymous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get it, but you can't claim a false flag without compelling evidence. Just saying that this all makes Anonymous look goofy isn't good enough - they've already looked plenty goofy when they said they were going after ISIS, and in December when they said they were onto Trump. Maybe they are people with some technical skills but in general, are not very bright.

    2. Re:False Flag operation against Anonymous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trump is right about Mexican rapists and thugs who are escaping justice by hopping the border into the USA. What the fuck is everyone smoking, I'm not sure, but isn't it common knowledge that criminals hop borders to escape the long arm of the law? Trump was talking about the criminal element that crosses the borders, and he is right about them. The corrupt establishment owned media used that sound byte to imply that trump thinks all Mexicans are rapists. However, that's not what Trump said.

      Indeed Trump wants to help Mexico build a wall to shut down the flow of money into cartels who are destroying Mexico, and possibly lending them armed forces if needed. Google up "autodefensas" -- The Mexican people are trying to resist the corrupt cartels themselves by organizing volunteer militias, but they need outside help because the government is bought off and corrupt too and the federales try to shut down the autodefensas (citizen militia), and they turn loose the drug lords when the citizens hand them over to the cops.

      Mexicans love Trump.

  22. Has groupthink paranoia reached peak yet? by swb · · Score: 1

    Standard disclaimer: I am not a Trump supporter. I think his statements are way too off the wall to be taken seriously, although I do like that he was the first to come out critical of H1Bs, but offhand it's the only thing I would say I've liked and can take seriously (or as serious as you can take anything he might say).

    That being said, the groupthink paranoia about him is reaching amazing heights. I *still* put the odds of him winning the Republican primary at less than 50-50 and think his negative numbers are way too high to defeat Clinton or possibly even Sanders.

    But geeze, the hostility towards him even presenting his message is pretty remarkable. I'd say it's more vitriolic than even the most conservative voices during Obama's election, especially with all the desire to "shut him down" and silence him.

    I say let the guy run -- for office, and his mouth -- and let him participate in the marketplace of ideas, and if his ideas are truly unappealing to the majority of voters then his candidacy will fail. No need for street fighting or banana republic election tactics to "stop" his candidacy. And I also think anyone supporting that kind of mindset better be prepared to be on the receiving end of it WITHOUT COMPLAINING.

    The funny thing about all the hostility towards him is that even when a serious, liberal newspaper profiles some of his supporters, they aren't just 70 year old white men from the countryside. The NY Times today even acknowledged his campaign staff in Tampa is fairly diverse, which is all part of the weird mystery of Trump and perhaps some genuine truth that there's something rotten about the conventional truths that people just aren't buying anymore.

    1. Re:Has groupthink paranoia reached peak yet? by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I believe the KKK came out against H1Bs before Trump, but they don't hypocritically exploit it for profit.

      I agree that he shouldn't be silenced, but the attempt to silence Trump is far outweighed by the excessive media coverage he gets. If there is a least silenced person in America right now, it is Donald Trump. He doesn't even need to buy speech with campaign contributions, he gets it for free.

      Aside from this single rally that was shut down, and this threat from anonymous to hack his website, I don't recall any other instances of Trump being silenced. In fact, both of these things probably just give him more free press.

      Yes, there is "vitriol" directed at Trump. I am not ready to say that it is greater in magnitude than the vitriol directed at Obama, but the fact that Trump is stoking racism is probably more deserving of vitriol than anything Obama has done. And this is coming from a person who did not vote for Obama in 2008 nor 2012.

      I absolutely support Trump's freedom to run. I don't think anybody is trying to stop his candidacy through means other than democracy and/or rules (as fair or unfair as they may be) that already existed.

  23. sigh... It becomes more and more obvious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that he is the only possible candidate to get the USA unfucked.

  24. Funny USA by jtayon · · Score: 0

    In their police drama, their super police man get people condemned for giving an order to make crimes.

    Trumps' speech are clearly related to riots that are as far as I know illegal, but since it is public, legal liability is none.

    So, if Al Capone 2.0 existed he would just have to be a politician gives his order of execution in public to never be jailed.

    Lol. Wonderfully absurd system.

    1. Re:Funny USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell us more of your deep understanding of America from your extensive studies of television dramas. We can't wait to garner more insightful comments from your vast wealth of knowledge...

  25. I wonder what they like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    about his competition. Any psychohistorian can tell you, something similar to Trump what happens after years of using wedge issues to get people to vote against their own benefit. His competitors are the people who generated the environment in which he is able to thrive.

  26. I didn't know they were working for Cruz by damn_registrars · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The only person who stands to benefit from this is Ted Cruz. Marco Rubio is already pretty much out of the race, Kasich is irrelevant. Taking down the Trump campaign at this stage won't benefit the democrats, either as they can easily defeat him in the general election. If the Trump campaign is somehow completely destroyed between now and the GOP convention the only person who would stand to win is Cruz, who also has consistently posted far better general polling numbers than Rubio or Trump against either Sanders or Clinton.

    Furthermore, what is the benefit of destroying Trump right now when the GOP nomination contest is still officially undecided? It would make more sense to try to derail him later when it is down to the general election. If there is anything Drumpf hates above all else it is losing.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, what is the benefit of destroying Trump right now when the GOP nomination contest is still officially undecided?

      It would benefit, primarily, the Republican (/Democrat) political Establishment.

      I don't like the guy, nor think he would be a good President (many of his views are counter to mine, and I think he's usually lying about everything) but I did learn a lot about his background from this video which seems to be pretty tight on the facts (obviously some opinion and bias, but that's life). If anybody in Anonymous is reading this, please try to find the patience to sit still long enough to listen to it, and understand why the Establishment hates him so very much. Stick it in a background tab and do something else if you have to, but try to get away from the MSM accounts of all of the candidates. Cruz is universally reviled and dangerous, from the Rove camp - think about the consequences of your actions. Hillary is going to be indicted, Bernie would govern from his feelz, and McAfee doesn't stand a chance under Duverger's Law (oddly enough, the 70-year-old drug-grizzled sex maniac appears to be the least insane of all of them).

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Taking down the Trump campaign at this stage won't benefit the democrats, either as they can easily defeat him in the general election.

      The Democrats can easily take down Cruz. Donald Trump is likely to beat Hillary.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      Taking down the Trump campaign at this stage won't benefit the democrats, either as they can easily defeat him in the general election.

      The Democrats can easily take down Cruz.

      I don't think Cruz believes that, and frankly he polls much better against democrats than any other candidate they've had on stage this time through.

      Donald Trump is likely to beat Hillary.

      Quite unlikely, actually. Drumpf has hit the ceiling in his own party, at ~40% approval. It is highly likely that a large number of GOP'ers will stay home in the 2016 election if he gets the nomination as they can't stand him.

      The best thing Drumpf has going for himself at this point is the high likelihood of Clinton winning the nomination, as while many republicans hate him they have all things named Clinton even more and will likely show up to vote against her without concern for who the name is on the GOP ticket. However if the GOP manages to knock off Clinton one way or another, they'll be facing Sanders who is the only candidate with positive approval ratings in national polling and their goose will be cooked. Nearly nobody will vote Drumpf to spite Sanders, in fact Sanders even polls well with conservatives in part due to being perceived as the most honest candidate in this election cycle.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    4. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      [Cruz[] polls much better against democrats than any other candidate they've had on stage this time through.

      Yeah, but no one's attacked him from the left yet. It's crazy to look at current polling of the matchups without factoring in the general. (Although Donald and Hillary, as frontrunners, have far less uncertainty there). We know Donald is Teflon.

      Drumpf has hit the ceiling in his own party, at ~40% approval. It is highly likely that a large number of GOP'ers will stay home in the 2016 election if he gets the nomination as they can't stand him.

      Well, a lot of establishment Republicans have promised to support him. And a lot will vote against Hillary. I'd expect a moderating VP pick, and a turn towards civility that will convince the establishment he'll be sane. He has months to convince them he came to Jesus. Look at his debate performance.

      I'm not advocating for either Cruz or Trump, but if I put money down on how each of the matchups would go, I take Trump over Hillary over Cruz.

      Trump will keep going Benghazi, Emails, etc. over and over again, while damping down his own craziness, and the Republicans will come out in force.

      Meanwhile, he'll start trying to sound sane so that Democrats think he was putting on a show to get the nomination, and no one really wants Hillary, so they won't care a ton.

      But yeah, if Sanders gets the nomination, then it won't matter who the Republicans put up, he wins. It's kinda shocking that Hillary is still the frontrunner at this point.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    5. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      Well, a lot of establishment Republicans have promised to support him

      Yeah, but those are the talking heads of the establishment. A couple hundred talking heads are just that - a couple hundred talking heads. There is no guarantee that they can get the millions of GOP voters who dislike Drumpf to show up at the polls and vote for him.

      And a lot will vote against Hillary.

      That, I would say, is the biggest weakness that Hillary presents. Plenty of republicans will show up just to vote against her. The name Clinton evokes a Pavlovian response in many GOP'ers, they instantly go into hate mode. If she filed for divorce this afternoon she'd likely fare better.

      I'd expect a moderating VP pick

      That I disagree with. A lot of the GOP heads see Drumpf as too liberal. I expect he'll pick someone out of deep-deep-deep-deep-deeper-than-deep right field. I could see him even picking someone with little to no actual political experience, like Glenn Beck, Ted Nugent, Jesse Ventura, etc. I would be shocked if he chose someone less conservative than himself.

      He has months to convince them he came to Jesus.

      That ship may have already sailed. Fortunately for his cause the Jesus crew harbors plenty of hatred towards Clinton so he can pick up some of them off of that.

      Trump will keep going Benghazi, Emails, etc. over and over again

      As opposed to any other republican? It will get their attention but will be be enough?

      It's kinda shocking that Hillary is still the frontrunner at this point.

      I can't really figure that one out either. The main selling point from the Clinton camp seems to be that Sanders' message is too "pie in the sky" to be something that can actually be done.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    6. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      A lot of the GOP heads see Drumpf as too liberal. I expect he'll pick someone out of deep-deep-deep-deep-deeper-than-deep right field.

      I mean, he'll pick someone with more conservative economic and healthcare policies to appease the base, but more moderate immigrant/Islam rhetoric to de-frighten the normals. And someone with political experience as well to balance the "need to manipulate Congress" part. I'm thinking a sane Republican governor with a track records of conservatism. I'd guess Walker or Kasich.

      I doubt the "come to Jesus" ship sailed. He didn't want to come to Jesus earlier, because he needed ot be the outsider to win the nomination. Once that's locked up (is that now?), he comes to Jesus for the general.

      As opposed to any other republican?

      I think Trump has proven that he, more than any other Republican, can look straight at the camera and slam an opponent with a smear that works. He's really gifted at that.

      The main selling point from the Clinton camp seems to be that Sanders' message is too "pie in the sky" to be something that can actually be done.

      Which is so stupid. Of course, he's going to fail hard on a lot of his goals. But so is Hillary. Aim at the stars and fall on the moon and all that.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    7. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      A lot of the GOP heads see Drumpf as too liberal. I expect he'll pick someone out of deep-deep-deep-deep-deeper-than-deep right field.

      I mean, he'll pick someone with more conservative economic and healthcare policies to appease the base

      The healthcare bit amuses me greatly. Basically every candidate for the GOP has been running with the same message of repeal the ACA. Some of them have stated that they want to repeal the ACA and then re-pass it with their own name on it, but most of them don't bother going that far into planning. I have yet to see a GOP candidate anywhere actually propose an alternative to the ACA that is less than 95% identical in action to the ACA. The last time the GOP candidates talked about it in a debate it came down to who could come up with the most arbitrarily short window of time post-inauguration in which to repeal the bill.

      but more moderate immigrant/Islam rhetoric to de-frighten the normals.

      If Clinton is the democratic nominee, he won't need that as Clinton will frighten as many of the "normals" towards him as he could ever hope to pull in with a less-loony VP.

      And someone with political experience as well to balance the "need to manipulate Congress" part.

      I disagree on that one. Look at how much enthusiasm the "outsider" candidates have pulled in this cycle in the GOP. He doesn't want to risk losing that.

      I'm thinking a sane Republican governor with a track records of conservatism. I'd guess Walker or Kasich.

      I would attach the adjective sane to the latter governor but not the former. That said I suspect Walker is already on the phone regularly with his friend "Teflon" Tim Pawlenty from MN working to figure out their plans for running in 2020. While Walker isn't very smart on his own he is smart enough to put smart people around him (as Dennis Miller said about GWB - "the same way a hole surrounds itself with a donut") and he realizes that the GOP has almost no chance of winning this election; hence his best move is to get ready for 2020. Walker and Pawlenty each took very, very long starts at their failed runs for the white house, so they wouldn't be afraid to lay the ground early again.

      I think Trump has proven that he, more than any other Republican, can look straight at the camera and slam an opponent with a smear that works. He's really gifted at that.

      He is the penultimate opportunist. I'm still not convinced that he actually wants to be president, but he is certainly enjoying the publicity of running for the office.

      The main selling point from the Clinton camp seems to be that Sanders' message is too "pie in the sky" to be something that can actually be done.

      Which is so stupid. Of course, he's going to fail hard on a lot of his goals. But so is Hillary. Aim at the stars and fall on the moon and all that.

      I couldn't agree more. It's like the Clinton camp decided to take on the fact that the Obama Administration has accomplished almost none of their original goals and then use that as a selling point for them to continue to accomplish none of them in the future because they are too lofty. To see foot dragging like that embraced that much is more than a bit disheartening for me.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    8. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      He is the penultimate opportunist.

      Query: penultimate?

      I'm still not convinced that he actually wants to be president, but he is certainly enjoying the publicity of running for the office.

      He's been talking about running since 1988. He wants the publicity of being the president. The work/policy making, probably not so much.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    9. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      He is the penultimate opportunist.

      Query: penultimate?

      My bad, my fingers got ahead of me. Indeed should have just been "ultimate".

      I'm still not convinced that he actually wants to be president, but he is certainly enjoying the publicity of running for the office.

      He's been talking about running since 1988. He wants the publicity of being the president. The work/policy making, probably not so much.

      I'm not sure that he really has more publicity to gain by being president. He's getting absurd amounts of publicity by running for president, but how could he keep pulling in that kind of publicity for four years if he were to somehow win? For comparison plenty of people thought Obama was good at pulling in press, but how often does he make the news now? Even before Drumpf announced his candidacy Obama was barely making the news daily. I actually think Drumpf wants to lose this election so that he can launch into something else - maybe a cable news network of his own, or a radio network?

      It seems to me that Drumpf just got tired of seeing newer billionaires (in particular Musk and Zuckerberg) getting more press than him. Once he's straightened that out to his liking he'll go back to declaring bankruptcy.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    10. Re:I didn't know they were working for Cruz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Query: penultimate?
      > My bad, my fingers got ahead of me. Indeed should have just been "ultimate".

      "Ultimate" kind of implies he's the last one.

      I would have said prototypical, quintessential, model, consummate. :)

  27. Won't work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To put it in (somewhat old) 4chan parlance - This would be like pissing in an ocean of piss.

    There's no ration or reason. Confrontation, ridicule, arguments valid or invalid just encourage them. Attention is validation.

    Trump's just grabbed the reigns of a larger problem that's been brewing for a while. - Changing demographics ended the usefulness of the "southern strategy" about the time Obama started his first term.

    So the conservative groups shifted strategy and instead of quietly nudging racial and sociopolitical division inside the GOP - They gave those people a direct identity with the tea party and outright tapped them.

    That was a mistake. You don't tap racists and religious nut-bags and think you can control them. All it takes is the bigger ego - And that's what Trump is. If you were around in the 80s and 90s you'll know that Trump is just about the biggest ego that's walked the face of the earth in recent years.

    And let's be frank. Trump's followers are low information, conservative racists that like authoritarian rule. Any objective measure of the demographic will yield this and you know it.

    What we have is a large group of angry people - They know they're getting the short end of the stick. They're largely working class and they see their bit of the pie shrinking.. But all they've been told for just about 20 years now is that it's the fault of Mexicans, brown people that live in the desert, those evil liberals with their colleges, the government (All governments, everywhere, in every country), and some nebulous group called socialists.

    With no real grip on the reality of how the world works.. How do you expect them to react when a rich person with a strong personality tells them exactly everything that they've been taught to know?

    1. Re:Won't work. by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

      Actually.... A lot of people have been gravitating to him because they've been told for years that they're imagining their lower class station, they're actually the oppressors, since someone who looks like them did bad things years ago. That someone else needs more help, and the fact that they're poor and worthless flies in the face of their obvious benefits gained for being big fat racists.
      And told. and told and told.
      It's all about class, and these lower class people who aren't of the correct oppressed race have been fed a stream of race division. So not only are they poor and live shitty lives, they're ignored. Imagine you live in a bad part of Appalachia, barely get by, poor with no future, and all the news carries is how some black guy( not you) in St. Louis ( A city, not your country life) got shot, and your kid's hooked on meth.
      Then along comes the blowhard, who essentially says "Hey, I see you, here's some [insert nonsensical ideas and bromides that appeal to their class, not race]. and they eat it up.

      I'm not at all surprised by this. It's simply backlash.

  28. A SSN? by irrational_design · · Score: 1

    How many Social Security Numbers does he have?

    1. Re:A SSN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Each business he owns has an EIN. 9 digits and used for tax purposes, like a SSN, but ... different.

    2. Re:A SSN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alll of them

    3. Re:A SSN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None, but apparently he does have a Nuclear Submarine

  29. Sure be his bogeyman I'm sure he can use you fools by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

    When will you knuckle heads stop playing with your dicks and wake up to how Trump operates? Conflict makes him stronger, and giving him yet another bogeyman to talk about just empowers him and expands his audience.

    I bet he paints anonymous as a threat to democracy and all the patriots will go "Booyah!" in support.

  30. So, outside agents directly influencing a US by Tulsa_Time · · Score: 1

    Election... Is this war ?

    --
    5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
    1. Re:So, outside agents directly influencing a US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, since the Supreme Courts ruled that anonymous donors to superPACs could donate as much as they wanted, outside agents have been allowed to buy as much direct influence in US elections as they cared to pay for.

  31. Get out the pop-corn by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Politics and humanity's future aside, this election is turning out to be THE most exciting one of my life-time.

    In terms of entertainment value, I never thought they'd top Palin. I was flat wrong. She was just the warm-up act.

    And it's not just Trump. Sanders adds a different spin, kind of like the grumpy Lorax who only comes out of the wood-work when things get too screwy, shaking his finger: "BEWARE!"

    Dr. Seuss couldn't script a zanier election. (He'd run out of ink for Trump's hair anyhow.)

    Outsourcing, offshoring, automation, inequality, leaky borders, and a confused mid-east together seem to be making a lot of people very nervous, giving non-traditional candidates attention they otherwise wouldn't get. The world is changing and the old ways of viewing things politically don't seem to apply anymore. The electorate is ready to experiment.

    1. Re:Get out the pop-corn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL @ Bernie the Lorax. Perfect analogy!

    2. Re:Get out the pop-corn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every US election where an incumbent isn't running for reelection is this exciting.

    3. Re:Get out the pop-corn by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Trump/Seuss: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      (Distorted vid, probably to avoid copyright cops)

    4. Re:Get out the pop-corn by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Americans finally get to enjoy the excitement of politics that is common in unstable countries.

      Even though I was a kid, I still remember 1996, when my country was deciding between an utterly corrupt but nominally liberal sitting president; a populist even nuttier than Trump, but calling himself a "liberal democrat"; and a hardcore communist who promised to bring everything back as it was 20 years before.

      Yeah, it's kinda fun. The process. Not its result.

    5. Re:Get out the pop-corn by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, reminds of the first time I started living outside the US, and reading the newspaper and realizing, "politics is so much more exciting here!" It's gotten more exciting in the US lately.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  32. a waste of time & effort by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    because no matter who gets elected the power behind the throne will still be in place, the global banking cartel & military industrial complex will still be telling the government what to do, and if they dont play ball guess what happens, yup, it happened to Abe Lincoln, & JFK, and RFK, they find some patsy to take the fall for an organized hit, the big money has been ruling this planet for hundreds of years and no election by a bunch of filthy peasants is going to change that

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  33. old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's last week's news. this week anonymous has started OpIslam, a campaign that goes after websites that criticize Muslims... come on businessinsider... get your shit together... that;s a 10-days-old video

  34. Re:Sure be his bogeyman I'm sure he can use you fo by Livius · · Score: 2

    Anonymous has just painted *itself* as a threat to democracy. Trump will consider it an endorsement.

  35. The ultimate lazy criticism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You say what your audience wants to hear but in reality you don't stand for anything except for your personal greed and power.

    That particular criticism is always used against every politician.

    It's so common, that I simply call it "The Standard Universal Political Criticism" (TSUPC).

    Go ahead and apply it to any politician that you don't like, and you'll see that it works beautifully. Don't like Hillary? Then you'll get a very satisfying sense of illumination out of the fact that she tells audiences what they want to hear, but she doesn't stand for anything except personal greed and power. See? It works like a charm!

    Many people use TSUPC as the standing criticism against all members of the political class.

    It's easy to use, because it's impossible to distinguish "greed and lust for power" versus "selfless ambition to serve the public". One sounds bad, and the other sounds good, but there is no possible mechanism that can tell which one actually applies to a given politician. That's because it pertains only to a politician's motivations, and is therefore impossible to prove.

    TSUPC is the ultimate laziness in political criticism -- it's no more illuminating than simple name-calling. TSUPC is basically the sophisticated, adult way of expressing what kids do on the playground when they call each other a "boogerhead". Deep down, the kids know their name-calling is logically meaningless, and that it only serves a social role. But the adults fool themselves into believing that their incantation of TSUC is actually biting, trenchant analysis.

  36. Prioritize by Livius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's vigilanteism, and then there's disrupting an election. People attempting to silence political opinions that they disagree with are a far greater threat to civilization than Trump is.

    I really don't want to take Trump's side on anything but in this case there is no contest.

    Of course, the Trump phenomenon goes away on its own as soon as the Republican Party puts up a candidate worth voting for. The problem is they've never done that before and they don't know where to start.

    1. Re:Prioritize by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Of course, the Trump phenomenon goes away on its own as soon as the Republican Party puts up a candidate worth voting for. The problem is they've never done that before and they don't know where to start.

      Really? Who's the candidate "worth voting for" by the Democrats? Is it the socialist Bernie Sanders, who wants more government handouts? Or is it the Washington crony Clinton, with her "Foundation" and status quo politics?

      I think there were several Republican candidates who were/are at least no worse than these two.

    2. Re:Prioritize by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Of course, the Trump phenomenon goes away on its own as soon as the Republican Party puts up a candidate worth voting for.

      Are you really not understanding it yet? Yes, that is what the Republican voters have been saying all along - and Trump is that candidate.

    3. Re:Prioritize by Livius · · Score: 1

      what the Republican voters have been saying all along

      ...illustrating the disconnect between the Republican Party and Republican voters.

  37. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Hilary doesn't count as a psychopath, then what the hell is she? Well, I mean, beyond somebody who if we lived in a just world would be in prison right now.

  38. steal his toupee with a cat drone, LULZ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, they're done destroying the Zetas ?

  39. Streisand effect. by nashv · · Score: 1

    Apparently, Anonymous has never heard of the Streisand effect.

    --
    Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
  40. Censorship is rarely constructive by shanen · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Actually, I'm reminded of a recent incident in which I believe I was censored by Bernie's fanatics for saying that Hillary wasn't such a bad option compared to Trump and his associates.

    However, I think I've finally figured out the source of the fundamental conflict between the so-called GOP and Trump:

    The so-called Republicans believe in "government of the corporations, by the lawyers, for the richest 0.1%."

    Trump rejects that and stands for "government of the Donald, by the Donald, for the Donald."

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    1. Re:Censorship is rarely constructive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bernie supporters were the ones that shut down his speech in Chicago. Obviously Bernie supporters think censorship is a good thing and they probably support the McCain-Feingold CFR that prevented individuals from campaigning for a candidate within 90 days of an election.

      The left seems to dislike freedoms of individuals espeically when it limits power of the state.

    2. Re:Censorship is rarely constructive by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      Actually, I'm reminded of a recent incident in which I believe I was censored by Bernie's fanatics for saying that Hillary wasn't such a bad option compared to Trump and his associates.

      I would agree with you. As far as the candidates go, Hillary is a pretty benign establishment Republican.

    3. Re:Censorship is rarely constructive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the "Bernie fanatics" were agents of the government, you weren't censored.

      You were criticized, using *their* First Amendment rights to do so.

    4. Re:Censorship is rarely constructive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary can't be trusted to hold our nations important information and her complete non-compassion in the Benghazi hearings says all we need to know about her. Cruz or Trump or Bernie would all be better alternatives.

  41. Lying about him makes it worse - he really is bad by raymorris · · Score: 0

    Further, what Trump ACTUALLY says, and refuses to say, is bad enough. There's no need for this story, and the other Slashdot story it links to, to lie about Trump, or even "stretch the truth". That just makes it look like he's not really that bad, like all of the criticism is BS.

    When asked if the government should maintain a database of Muslims entering the country, the right answer is "no, that's ridiculous ". Trump's answer was "we should do a lot of things, it's all about management."

    When anti-Trump people lie or exaggerate, it makes it seem like Trump isn't really that bad, that the criticism of him is all bullshit. It's not bullshit, he does say some inflammatory stuff, and more so he often refuses to say what should be said, to clearly say "no, we shouldn't do that". Instead he dodges even easy questions.

    To maintain our own credibility (and indeed our actual integrity) , let's just tell the plain truth about Trump and not stretch it: "Trump declines to confirm that the govt should not ask refugees and immigrants about their religion".

  42. Cyber Terrorists by frovingslosh · · Score: 0

    Terrorists don't like Donald Trump. What a surprise!

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  43. Re:~50% by __aaneik5497 · · Score: 0

    Yet more deserving people get left alone aka Hillary and Obama

    Agreed.

  44. Doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hating on him simply elevates him

  45. because a sober electorate is dangerous by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    This country went to Hell when they stopped giving all day off for elections and got rid of the free beer.

    If it was good enough for George Washington, it's good enough for me. Excuse me, I have to go to the outhouse...

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  46. Forget the Muslims by cyber-vandal · · Score: 5, Funny

    Trump's being attacked by the 72 virgins.

    1. Re:Forget the Muslims by sinij · · Score: 2

      You just won this thread.

    2. Re:Forget the Muslims by ArylAkamov · · Score: 1

      Holy shit. I can't stop laughing.

    3. Re:Forget the Muslims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Kudos!

  47. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Would you believe that half of Washington is composed of psychopaths? I don't think that's much of a stretch.

  48. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    really??? half the people in congress run their own mail servers (directly against policy) and wipe their own server before handing anything over??? Id like to see that list of people so we can go after them as well

  49. More Propaganda by __aaneik5497 · · Score: 1

    This seems like another attempt at spreading anti-Trump propaganda. It's really no different than CNN giving that obnoxious Ohio protester his own interview yesterday. I didn't watch it but there was no avoiding seeing that neanderthal's face on all of the screens at the airport. I wonder if we'll ever get to a point where media isn't primarily a tool to brainwash people.

    1. Re:More Propaganda by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      I think its getting worse, not better.
      The BBC used to be famously fastidious about unbiased reporting, however, watching BBC America News I've been disgusted at how radically feminist and very strongly anti-Trump all their reporting has now become.

  50. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like it will be great for democracy. What a bunch of clowns.

    1. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does the DJ 3000 keep up with the news like that?!

  51. Re:~50% by amRadioHed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I feel the best way to destroy the Trump campaign is to keep letting people hear him.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  52. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When asked if the government should maintain a database of Muslims entering the country, the right answer is "no, that's ridiculous ". Trump's answer was "we should do a lot of things, it's all about management."

    That IS the right answer, No is to simplistic. the answer is we should have a list of EVERYONE coming into the country. we have a list of all the citizens (SS number) why shouldnt we also have a list of all those from outside the country (muslims included)

    no, you are simply looking to be offended if that statement was somehow wrong

  53. Into obscurity you go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh look "ma" someone said something I do not like, time to put on my social justice warrior uniform and do something about. Just hurry up and dissolve into obscurity already.

  54. That does it by istartedi · · Score: 1

    I'm voting for Barbara Streisand.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:That does it by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      What kind of idiot mentions Barbara Streisand in this article? That would make sense if there were many, many people who had never heard of Donald Chump who have now heard of him because of Anonymous. Since that is a ridiculous, invoking the Streisand Effect just shows that you are a clueless moron with no idea what the Streisand Effect actually describes.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  55. Re:~50% by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    You've had 20+ years of searching to find anything on her, and you still can only wave your hands and say the word "prison" without even an accusation. Derpyderpderp!

  56. Re:~50% by fluffernutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's placing an awful lot of faith in the ability of the average American to think logically and rationally for themselves.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  57. No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To a certain extent I was a fan of some of Anonymous' shenanigans, but this isn't right. I am by no means a fan of Donald Trump, and the electoral system is far from perfect, but to have a third party with foreign membership fucking with our elections is a direct attack on our democratic ideals (flawed though they may be).

    Anonymous - please fuck off. You aren't the Robin Hoods of the Internet any more.

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    1. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Fragnet · · Score: 0

      That's funny. Your President is coming to the UK soon to strike fear into the UK population about voting to leave the European Union in our June referendum. Before you get all high and mighty about other people interfering in your elections please stop interfering in other country's business yourselves.

    2. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "To a certain extent I was a fan of some of Anonymous' shenanigans, but this isn't right."

      Oh I totally agree. This is the kind of Bullshit we have come to expect from Trump. When others do it it's just wrong. When HE does it? GO CHUMP!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    3. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "to have a third party with foreign membership fucking with our elections is a direct attack on our democratic ideals (flawed though they may be)."

      And guess which candidate will be able to use that very point as another platform plank? To be laid right next to the Chicago thug plank.

    4. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 2

      That's funny. Your President is coming to the UK soon to strike fear into the UK population about voting to leave the European Union in our June referendum. Before you get all high and mighty about other people interfering in your elections please stop interfering in other country's business yourselves.

      I do believe our President was invited to go to the UK. It's not a one-manned invasion.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    5. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fully agree, we need to stay out of the business of other countries. If you want to leave the EU, feel free. That is YOUR choice. My personal opinion is that the EU is more problem than solution. Knowing Mr. Obama, he is going over there to try to join the EU. The Putz.

    6. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Nunya666 · · Score: 1

      Most Americans don't interfere in the business of any country.

      I've been a U.S. citizen for my entire life of almost 50 years, and no President has ever asked my opinion before he acted like the world's biggest bully.

    7. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny. Your President is coming to the UK soon to strike fear into the UK population about voting to leave the European Union in our June referendum. Before you get all high and mighty about other people interfering in your elections please stop interfering in other country's business yourselves.

      I do believe our President was invited to go to the UK. It's not a one-manned invasion.

      Boy the UK must be in dire straights if the President and a small, Presidential entourage can strike fear into the population.

      Churchill is rolling in his grave. This is the same UK that endured the buzz bombs and air raids of WW2 with the stamina of "We will never give up!", right?

    8. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 1

      "but to have a third party with foreign membership fucking with our elections is a direct attack on our democratic ideals "

      Bwahahaha you have no idea how little control the "rest of the world"(tm) has over america compared to the control that america, and american companies, have over the rest of the world.

      "Foreign membership fucking [us]".... HA!
      To the rest of the world, thats called "american business interests".

      the world should be able to vote for the american government with all the shit you people spew out on other countries. We got NO Fucking say man.

      --
      -
    9. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Raenex · · Score: 1

      But most American's aren't going to vote for a non-interventionist, so in a sense there opinion was already asked.

    10. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Most Americans don't interfere in the business of any country. I've been a U.S. citizen for my entire life of almost 50 years, and no President has ever asked my opinion before he acted like the world's biggest bully.

      He asks for your opinion every 4 years...

    11. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Fragnet · · Score: 1

      Of course he was invited. How do you think these things actually work?

    12. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Robin Hood did what was Right regardless of if it helped the likes of you, or if it annoyed the likes of you.

    13. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      Honestly I think it will encourage his supporters to double down in support and vote.

      If anything, Americans hate being told what to do by foreigners in their election. There was an article about how the BBC tried to get people to go vote Democrat in some places in Ohio (2004 I think? Maybe 2012) and the outcome was the exact opposite.

    14. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Sucks to be you.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    15. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Nunya666 · · Score: 1

      Most Americans don't interfere in the business of any country. I've been a U.S. citizen for my entire life of almost 50 years, and no President has ever asked my opinion before he acted like the world's biggest bully.

      He asks for your opinion every 4 years...

      Really? Even if I didn't vote for him?

      I have never voted for an incumbent in any election, and I ALWAYS vote. I want to get rid of the a**holes, not bring them back so they can continue screwing up.

    16. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Nunya666 · · Score: 1

      But most American's aren't going to vote for a non-interventionist, so in a sense there opinion was already asked.

      By that "logic," everyone who voted for Obama has given their permission for everything he has ever done as a President.

      That's not how the real world works.

    17. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Raenex · · Score: 1

      In the context of what I replied to, the real word works as I described. American's are mostly for "bully" Presidents. Non-intervention doesn't sell when it comes to votes. The majority of Americans support drone attacks. The majority of Americans supported the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein.

      With regards to voting, what can be said is that major candidates for the Presidency with serious positions on non-interventionism have never gotten much traction with the public, so the issue is definitely not an overriding one.

    18. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I have never voted for an incumbent in any election, and I ALWAYS vote. I want to get rid of the a**holes, not bring them back so they can continue screwing up.

      So you want your vote to count more than others? I think they've tried that system before and it failed...

    19. Re:No Longer a Fan of Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't want our interference... you know, then don't tolerate it. Do you fault someone for protecting their own interests?

      do you expect china to look out for you? russia? the UK? each country's government should be looking out for the interests of its citizens first and foremost. That's the only directive as far as i'm concerned.

      where your interests and mine align, that's what we call friendly relations.

  58. Didn't we hear this all before? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait I'm confused... I thought they were going to wipe him out last year?? What happened to your previous "total war" anonymous?
    Maybe anonymous should concentrate on lesser goals they might actually achieve, like getting laid.

    1. Re:Didn't we hear this all before? by KingBozo · · Score: 1

      Anon - now with slashdot duping capabilities.

  59. At last we know... Anonymous is Against Democracy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Anonymous is telling us who to vote for now and not the will of the people? They will not let a person speak or have a campaign because they don't agree with it?

    Trump does not decide if he is to be president, the people do.

    What if the majority of people vote for Trump? They don't respect the rights of voters to decide?

    Everyone has to right to be candidate even if you don't agree with their views.

  60. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    You can reason with - perhaps even change - an "openly fascist candidate". However, we have openly fascist politicians in power right now (including the President) or in the recent past, looking to gain more (Mrs. Clinton); that's a much bigger threat IMHO.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  61. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    When asked if the government should maintain a database of Muslims entering the country, the right answer is "no, that's ridiculous ". Trump's answer was "we should do a lot of things, it's all about management."

    My response: I want a database of everybody entering the country. Leaving too.

    "Trump declines to confirm that the govt should not ask refugees and immigrants about their religion".

    You know, I think this is something that I'd have to think about before answering. Maybe Trump is the same? Should the government be prohibited in gathering basic census type information from those coming into our country, if only so that it can be charted? Should we start removing race/sex questions from all federal paperwork? The issue becomes more complex the more I think about it.

    Note that this is a separate issue from actually discriminating against them.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  62. Re:~50% by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    It's not actually working though. He could sacrifice a goat on stage while wearing a black robe and he'd still be supported; the evangelicals backing him would claim that they dislike his satanist religious views but are glad to find someone who's willing to say what he thinks. (meanwhile Hillary is crying that she says what she thinks too but keeps getting blamed for her gaffes)

  63. The guy they ran last time by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    He thought the tax returns would be important.

  64. Interested to see what happens by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    Knocking websites off is pretty pathetic and childish (and really, not all that hard unless they're backed by places like Akamai), however, that isn't the part I'm interested in.

    When they DDOS somebody, there's a decent chance that someone will panic and make a mistake with security, or Anon will find a mistake that someone had already made with their security, and use that to vacuum their data. There's a decent chance that they will find something juicy.

    That being said, unless they find something actionably criminal, none of it will matter. As others have said, these Trump supports have wrapped themselves in a reality distortion field that puts Apple to shame, and nothing will dissuade them short of Trump assassinating their children right in front of them. (And even then, only maybe).

  65. Why havent muslim countries banned this nutjob? by jonwil · · Score: 1

    There are any number of Muslim countries where saying the sort of things Donald Trump has said would get you locked up in some dark hole or worse. Why aren't these countries also saying "we will not allow people who say these things to enter our country" and banning not just Trump but anyone else who has said these anti-Muslim things from entering the country at all.

    1. Re:Why havent muslim countries banned this nutjob? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but then America should ban people who say anti-American things too. And stop those muslims from entering the country.
      This shit goes both ways you know.

    2. Re:Why havent muslim countries banned this nutjob? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean you support countries being able to decide who can and who can not enter their territory?

    3. Re:Why havent muslim countries banned this nutjob? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      " Why aren't these countries also saying 'we will not allow people who say these things to enter our country' "

      And while they're at it, could they possibly pull their own people back from Europe, the Americas and Asia, and never be seen outside al-Ummah again?

      We can dream, can't we?

    4. Re:Why havent muslim countries banned this nutjob? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Banning him from visiting a country would only go to INCREASE his popularity amongst his core voters. i.e. Those who want to cut the USA off from the rest of the world and go 'na na na na na, can't hear you'.
      With his 'Wall' to the south, IMHO and as a non American I forsee that electing Trump will send the USA into another era of protectionism and isolationism. That will hit the US Economy badly. The Economy is a global thing these days. Just hauling up the drawbridge, circling the wagons etc is going to his US Jobs hard.
      Meanwhile, the rest of the world gets on with business and grows.

      IMHO, Trump is by far the worst of a bad lot you guys/gals have to choose from.

  66. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

    My favourite trump moments:
    - Announcing that not only will he build a wall along the border, but he'll make Mexico pay for it.
    - -Suggesting doing so by seizing assets from Mexican companies in the US.
    -- Suggesting doing so by declaring war upon Mexico and just invading.
    - Performing a mocking caricature of a reporter's disability.
    -- Outright denying he ever did any such thing, even though it was caught on video, recorded, broadcast on national TV and uploaded to youtube.
    - Proposing that all Muslims should be forbidden from entering the country, regardless of citizenship, with the sole exception of those serving in the military.

  67. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you sure fascist is the word you meant to use?

  68. Help save us from Cruz by XXongo · · Score: 2
    About half the time I like what Anonymous does. This is not one of those times.

    Trump is our only hope to stop Ted Cruz.

    Trump just likes to shoot off his mouth. Cruz really is evil.

    For god's sake, don't stop Trump-- stop Cruz.

    1. Re:Help save us from Cruz by DaHat · · Score: 1

      Cruz really is evil.

      Because... ?

    2. Re:Help save us from Cruz by XXongo · · Score: 1

      Cruz really is evil.

      Because... ?

      You could start here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

    3. Re:Help save us from Cruz by DaHat · · Score: 2

      Again... because... ?

      The 'worst' I read about Cruz seemed to be:

      While Cruz has touted his hard earned anti-Washington bona fides, his campaign is straight from the Republican Party playbook. His stump speech and voter targeting has adhered with absolute fidelity to Grover Norquist rules. He pounds on the Second Amendment, religious liberty, reigning in entitlements and reducing the debt. He attacks federal intervention in education, gay marriage, and eminent domain. At the same time, he has offered a tax plan that is music to the ears of his largest donors in the hedge fund and oil and gas worlds. His proposal to replace the current progressive income tax system with a 10% flat income tax and a 16% value added tax would constitute a massive shift in the distribution of the income tax burden from the wealthiest Americans to the rest of the population.

      ... none of which is too far out of line of the mainstream republican view (oh right, the paragraph even says that).

      So again, how/why is Cruz evil?

      Or are you just one of those Democrats who has a hard time labeling anyone on the right as anything other than stupid or evil?

    4. Re:Help save us from Cruz by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Yes, because there is such a huge danger of Cruz winning. Are you some kind of fucking mental incompetent?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    5. Re:Help save us from Cruz by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

      ... he is so good at tricking the mentally incompetent?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    6. Re:Help save us from Cruz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cruz is a fucking leaf.

    7. Re:Help save us from Cruz by werepants · · Score: 1

      Hmm... is it evil to shift taxation away from the wealthy and instead onto the backs of struggling single moms? I'd say so. Actions that disproportionately harm the poor and favor the rich are basically the way you set up someone as a villain in a Disney movie... if a 3-year-old can understand why that's bad, what is there to be confused about here?

  69. Re:~50% by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

    As of right now, Clinton is well ahead of Trump in head to head polls.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

  70. Re:At last we know... Anonymous is Against Democra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No way, man.

    We all Know Donnie is a cancer.. Annon, is just the chemotherapy to get rid of it..
    When various others lack the intestinal fortitude to step up in and into the face of destruction..

    Like most great fires, leaving extensive destruction in their wake, this too should be extinguished..

    Annon, seems to be against people whom deserve this type of attention..
    Annon, like any other groups of this type, May also respond to the highest bidder ($) depending on the social drive of the disposition they decide to fight without funding .
    there are alot of factors..
    But the one you keep missing is the HUMAN factor.. To which they mostly build-on. (ashley madison).

    Bottom line is Annon is for themselves at the core, but is somewhat dependent on situation at hand..

  71. Proof! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anything, this is just more proof that Anonymous is controlled by the establishment.
    Trump was a wildcard they never accounted for, the insane ramping up of anti-trump sentiment in the media the last weeks is another proof.

  72. Re:~50% by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    Good to hear. Maybe there is hope for America yet.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  73. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Yep. Core tenets of fascism: Nationalism, Totalitarianism, One-party state, Personality cult, Dictatorship, Militarism, Direct action, Mixed economy, Class collaboration, Third Position, New Man, Imperialism, Social order. Most of those apply to President Obama and Mrs. Clinton.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  74. Declares 'Total War' by tehlinux · · Score: 1

    Oh man, I would NOT want to be Trump's webservers right now...

    --
    Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
  75. Bunch of idiots. by jacekm · · Score: 0

    Unless orchestrated by Democrats script kiddies want to end up like Snowden?

  76. impotent by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    They're always declaring war on something... and that war tends to boil down to them trolling on social media or maybe "hacking" some very very very easy to hack something or other. Like... a voice mail system that has a default password. Such amazing hacking...

    Anon broke apart shortly after it was created. The people that cite themselves as Anon are mostly script kiddies and posers at this point.

    So a bunch of script kiddies and posers just declared "war" on a guy currently getting Secret Service protection.

    This should be good.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  77. Threats by Anonymous by Catmeat · · Score: 1

    It's not that I have a problem with Anonymous threatening some quite dislikable individuals.

    But it's just their threats to person or organization X are starting to sound like North Korea's weekly threat to nuke New York/Washington/Wherever.

    And they sound about as credible.

  78. "Anonymous" Is Owned By The CIA and FBI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sabu was a Rat, who ratted out his entire organization Anonymous.

    In turn, Anonymous is now controlled by the federal government. Please get it through your thick skulls that anything you see in the mainstream media with the name "Anonymous" on it can be directly translated to "FBI and CIA". They were infiltrated, owned, completely compromised. No need to fall for their little Psy-ops any further.

    And on that note, fuck Trump.

  79. Re:~50% by johanw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If I were American I would vote for Sanders. However, if the choice was between Trump and H. Clinton it would be a close call, I'm not sure which of those I dislike the most. My guess is that Trump is a little less a warmonger than Clinton.

  80. RE: Attacking Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to look on Anonymous as the 'heroes' attacking the evil in the world... al-Qaeda, ISIS, etc. But threatening attacks on someone running for President crosses the line. If this is what Anonymous is about, then they should be hunted down and dismantled by the governments of the free world.

  81. Re:~50% by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    I'd be inclined to agree with you if I felt I could trust anything that comes out of Trump's mouth.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  82. Re:~50% by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

    It's working on some people, the rest loath him. Is it working on enough people to get elected? That's doubtful.

    --
    We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
  83. Re:~50% by jpapon · · Score: 1

    Most of them? Which ones, exactly? *Maybe* personality cult. Other than that, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Obama and Clinton are many things, some good, some bad, but Fascist? You're nuts.

    --
    -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
  84. Re:~50% by jpapon · · Score: 1

    Except that with Clinton, you pretty much know what you're getting: more of the same. With Trump... there's no telling what he might do. He *might* make some interesting changes. He also *might* invade Mexico. Better off with Clinton. Things could be much worse, and with Trump, there's a risk they will be.

    --
    -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
  85. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are full of shit.

    Hope this helps. Toodles!

  86. impossible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous can't do this -- Trump will just turn off that internet thing. :/

  87. Re:~50% by Lodlaiden · · Score: 1

    But annexing Mexico solves so many problems. Suddenly they aren't illegal immigrants and we don't have to build a giant wall.

    --
    Suborbital [spaceflight] is the special olympics of spaceflight. - Rei
  88. No candidates worth voting for? by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

    Reagan?
    Eisenhower?
    Grant?
    Lincoln?

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
    1. Re:No candidates worth voting for? by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Yeah but they aren't running for this election are they?

    2. Re:No candidates worth voting for? by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      really? grant?... really?

  89. Re:Nothing to see. by matthewv789 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Among other things, "other people" are not running for President of the United States of America.

    With Hillary, yeah, you could say "so what if she's corrupt as shit and lies through her teeth? Don't all politicians do that?" And I think most politicians today are at least somewhat like that, but I feel that she's worse than average, at least worse than average among Democrats. But still, if nobody better were running, sure, she might be the least of all evils and many people would overlook that, well, cause she's a Democrat with a capital D (it worked for Bill). And she's a Woman, too, and don't we all want to elect the first female president, regardless of who she is?

    But actually, all of her scandals and the awkward things she says (to put it very politely, I really mean the incessant stream of bald-faced lies) are sort of never-ending, with another scandal or mis-statement right around the corner seemingly daily, and are signs of a much deeper problem. And that problem is the whole reason why so many people are so thoroughly disgusted with politics and the entire American political system in the first place. Therefore, since they're trying to change that oligarchic, plutocratic, corporatistic, corrupt, war-oriented system of power and money that's taken away our democracy and ignored the voters (aside from lying to them to try to get votes), and since she's the shining example of everything that is wrong with that system, why would they want to vote for her? Why would they refrain from calling out her corruption and lies every time they see them?

  90. Re:Nothing to see. by DaHat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As has been well documented, when she was in office there was no regulation saying that a secretary of state couldn't use their own e-mail server

    You forgot the part about policies regarding classified information... the laws regarding which she is being investigated for

    Oops!

    Sorry to destroy your narrative.

  91. Martyr by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

    You run the risk of making him into the underdog martyr, and people saying "Hey, they're not treating that Trump guy fairly!"

  92. Look -- Anonymous is helping Trump by wbtittle · · Score: 1

    This is going to backfire. Trump is only going to get more popular because of Anonymous.

    How much free advertising can this guy generate?

    --
    God: "I don't leave footprints!"
  93. Godwin's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you were winning the argument up until then.

    1. Re:Godwin's Law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Godwin's Law doesn't say anything about losing the argument. And it would be wrong if it did.

  94. Re:~50% by kheldan · · Score: 0

    Oh look the Tea Party modded me down, what ever shall I do? What a bunch of losers, just like Trump. He'd be the absolute worst thing to ever happen to this country, he deserves all the grief he gets.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  95. Trump is the New Hitler by BrendaEM · · Score: 0

    Proof positive that any jackass with money can run for president, even a racist, classist, piece of shit like trump.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    1. Re:Trump is the New Hitler by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      I'd much rather vote for someone self-funded than blatantly bought-and-sold mouthpieces for the big corps and "special interest" groups like rubio, cruz and clinton.

  96. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must not be paying attention, or if you have been, you support his actions.

    This regarding Mr. "I have a pen and I have a phone" when elected representatives don't give him what he wants, and when things go wrong, it's never his fault, only those who stood in his way.

  97. Re:~50% by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

    Except that with Clinton, you pretty much know what you're getting: more of the same. With Trump... there's no telling what he might do. He *might* make some interesting changes. He also *might* invade Mexico. Better off with Clinton. Things could be much worse, and with Trump, there's a risk they will be.

    I understand he's paying the legal fees of the brownshirts who attack protesters.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  98. hahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    like they did for ISIS.... hahahaha.

  99. Re:~50% by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

    I dislike Trump and fervently hope he is not going to be elected as president of the USA, but this is not one of the times I agree with what Anonymous do. I'm no fan of political vandalism.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  100. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No it doesn't. Feel the Bern, Bitch!

  101. The one politician they can't dox is Bernie by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Because all of his documents are on scrolls of tree bark.

  102. Re:~50% by Bartles · · Score: 2

    Fascist economics supported a state-controlled economy that accepted a mix of private and public ownership over the means of production.[176] Economic planning was applied to both the public and private sector, and the prosperity of private enterprise depended on its acceptance of synchronizing itself with the economic goals of the state.[177] Fascist economic ideology supported the profit motive, but emphasized that industries must uphold the national interest as superior to private profit.[177]

    While fascism accepted the importance of material wealth and power, it condemned materialism, which it identified as being present in both communism and capitalism, and criticized materialism for lacking acknowledgement of the role of the spirit.[178] In particular, fascists criticized capitalism not because of its competitive nature nor support of private property, which fascists supported—but due to its materialism, individualism, alleged bourgeois decadence, and alleged indifference to the nation.[179] Fascism denounced Marxism for its advocacy of materialist internationalist class identity, which fascists regarded as an attack upon the emotional and spiritual bonds of the nation and a threat to the achievement of genuine national solidarity.[180]

    This reads like it was lifted from the Democratic Party's platform. It exactly describes the criticisms that progressives level against capitalism, and exemplifies their idea of what the American economy should look like.

  103. Idiots by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trump is not the enemy. He's just a reflection of the hate and desperation white working class Voters feel in the face of an eroding standing of living. Rubio, Cruz, Kasich. Their your enemies. They're the ones who openly attack the working class and drive down wages while raising taxes on the poor and working class. Take care of them, protect the Workers and bring back the middle class and the fear and hate Trump is reflecting back will dissipate in the wind.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Idiots by sabbede · · Score: 1
      Enemies?? Why, because they see things differently? Because their approach to solving problems is different from yours?

      Why you forget that good, intelligent people can disagree on matters of substance and decide that your approach is so unarguably correct that anyone who disagrees must be evil, democracy ends and civil war begins.

      Liberals and Conservatives both want what's best for America, both want everyone to do well, be happy, be healthy, and be financially secure. Just because they disagree on how best to achieve those goals, doesn't mean they don't share them. So pull your head out of your ass and ditch the hyper-partisan nonsense.

  104. Re:~50% by Bartles · · Score: 1

    No kidding. It's so much better to have the State do the thinking for them. Self-determination is such an outdated concept. Vote Sanders 2016!

  105. Re:Nothing to see. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bull shit.
    First of all, we have access to all the emails powel kept on his email server, but not HRC's.... interesting.... and the ones on powels server originated from within the department of state where He(powel) has discretion and authority to declassify the entire lot. HRC had content from classified networks that cannot exist outside of the networks, on her personal server. It somehow 'jumped' over the protections in place. Furthermore, she signed an NDA specifically speaking to the laws and rules regarding handling the classified data.

    You are either a liar, a shit-stirrer , or you just dont pay attention. There is the possibility you are shilling for shits and giggles.

  106. Re:~50% by Bartles · · Score: 1

    Yeah, you'd no longer have to pretend that you're not trying to import a bunch of new Democratic voters.

  107. Free speech for us! People we dislike; not so much by dbc · · Score: 1

    I've heard this song before and I don't like it.

  108. Re:~50% by amicusNYCL · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Who cares? RealClearPolitics also predicted Clinton with a 20+ point lead in Michigan, and you can see how that turned out. If polls this election season are proving anything, it is that the people who participate in polls and the people who actually vote are 2 different groups.

    Even so, who cares about Clinton? According to that site, the only people she beats are Trump and Carson (who dropped out). Sanders beats any Republican opponent. If the Democrats wanted to ensure that the Republicans lose then they would nominate Bernie.

    You know, assuming that polls mean anything now.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  109. Re:Nothing to see. by rahvin112 · · Score: 0

    So to clarify you are calling Colin Powell corrupt as shit and saying he lies through his teeth?

    I'd ask the same thing about Condeleeza but I actually believe that about her, after all she was in the NSA. There is nothing Clinton has done that everyone else that had that job didn't do. You might think she's slimy and such but that's because she's a politician. Personally I think Trump is about a million times worse, there is no slimier person in the world than property developers, they are about 10 times worse than used car salesmen and Trump is a property developer. Flesh eating bacteria might be slimier than property developers but it could be a tossup.

    Frankly if you wanna dislike the Clinton's there is far more to dislike that anything that she did as Secretary of State. People dragging up this stupid email thing up are doing so for political reasons, either that or they've been brainwashed by the propaganda campaign being executed by the super PAC's. Clinton did nothing wrong as SoS. You want to hate her, hate her for the legitimate shit, such as what she did to retaliate against people and pay back friends. Stop bringing up the stupid email or lets go back and go after all the Bush people that did the same thing.

  110. Re:~50% by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

    Seriously? Trump is the one that would start WWIII over some slight he perceived, just look at his rallies for god's sake. He's a hot head and would follow right in Bush's footsteps of using the military to exact personal revenge.

  111. Re:~50% by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    Oh look the Tea Party modded me down, what ever shall I do?

    I suppose you'll probably anonymously post a follow up chiding the mods.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  112. Re:~50% by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

    Most of the people crossing the Mexican Border aren't Mexican, they are from central America. Most of the Mexicans immigrated 20 years ago and are already citizens, either that or being repeatedly deported for drug crimes. The vast majority of current immigrants are fleeing drug gang crime in central America. They aren't coming because they want to, they are coming because they don't' have a choice.

  113. Total War? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is nearly not enough to demolish a campaign. If are serious about the expression "total war", you know you have to actually interfere the campaign itself. That may or may not involve some criminal hacking, breaking and entering and stealing confidential documents just to prepare an attack.

  114. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

    Or don't forget his bogus claim of 911 celebrations... and when demonstrated false couldn't find it within himself to acknowledge his error.

  115. Old saying springs to mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old saying springs to mind:
    I might not like what you have to say, but I will protect your right to say it.

  116. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

    Totalitarianism. One-party State. Cult of Personality. Dictatorship. Militarism. Direct Action. Mixed Economy. Third Position. New Man. Social Order. So 10 out of 13. I didn't say Nationalism, because I believe the President and former SecState both believe in a one-world Government, thus Nationalism is really Globalism. But if you expanded it to Globalism, then it would be 11 of 13.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  117. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My favourite trump moments:
    - Announcing that not only will he build a wall along the border, but he'll make Mexico pay for it.

    Hmm, my understanding of why this was silly is because there already is a wall - at least along the parts of the border where it would make any difference - and Obama has dramatically raised immigration and customs fees - to the point that much of US immigration and customs is already paid for by foreigners. Once you sort through the hyperbole, Trump was basically saying that he'll continue Obama's policies - continuing to improve the wall along the border and funding much of US immigration and customs through fees levied on foreigners.

    Or did you imagine that Obama and Hillary were in favor of a completely open border with Mexico where anyone was free to walk across any time?

    - -Suggesting doing so by seizing assets from Mexican companies in the US.

    And what do you imagine happens to Mexican companies that don't pay their customs and immigration fees in the current system under Obama?

    -- Suggesting doing so by declaring war upon Mexico and just invading.

    It was slightly more nuanced - that Mexico would lack the military strength to do anything to stop Trump's customs and immigration policies - which is also true now about Mexico being unable to use military threats to influence Obama's customs and immigration policies.

    - Performing a mocking caricature of a reporter's disability.

    Oh, the horror!

    -- Outright denying he ever did any such thing, even though it was caught on video, recorded, broadcast on national TV and uploaded to youtube.

    Consistent policy positions are definitely not Trumps strong point. But I'm also sick to the teeth of all this "gotcha" politics where everyone is looking for single comments that can be taken out of context to prove all on their own that some candidate is a total monster.

    - Proposing that all Muslims should be forbidden from entering the country, regardless of citizenship, with the sole exception of those serving in the military.

    I've had Muslim friends denied tourist visas under Obama (with Hillary as Secretary of State) - even though they were obviously not terrorists and obviously had no intention of overstaying or working illegally. But apparently the San Bernardino shooters were welcomed with open arms. While I'm not personally a fan of a temporary ban on Muslims, Trump does score some points with me for being willing to acknowledge just how horribly broken the current US immigration system is: denying tourist visas to good decent Muslims while giving citizenship to Muslim terrorists.

    The key point in all of this though is that what distinguishes Trump from politicians like Obama and Hillary isn't his policies, per se, it's that he's actually willing to be honest about them. Obama and Hillary preside over a government that does terrible things - but then pretend that everything's fine. So the real question is whether you want more of the same: pretending things are fine while doing horrible things. Or do you want to roll the dice on change - most likely for the worse - but maybe just maybe for the better. I mean, who knows, Trump's mother and two of his wives were foreign immigrants. He might possibly actually reform US customs and immigration policies for the better.

  118. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4

    She still hasn't released those speeches she gave to wall street - one of which she was paid $415,00 for. She only changed her position on same-sex marriage after it was obvious which way the wind was blowing. She sent secret information to people who were not supposed to be privy to it (to which the email server is just incidentally involved).

    That's three to start.

    The current FBI investigation has been going on since last August, but only confirmed in February. And this has nothing to do with republicans - this is an FBI probe under a Democratic president.

    Clinton is Not liked or trusted by a majority of the voters.

    On the positive side, 8% of Americans say they like her, 7% describe her as capable and qualified, 5% as experienced, 3% as strong and 3% as a good politician. Smaller percentages consider her honest or smart.

    Overall, 29% of Americans offer a positive observation about Clinton while 51% express something negative. The rest have either a neutral comment or no opinion. This loosely fits with her overall image among national adults as measured on Gallup tracking, which is 42% favorable and 51% unfavorable.

    These are the same number she had in 2008, and she lost then. The only candidate with overall positive numbers as Sanders.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  119. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Sir, your commentary is enlightening and a revelation in terms of the depth of your argument and your stunning logic is flawlessly displayed. It is a masterful commentary on the intellect you possess.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  120. Re:all smoke, no fire by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3

    The FBI, under a democratic president, has been investigating Clinton since last August, but they only revealed the investigation last month. And they're still investigating ...

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  121. Unfortunately - it won't stop the run away train by VikingNation · · Score: 1

    Donald Trump has tapped into a visceral nature of a base that feels ignored and marginalized by the "establishment" part of the party. The party deserves what is happening. Unfortunately, America (and the rest of the world) does not deserve Donald Trump. Howard Dean had a goofy 'Yell' after winning a primary and it sunk his campaign. Trump says 'I can shoot people in Times Square and not take a hit in the polls' and 'The guy [protester] needs to leave the building in a stretcher' and nothing happens. People who support Trump should be ashamed of themselves.

  122. No one gets it. by gabrieltss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The media, the republicans, the democrats and now Anonymous - they all don't get it. If you QUIT talking about Trump, quit showing him on the news he would become irrelevant and people would forget about him. The more people talk about him, berate him, attack him, show him all over the T.V. the more popular he gets.

    If they REALLY want to get rid of Trump they need to IGNORE him! Just stop talking about him, stop putting his face all over T.V., he will just go away and people will forget about him. I mean really, it's not rocket science folks. But then again.... Maybe they all WANT hm to WIN. It could be you know....

    We should be spending more of our time hammering the candidates about the problem with the H1B Visa program - like SHUTTING IT DOWN! This is what's really affecting people! Think Disney, Hertz, and all the others that are destroying American jobs for CHEAP foreign labor.

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!
    1. Re:No one gets it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anybody know of any candidates (other than Trump) that want to shut down or reduce H1B?

    2. Re:No one gets it. by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      We should be spending more of our time hammering the candidates about the problem with the H1B Visa program - like SHUTTING IT DOWN! This is what's really affecting people! Think Disney, Hertz, and all the others that are destroying American jobs for CHEAP foreign labor.

      Looks like your ideal campaign platform matches Trump's.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  123. Guess mommy's basement got boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    After all, I was still waiting for them to complete their teardown of ISIS/ISIL, which was apparently do successful that nobody noticed and now they need more attention.

    [End of sarc]

    Let's face it, the Anonymous jerks are just criminals and jerks who occasionally try to curry favor with the sort of morons who voted for Obama by claiming they will destroy somebody those Obama supporters think is "bad". ISIL was actually bad, so that one was easy. Trump is a super-villain to the worthless "gimmee free stuff" part of Obama's base, and he really freaks out the leftists "we get to bully everybody else into shutting up" crowd when he dares to push back, so he is a great target - BUT these attacks on him will backfire.

    The sad truth is that the left has been burning things down, blowing them up (google "Bill Ayers", who was at the big anti-Trump protest), trashing, punching, screaming expletives, etc ever since they hijacked the Democrat party at the 1968 convention. Lots of normal people in middle America are warming to Trump because they have seen their political parties fail, and finally seen that those leftist Saul Alynski tactics work. Playing nice while leftists attack, decade after decade, has just lead to the gradual slow meltdown of the society and with Trump as the only candidate resisting he becomes the solution to the problem of lawless anti-Americanism.

    In previous election cycles, yelling "fascist!" and "racist!" worked well to scare republicans and old-school democrats into backing down, but those slurs have been hurled so loudly and so frequently at anybody who opposes any element of leftists ideology that they have finally lost much of their kick.

  124. Re:~50% by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 2

    And yet Sanders beats everyone with better numbers. Normally, when a politician is under investigation by the FBI for more than half a year, they step aside and let someone else carry the water.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  125. Re:~50% by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 0

    You can reason with - perhaps even change - an "openly fascist candidate". However, we have openly fascist politicians in power right now (including the President) or in the recent past, looking to gain more (Mrs. Clinton); that's a much bigger threat IMHO.

    Yes, that's all Hitler needed. A nice little sit-down with some good coffee and cakes would have convinced Hitler that Germany didn't need to invade the rest of Europe, and that the Jews were just fine staying where they were.

    Seriously, you should try saying some of your stuff out loud before you post it. Maybe you'll notice how utterly insane it all is.

  126. Re:Nothing to see. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not when it comes to classified material: there retroactive classification does make prior handling illegal. This has made it to the Supreme Court before and they - well, they explicitly declined to comment, letting it stand and ruling on a different aspect of the case instead.

  127. Re:~50% by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

    I feel the best way to destroy the Trump campaign is to keep letting people hear him.

    It won't change anything. At this point, his supporters will stick with him no matter what. One thing Trump did say that was true is when he said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any supporters. His base of nutters are right now making any and all excuses for him.

  128. No, he doesn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama has a "kill list" of people he selects to be killed by remote control. These people are blown to bits. I personally suspect most deserve it, but whether that matters or not it does not change the fact that Obama selects specific human beings to be shredded, dismembered and burned.

    Trump has said he'd bring back waterboarding, in which water is splashed onto the faces of people captured alive (when by the rules of war they COULD have been killed). Nobody has ever been killed or even permanently damaged by Americans using waterboarding, and indeed waterboarding has been used on American troops in their training and journalists have even paid to be waterboarded so that these pampered keyboard princes could write articles about what it feels like. I cannot recall any journalists paying to have their fingernails plucked out, so I just cannot put waterboarding into the category of "torture".

    According to the political left, Trump is the evil NAZI and Obama is a messiah.

    Obama has an agenda built largely on indirectly controlling corporations and individuals through a combination of regulations, intimidation, and government investments - the classic definition of Fascism.

    Trump is calling for marginally less government intervention in the economy, probably bigger government than most Republicans want.

    According to the political left, Trump is the fascist and Obama is a great American.

    Trump is looking better by the day.

  129. Re:~50% by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 2

    Except that with Clinton, you pretty much know what you're getting: more of the same. With Trump... there's no telling what he might do. He *might* make some interesting changes. He also *might* invade Mexico. Better off with Clinton. Things could be much worse, and with Trump, there's a risk they will be.

    Considering how insecure he is, such as publicly rebutting Rubio during the primary debate regarding the size of his member, all Iran would need to do to destroy the U.S. during a Trump presidency would be to taunt him saying he is too much of a wuss to handle a war with Russia. And his supporters would say nonsense like "Yeah! We gotta give it to those Commie Soviets!"

  130. Re:Nothing to see. by Lt.Hawkins · · Score: 1

    "I'd ask the same thing about Condeleeza but I actually believe that about her, after all she was in the NSA. "
    Condeleeza Rice was never in the NSA. Your arguments lose serious credibility if you can't differentiate between the National Security Agency (the intelligence agency) and the National Security Advisor (the person who advises the president on national security issues, including but not limited to, intelligence matters, who has no authority over any of the Intelligence Community)

    --
    -- My Sig is a P228.
  131. Re:Nothing to see. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

    Well, yes and no. You are correct in the concept of ex post facto but incorrect on the retroactive classification. Several of the documents being looked at were classified at the point of creation due to known policies and who or what the communication was about. Then there is supposed documents that were classified before hand and mishandled.

    How do we know this? Because several people she communicated with had their emails hacked and dumped on the internet marketing. But that of course necessarily assumes the emails are real which is something we will have to wait until the FBI investigation is finished.

  132. Test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    test

  133. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mexico is literally invading the USA. And the USA is literally at war with Muslims. Trump's imitation of the guy with the birth defect was accurate.
    Blind citizens need to be led by someone who can see.

  134. Where have all the Republicans gone? by shanen · · Score: 1

    I don't know if I'd go that far. The Democratic Party has never had much of a cohesive ideology. It sort of grew over time and incorporated bits of this and that, including many unlikely or implausible coalitions. Actually, many of the organizational features we now regard as standard parts of political parties in America were innovations introduced by Abraham Lincoln as he organized the Republican Party--and even with those innovations his party never could have captured the White House without a massive schism in the Democratic Party over the issue of slavery. On that basis, I 'd say Hillary and Bernie are both well within the historical "norms" of their party. Hard to call anyone a DINO when the label has so little meaning, eh?

    However, on the topic of this article, my main focus was actually the intended joke of "government of the Donald, by the Donald, for the Donald", and the entry point of censorship, even of the Donald, is what bothered me about the situation. Better to let the jackass bray as loudly as possible. If he doesn't destroy his own reputation and candidacy, then maybe we have to pray that the Donald is faking. "I want to be president" certainly wouldn't be Trump's first lie.

    Now about that moderation... Still offensive. I wouldn't mind being marked "provocative" or even "thought provoking", but slashdot lacks such sophistication... I'm horrified to feel sort of compelled to say something nice about Facebook's new moderation system. Still awful, but at least it's improving and it may already be better than slashdot's moderation system... The idea of a general positive dimension with optional focusing on more narrow dimensions is a half-decent implementation of what I recommended for slashdot about 10 years ago. (Not claiming credit. It's intuitively obvious to the most casual observer, and I'm quite sure there have been plenty of such observers with similar suggestions over the years...)

    (Now what was that "open proxy" thing about? Slashdot doesn't need more breakage...)

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  135. Re:all smoke, no fire by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

    That sounds like you are admitting that they have nothing (because you are). I know that is ridiculous, because you would never admit that simple fact. I fucking hate the idea of Billary as President, but lets not pretend the reason she is bad is because she has committed crimes. Let's just admit she hasn't done anything out of the ordinary, and that is what disqualifies her.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  136. Re:Nothing to see. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

    You are apparently new to how things work.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  137. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Huh. You're comparing Trump to Hitler - and I'm the one making insane comments?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  138. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

    If you think anyone is more deserving of scorn and ridicule than Trump then you truly are a moron.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  139. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

    Shut the fuck up you idiot. You are the reason this country is a Pathetic joke.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  140. Re:~50% by TimSSG · · Score: 1
    How the people in Washington have claimed that a vast right wing conspiracy is working against them?
    Wow, I did NOT know there was that many conspiracy kooks in DC.
    Tim S.

    You do realize that it's well documented in the press prior to her current issues that half of washington does exactly what she does? I don't like it.. it's shady faggot lawyer shit. But seriously like... I can't take you serious.

  141. Re:all smoke, no fire by DaHat · · Score: 1

    Not to mention that same DoJ recently granted immunity to the staffer who originally setup the server.

    Clearly also just smoke and no fire... as they hand out those immunity cards like free condoms on a college campus.

  142. I think the hatred of Trump comes from WWII by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People haven't forgotten Hitler, and they see a lot of parallels between Trump and Hitler.

  143. Re:Nothing to see. by DaHat · · Score: 1

    You and Hillary are free to keep on telling yourselves that... however the State Department Inspector General and FBI seem to disagree... and no offense, I trust their interpretations much more than I do yours or hers.

  144. Better get used to those bars kid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go ahead and attack a front running presidential candidate that has US Secret Service protection. I foresee many many articles with headlines like "John McMasterson, Member of Anonymous charged with multiple felonies" (Name made up on the spot). It is one thing to play script kiddie and shut down websites of churches or release nude pics of Miley Cyrus from where you managed to "hack" her email account, it is another thing entirely to try to do similar to a presidential candidate. The NSA would be on you like stink on pig dung.

    Not that it really matters, because anonymous is worse than the government when it comes to "you said something we don't like so now you are going to pay". Apparently if you disagree with them, you must be "silenced". If they were actually going after good causes, I would probably be more supportive of them. When they decided they were going to try to go after the drug lords, I thought two things. First, at least they are finally doing something worth while. Second, it will never last as soon as they figure out that the drug lords kill people that cross them.

    It has been my experience, after looking through logs of some of their attacks, that these little kids know absolutely nothing about hacking and would be lost if it wasn't for the real "hackers" that wrote their code for them.

    Just a bunch of wannabe's.

  145. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    Oh, I have it on good authority that Trump is much better at head than Hillary.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  146. Re:Nothing to see. by DaHat · · Score: 1

    Then again, these are peopel who were frothing at the mouth about the Kenyan terror baby's not being elegible to be president, while finding Dominionist Teddy Cruz a perfectly acceptble candidate.

    Aside from your atrocious spelling, your delusions and impending meltdown are absolutely delightful to witness.

  147. Re:Nothing to see. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I could get you investigated for child pornography, that doesn't mean you are a pedophile (or have child pornography in your possession). And I don't even have any political clout in the USA. With the appropriate political clout you can get anyone investigated for anything you want. That doesn't mean that anything will turn up...

  148. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    "My guess is that Trump is a little less a warmonger than Clinton"

    Yes. Nothing says "Can't we all just get along" more than declaring that all Muslims are our enemy.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  149. Nonsense by Trogre · · Score: 1

    If they had the ability to do so they would have done it already.

    They're just spouting rhetoric.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  150. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

    Rest assured. You CAN trust everything he says. He has openly stated that he is completely incompetent and should be tortured to death. You just haven't been listening.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  151. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wouldn't even begin to try to claim that Trump is clear and consistent in his message. And, for me, the biggest puzzle is why he would want to be president at all. Presumably, he would see being elected president as somehow demonstrating his superiority - whereas I would just see it demonstrating his lack of integrity in successfully deceiving an ignorant and gullible American public: like taking candy from a baby - not hard to do, but ethically questionable.

    But, unless Obama and Hillary and the other mainstream Democrats were willing to go to the mat advocating the position that there were valid reasons to celebrate 9/11, I wouldn't really see their position as being all that different from Trump's. In fact, when it comes to admitting that there are things to dislike about the USA, Obama and Hillary are sweeping all the problems under the rug and pretending everything's fine while Trump is at least acknowledging that there are problems - even if he proposes bogus and misleading solutions.

  152. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

    I can honestly say that if Trump gets elected that it is every citizens responsibility to assassinate him. To allow him to be the president is completely un-American.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  153. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

    I'd normally agree with your anti-Sanders sentiment. Sadly, as phenomenally unqualified as he is, he is the only viable option.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  154. Re:~50% by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    I truly hope he becomes President, simply because the chances of him getting assassinated skyrocket.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  155. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But annexing Mexico solves so many problems. Suddenly they aren't illegal immigrants and we don't have to build a giant wall.

    And you could have a real war on drugs instead of just arresting a whole bunch of people who are not really causing any issues...

  156. "Hackers affiliated with the Anonymous" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dont think you know how Anonymous works.

  157. Re:Nothing to see. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The entire argument against us folks who want to see Hillary face charges for exposing classified information to people without clearance seems to be "yeah but you wouldn't want to prosecute !! Fucking conservatives!!!!!"

    No, we want every politician who has done something like this to face charges. "Bush did it!" is your response? Prosecute Bush. Put Bush in fucking prison alongside Hillary.

    This is where you try to construct a fantasy argument about how Hillary didn't expose classified information to people without clearance. This is the dozen replies with endless amounts of evidence of Hillary trying to hide the fact that information was classified by removing 'classified' and 'secret' markings on documents.

    This is where you try to construct an argument about how other politicians have done this. This is the dozen replies about how those people need to be prosecuted too, and when can we get started on that?

    This is where you resort to 'BUT MUH MISOGYNY' or 'FUCKIN CONSERVATIVES'. This is the part where I tell you I'm a liberal, but you refuse to believe it since "liberal criticizing a FEMALE politician" does not compute in your brain.

  158. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the people assuming "SuricouRaven" is opposed to Trump's policies: I'm a Trump Supporter and these were some of my favorite Trump moments as well!

    That's what's so great about Trump:
    ~40% of the Country hates the guy because they think he's serious.
    ~30% of the Country love the guy because they think he's serious.
    meanwhile, the remaining ~30% of the country love the guy because he's Trolling the first 70% so hard.

    I consider myself in the 3rd category.

  159. Re:~50% by Bartles · · Score: 1

    Viable doesn't actually mean what you think it means.

  160. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mexico is corrupt as fuck, and Mexican people have been crying for a better wall for decades (to end the drug money flow to the cartels who destroy their nation).
    Many Mexican companies are corrupt mafia-like entities and should have their assets frozen until they pay their fucking taxes in Mexico and the USA.
    The Mexican government has basically declared war on its own people and sided with the cartels.
    Trump performed the same mock caricature of other people, the one "journalists" who happened to have a disability played the victimhood card and got all pretend offended, like a good SJW lapdog.
    Trump didn't deny he insulted the jerk, just that he didn't mean to insult him for his disabilities, just for being a corrupt SJW slanted media shill.
    He proposed a ban on new Muslim immigrants because ISIS actually released a document describing how to infiltrate countries using the migrant crisis. And then Paris and California radical extremist shootings happened... He didn't even say, "I told you so", to you fools, but Trump should have.

    There are plenty of things to go after Trump on, but you're just regurgitating propaganda and lies.

  161. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Oh yeah, Hillary's totally not a psychopath...

    Why are you hardcore leftists/"progressives" always the absolute biggest hypocrites? You constantly accuse others of acts you or your heroes are guilty of. You claim to be against hate, but you do nothing but spew hatred. You claim to be against racism, yet you constantly make every topic about race, and demand unequal treatment based on race. You demand to be treated with respect, yet you show no respect for others. You demand peace from others, yet throw violent tantrums when things don't go your way. You demand restrictions on the free speech of others, yet expect your speech to be heard and uncensored.

    Nobody takes you seriously. You're the running joke of the 21st century. A failed societal experiment. A product of "no child left behind", "affirmative action", and garbage child psychology.

  162. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RealClearPolitics also predicted every other state so far and they were correct for the overwhelming majority of them.

    Sanders only beats Republicans in the polls because everyone knows he's going to lose so the attacks never really started. The vast majority of the American people aren't going to vote for a deadbeat dad socialist that couldn't hold a steady job until he was 40. They probably wouldn't even need to get to the fact that every respected economist in the world thinks his economic plans would be an unmitigated disaster or the fact that his tax plan doesn't even come close to actually paying for all the ridiculous spending he wants to do.

  163. Anonymous to the rescue! YAY! by Chas · · Score: 1

    Fucking script kiddies...

    They'll attack anyone who won't fight back.

    How brave of them!

    But hey! Drug cartels might hit back! So we can't take those on!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  164. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're a fucking lunatic.

  165. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right, not like there's a huge continent in the other direction that they'd have the choice to flee to.

    The more this lie about "no choice" is repeated, the more unbelievable it becomes. People flee to America the same reason they asylum-shop in Europe: for FREE SHIT.

    If Peru was a welfare recipient's wet dream, you could bet your bottom dollar that's where everyone would be fleeing to.

  166. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think that claim was bogus, see YT below.

    Not sure why its so hard to fathom this happening:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3auKMHkZJnQ

  167. Re:~50% by epyT-R · · Score: 1

    That doesn't make it ok.

  168. Re:all smoke, no fire by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Obviously they won't reveal what they have until they're ready. And the fact that there is an ongoing investigation is usually sufficient for the individual to voluntarily step aside during the investigation. So, why should Clinton be an exception?

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  169. Sigh by koan · · Score: 1

    If Trump can't run, regardless of his behavior or how you feel about T-rump, then what do we have?

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  170. Re:~50% by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Huh. You're comparing Trump to Hitler - and I'm the one making insane comments?

    If the shoe fits...

    Have you even seen what goes on at Trumps rallies? Or heard all the stuff he's been saying publicly for months now? It simply is fascism. It is Hitler in the early years, before he became Chancellor. It is Oswald Mosley, complete with pointing out someone he doesn't like in the audience, and having hooligans beat them up as they are dragged out.

    Clinton and Obama, while certainly not the best of politicians, as also certainly not fascists as you claim. You don't like them, and you have clearly developed a burning hatred for them, but that doesn't make someone a fascist.

  171. Trump, trump, trump. by Z80a · · Score: 1

    Just yet another article to remind everyone that Trump exist and is running for president.

  172. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree.
    Sorry, Anonymous. This is democracy in action like it or not; let Trump win or lose on his own merits. He may or may not be evil, but our constitution says that the voters decide. Not you.

    Have you considered that an attack on Trump may backfire by creating more sympathy and votes in his direction?
    You must have a lot of time on your hands after you destroyed ISIS. (sarcasm)

    "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." - H. L. Mencken

  173. ISIS by tsotha · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm glad to see Anonymous's war on ISIS has been completed successfully.

    Or maybe the people involved are starting high school soon.

  174. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except it's the protesters who are following the playbook of the brownshirts. Disrupting the meetings of opposing parties was one of their key tactics, which is exactly what these paid-for, brainwashed, protester stooges are doing. Funding the smear campaign and these so-called protester clowns are oligarchs such as Soros, Musk, Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance, and one of the Google founders. Useful idiots, indeed. Soro's moveon.org movement took credit for the violent protests. So when is the designation of terrorist organization going to be applied to Soros' orgs? Bafflingly, only Russia has had the brains to call that criminal out for what he's done.

  175. Re:Nothing to see. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 0
    At last, a trooley intellectual reply. Troolly, iff al u heve is a coment on mine spewlining, you rnadzeho.

    But seriously, Is that the best you can muster? What kind of imbecile actually responds to a direct challenge by whining like a small spoiled child about a spelling mistake, then adding stupid non-sequitars?

    Do you need a Binky? Am I attempting to discuss an adult topic with a person who has no comprehension of anything that isn't told them by someone who pre-determines their views? Is that the absolute best you can do? Because it doesn't even work as third grade playground taunting. It was a challenge, because there were quite a few people killed at US embassies during the Bush administration. Perhaps in that impermeable fortess of your cognitive dissonance you forgot it was a challenge. Which makes your semi incoherent rant against my spelling all the more a good example of your utter stupidity, and the increasingly apparent fact that you simply do not give a rampant syphilitic fuck about those poor Americans who were killed in Benghazi, only as long as you can attempt to score some political points against your favorite hate target. a Democrat, and even worse, a Clinton.

    Well spunky, I'll tell you what. All of the Americans and all of the innocents killed in all US Embassy attacks have my undivided attention, not just the ones in your rather unpatriotic view of dismissing them as long as they didn't happen during the "enemy's watch". And I mean that. What the hell kind of American goes apeshit nuts about Benghazi while not breathing a word about the 43 deaths that the previous administration is responsible for?

    Then having the nerve to complain about a typo. Bitch, please. It's still a challenge, but since you don't want to venture outside your bubble.......

    Here's the numbers and the year. Attacker deaths not included.

    2002 - 17

    2003 - 2

    2004 - 5

    2006 - 4

    2008 - 15

    Total of 43 under the Bush administration.

    2010 - 4

    2012 - 4

    2013 - 3

    total of 11 (so far) under the O'Bama administration.

    Look 'em up, and prove me wrong.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  176. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently you and other hot-head regressives are the ones who are having trouble understanding the democratic process and America's founding principles. As soon as things don't go your way, you're calling for others to be killed.

    I seriously hope the FBI pays you a visit. You're a maniac who is inciting others to commit murder. Look in the mirror, psycho, because attitudes like yours are a bigger threat to the American way of life than any one president.

  177. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When asked if the government should maintain a database of Muslims entering the country, the right answer is "no, that's ridiculous ". Trump's answer was "we should do a lot of things, it's all about management."

    A few weeks ago, I flew into the LAX airport in Los Angeles from Southeast Asia. And the USA doesn't just keep a database of Muslims entering the USA, the USA keeps a database of everyone entering the USA - even natural born US citizens like myself. There's a kiosk that you have to go through where they take a photo and a thumb print.

    Now, it's true that they don't ask what your religion happens to be that morning - and, even if they did ask your religion, how would they know whether you were telling the truth? Suppose I claimed that I had decided to be Muslim merely for the morning that I was passing through immigration and then I was planning to switch back to pastafarian? Could they prove that I wasn't Muslim? The USA has freedom of religion right there in the first amendment - unlike many other countries where you can be severely punished for switching religion, in the USA you can be whatever religion you want whenever you want.

    So, yes, adding an additional "religion" field to the database of everyone who enters the USA would be ridiculous. But, if you want to be outraged, be outraged with Obama about the entire database. Don't pretend that this database is somehow OK simply because it doesn't have a religion field.

  178. total war by ooloorie · · Score: 1
    And who else like to talk about "total war"? Oh, right.

    Looks like the mask is slipping.

  179. Clinton or possibly even Sanders... by neoshroom · · Score: 2

    ...and think his negative numbers are way too high to defeat Clinton or possibly even Sanders.

    Actually, you should say "and think his negative numbers are way too high to defeat Sanders or possibly even Clinton." I say that because in hypothetical Clinton-Trump and Sanders-Trump matchups, Sanders appears to consistently fair better according to the polling data:

    Clinton-Trump
    Sanders-Trump

    Averaging five or more polls in a Clinton-Trump matchup currently, Clinton wins by 6.3% on average.
    Averaging five or more polls in a Sanders-Trump matchup currently, Sanders wins by 10% on average.

    --
    Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
    1. Re:Clinton or possibly even Sanders... by swb · · Score: 1

      I didn't realize how well Sanders was doing against Trump head-to-head. I've definitely heard there is some Democratic crossover to Trump and some kind of weird, mutual appeal that Sanders and Trump both have to a segment of the electorate.

      I think the +4% advantage you show for Sanders over Clinton in a matchup with Trump shows there are some Sanders supporters willing to vote Trump over Clinton, which kind of reinforces that sector of the electorate who sees things they like in both candidates (or a shared dislike of Clinton).

    2. Re:Clinton or possibly even Sanders... by Talderas · · Score: 1

      When you view the primaries as political class vs everyone else it makes a whole lot more sense. This election is, in my mind, a punitive one by the voters directed at the Republicans and Democrats.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    3. Re:Clinton or possibly even Sanders... by werepants · · Score: 1

      Supposing a single-issue voter who wants campaign finance reform, I could imagine a Sanders>Trump>Others strategy, because they've both called for finance reform in different ways, and both have non-traditional financing for their campaigns. You'd have to hold your nose to Trump's blatant sexism, racism, and cluelessness though.

      Note: I am not one of these voters, and will never, under any circumstances, vote for Trump. I do think Sanders is a stand-up dude, though.

  180. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Half of Washington laughs while ambassadors die and later scream "WHAT DOES IT MATTER?" when asked about it?

  181. Re:Nothing to see. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lemme see INDITEMENT and then lemme see it STICK.

  182. Insightful - really ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Race card is a little over played. It's working because he's communicating common sense solutions that the establishment isn't able to see/do. I think he'll be the least stupid president of this generation for his art is working with people and getting things done.

  183. They're out of stock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The national socialist garb was already gobbled-up by all the Hillary and Bernie supporters.

    Fun Fact #1: The "Brown Shirts" were the NSDAP (AKA NAZIs) which were the National Socialist Deutch (German) Arbeit (Workers) Party

    Fun Fact #2: The "Brown Shirts" of old used mob intimidation tactics to shut down the speech of people who disagreed with them - just like Hillary and Bernie supporters trying to shut down Trump rallies.

    Fun Fact #3: Every slave in US History was owned by a Democrat or an independent.

    Fun Fact #4: The KKK was founded by Democrats mad that the Republicans took away their slaves, and their posters and flyers often called for lynching Republicans. It was the NRA that went to blacks in the "old south" to help them get guns and learn to use them to defend themselves from Democrats in white sheets.

    Fun Fact #5: Hillary, Bernie, President Obama, and Vice President Biden ALL voted to have an actual Klansman, Senator Robert Byrd, as their leader.

    I Personally would not knowingly be in the same room with a filthy Klansman, but you people on the left who love Obama and Bernie and Hillary and yet insist on calling ANYBODY else ANY nasty words have absolutely no ground to stand upon. For you, it really all seems to be "ends justify the means" and "facts don't matter" as long as raw political power is on the line.

  184. Re:~50% by pagedout · · Score: 1

    *replaces Trump with Obama and wonders how many people see the hypocrisy*...

  185. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

    My favourite trump moments: - Announcing that not only will he build a wall along the border, but he'll make Mexico pay for it.

    This has been my single favourite moment so far. I'm still waiting to hear how this will address the planes, tunnels and submarines that currently also being used by smugglers?

  186. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hilarious! just what I was looking for!

  187. Right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did that KKK war work out for them? I notice we didn't hear much about it...

  188. Again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet another common theme for the left. Both Bernie and Hillary are for not enforcing our borders, not deporting illegal aliens, i.e. Lawlessness and no national security.

    National Socialists, International Socialists, - To Quote Hillary: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

  189. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So President Obama telling people to bring guns to knife fights, to get in their faces, that's not violent and fascist? Telling the opposition party to get to the back of the bus, the sit and be quiet is not fascist? Using the power of the State (the IRS) to penalize political opponents isn't fascist? Virtual State control over an entire industry isn't fascist? You have an interesting definition of fascism... I posted mine (a well accepted one at that); what's yours?

    Oh, and about the "beating" of hecklers? Never really happened now, did it? Of course, with the media literally lying about the hooligans disrupting the rallies (those hooligans, you know, sponsored by MoveOn.org and other darlings of President Obama and SecState Clinton) it's not a surprise you're confused. You only need to ask yourself if Trump was the problem, why is the ACLU siding with him over these rally disruptions?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  190. psssst.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your foil hat is on too tight.

    plus, George Soros and his MoveOn puppets have already claimed responsibility for the Brown Shirt tactics of trying to shut down the speech of Trump and his supporters. They'll probably start holding book burning parties soon.

  191. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

    Having a list of names of immigrants is one thing. Requiring the immigrants to disclose their religion is quite another!

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  192. The US has NOT lost perspective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that Europe is balanced on a thin line between the international Socialism of the old USSR on their left fringe and the national Socialism of Hitler and his merry band on their right, only speaks the the extreme dysfunction of politics in a part of the world that went from totalitarianism (various monarchies) to elected socialists without ever trying FREEDOM. The US political spectrum is kilometers wide with most politicians within a kilometer of a spot half a kilometer left-of-center. Bernie is two kilometers left of center. Europe's entire political spectrum is 2 centimeters wide, and located 10 km left of center. A large portion of the Republican base in the US wants to be a kilometer right of center, and our founders were 20km right of center.

    The US Political spectrum started with maximum freedom of the sort only hardcore libertarians and conservatives today could love and which no European ever got to experience, and has spent the past several decades accellerating leftward toward Euro-style Marxist whacko-ism with the natural effects easily predicted from such a move: massive loss of freedom, muzzling of speech with "speech codes", "progressive" taxes that squelch entrepreneurism, suppressing new small business creation and new jobs, and the resulting institutionalized unemployment and suppression of upward mobility with the super-rich getting richer as has always happened in Europe.

  193. Re:all smoke, no fire by Raenex · · Score: 2

    I fucking hate the idea of Billary as President, but lets not pretend the reason she is bad is because she has committed crimes. Let's just admit she hasn't done anything out of the ordinary, and that is what disqualifies her.

    I believe if an ordinary employee had done what she had done, they at minimum would have been fired, and potentially would have gone to prison. If they were a whisteblower, they almost surely would have gone to prison as retaliation: http://www.washingtontimes.com...

    I also believe her "Foundation" is a tax-free piggy bank for her to pay salaries to cronies (at the minimum) that lobbyists looking for influence contribute to, on top of any money she or Bill makes from speaking engagements.

    Let's just admit she hasn't done anything out of the ordinary

    Perhaps in the sense that high-profile politicians routinely engage in such shenanigans without accountability.

  194. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are whole documentaries on the corruption of the Clintons. Go read or watch the Clinton Chronicles. Guess who has a monopoly on gold rights in Haiti thanks to exploiting a big earthquake? The Clinton family.

    Go look at the death tolls among friends and associates of the Clintons. It's crazy that you think there's no concrete evidence. Not being prosecuted doesn't mean you're not a criminal, esp. if you can buy off law enforcement. I would love to live in the world of your idealistic delusions, too bad it doesn't exist.

  195. No decent person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would ever consider supporting Hillary or Bernie. Both are Marxist, though she tries to be in the closet occasionally, and Marxism is behind all the worst millions+ victims massacres in the history of the planet: Pol Pot (Communist), Chairman Mao (Communist), Joseph Stalin (Communist), Hitler (National Socialist)

    No civilized human being would EVER be a leftist.

    I always marvel at the extreme ignorance of young people wearing Che' shirts... HE also was a Marxist who despised black people and had a big window installed in his office in Cuba when he was there with his buddy Fidel - so he could watch all the executions of opponents of the Marxist revolution. Che' was a total racist pig who was only popular with the smelly unwashed hippies of the sixties (who later became journalists, school teachers, and professors) because he hated the United States even more than he hated blacks.

  196. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the answer is we should have a list of EVERYONE coming into the country.

    Uh...we do. Everyone who enters the USA, including natural born US citizens, now has to get photographed and fingerprinted. All entries to the USA are now recorded in a federal database.

    we have a list of all the citizens (SS number) why shouldnt we also have a list of all those from outside the country (muslims included)

    Why stop there? These days we can do a lot better than mere international border crossings. We should have everyone in the USA wear a GPS tracking device at all times. Make it impossible to commit a crime without being caught. Premeditated crimes would drop to zero.

    Given the choice between privacy and security, anyone who chooses privacy is a fool. I mean, what good is privacy when criminals are allowed to wander our streets in secret?

  197. Just like the violent protestors by bobby_9x · · Score: 1

    Well, we see who are the evil ones, now don't we. Anti-trump protesters have not only disrupted many of his rallies with violence, and silencing the freedom of speech. They now are going to try to use more thug tactics. I still haven't seen the same level of violence disrupting Hillary or Sanders.

  198. Anonymous need to get a clue by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    I miss the days when Anonymous used to act intelligently, and on behalf of freedom and the people. This latest action of theirs is blatant suppression of free speech and democracy just to bully people into having whatever political views Anonymous decides is good for us. Good job Anonymous... NOT. You've now become exactly the evil dictatorial thing that you originally formed expressly to fight against.

  199. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some information about the average Muslim for you from (now) anti-Trump supporter - Ben Shapiro : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg

    Pro-tip: They're not as cultured as the MSM would have you believe.

  200. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My response: I want a database of everybody entering the country. Leaving too.

    Well, then you should love Obama because he's been hard at work to get that all in place. Obviously all entries are recorded - in most cases with photos and fingerprints - even for natural born US citizens. The exits are almost certainly recorded, too. But not quite as "officially".

    But why stop there? Why not require everyone in the USA to wear a GPS tracking device. Then, if the government noticed someone walking down a street where drugs were often sold the government would have probable cause to bring that person in for some extra questioning. Offer them a plea bargain - either they confess to buying drugs or you charge them with a murder that happened in the general area where they were walking. Would they rather accept a few years in jail or risk the death penalty?

    In the meantime, though, I do hope that the federal government uses it's database of international border crossings to establish probable cause to convict all manner of miscreants. Let's say there's some chubby middle-aged loser that has made a number trips to Southeast Asia. Boom - probable cause for underage sex. Who cares if he claims he just likes the beaches and the cheap food. Offer him the usual plea bargain - plead guilty and the government lets him off light with just a few years in prison. But if he gets all constitutional and claims his right to "fair" trial and well that's when the government locks him up for the rest of his life.

    Knowledge is power and who better to trust with that power than the US federal government?

  201. Re:Unfortunately - it won't stop the run away trai by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    No, its the people who support blatantly corrupt, self-serving politicians like Clinton, Cruz and Rubio that should be ashemaed of themselves.

  202. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean a temporary ban on Muslims until we can figure out a system that filters out terrorists. That proposal of his? You oppose *that*? What a schmuck.

  203. Trump Is Okay In my Book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anonymous is totally wrong on this one...

    Trump is saying a lot of truths right now... weather he is the one to fix the wrongs, I'm not sure. But he definitely deserves a shot for sure.

    Career politicians are the ones that we should be most wary off... they are controlled by corps and foreign governments. They don't give a shit about the people - only their owners interest that feed them scraps.

    Trump has high IQ 156 (Einstein was 160) - that gives me some hope.

  204. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - Arguing for the war crime of killing the families of the ISIS soldiers to get back at them. http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/02/politics/donald-trump-terrorists-families/

  205. THIS DOES NOTHING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need people literally at every rally tugging behind his coat or throwing tomatoes at him. That is how you ruin a politician, not by defacing a website that nobody looks at.

  206. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Poe's Law?

  207. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I seriously hope the FBI pays you a visit.

    I expect the secret service will. Posting with your username wasn't wise.

  208. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by Boronx · · Score: 1

    Meanwhile, Trump is supportive of violence at his rallies, pumps up anti-hispanic racism, alludes positively to Japanese internment when talking about Muslims, and would bring back torture. That's your choice.

  209. Re:~50% by ag0ny · · Score: 1

    Yep. Core tenets of fascism: Nationalism, Totalitarianism, One-party state, Personality cult, Dictatorship, Militarism, Direct action, Mixed economy, Class collaboration, Third Position, New Man, Imperialism, Social order. Most of those apply to President Obama and Mrs. Clinton.

    If you're trying to say that Obama is a fascist, then you have no idea about what you're talking about and you should be taken to a real fascist regime for a few years so you can learn your politics.

    Sometimes I think it would be better to let Trump win in order to put some sense in your heads (or at least those of you who manage to survive), as it had to be done to Germany in World War II.

  210. Re:all smoke, no fire by Boronx · · Score: 1

    Exactly. She's no crook, except in the money for favors sense that most politicians are, but she's just not smart enough. OTOH, the alternatives are Trump, who is even dumber, or Cruz, who is very smart but everyone who knows him thinks he's a horrible person.

  211. Re:~50% by ag0ny · · Score: 1

    Huh. You're comparing Trump to Hitler - and I'm the one making insane comments?

    If you can't really see how history is repeating itself, and how the conditions that allowed Hitler to reach power are happening again, this time around Trump, then yes: you're insane. Or at the very least, delusional.

  212. Re:all smoke, no fire by Boronx · · Score: 1

    You're probably old enough to remember the '90s. Whitewater, travelgate, filegate, these kind of investigations can generate a whole bunch of smoke with out even a flicker of frame.

    A) If you threw everyone in jail who ever sent or received classified info through unofficial channels, half of Washington would be in jail. People slip up. Things get into emails. Sometimes not everyone is clued in on what's classified and what's not.

    B) Hillary is not a sys-admin. Unless you can show that she ordered some nefarious activity, you aren't going to get an indictment based on the contents or security level of her servers.

  213. Re:~50% by Boronx · · Score: 1

    You claim to be disturbed by this video but you'll probably vote for concentration camp loving, brown shirt goading Trump.

    Any liberal who's tuned into foreign policy is not happy with Hillary "Bush Lite" Clinton, but the Republicans haven't put up any credible alternative.

  214. Trump might be a jackass by DrXym · · Score: 1

    But so are anonymous. Their "campaigns" are simply an weak excuse to vandalise websites and cause minor disruption for their own lulz.

  215. Re:~50% by Boronx · · Score: 1

    > So President Obama telling people to bring guns to knife fights, to get in their faces, that's not violent and fascist?

    Was he actually encouraging people to bring real guns to a real knife fight? No? You mean it was a metaphor?

    > Telling the opposition party to get to the back of the bus, the sit and be quiet is not fascist?

    Ooh, scary. Bad Obama tells the opposing party that when he wins and they lose, he'll be in charge. Nasty!

    > Using the power of the State (the IRS) to penalize political opponents isn't fascist?

    Obama never did this, so what's your point?

  216. Re:~50% by Boronx · · Score: 1

    People have a strong ability to hear what the like from Trump and ignore the rest.

  217. Hypocrits by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    How is this not an attack on democracy? Funny how lefties are the ones that actually do the 'violence'..

    Yes, you may not like what Trump has to say, but it's a f-ing democracy. So if a lot of people are voting for him you'll have to accept that, you don't have to like it....

    1. Re:Hypocrits by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      So democracy is Drumpf gets to speak, Anonymous doesn't?'

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    2. Re:Hypocrits by SuperDre · · Score: 1

      Anonymous may speak, just as they do now, but hacking and targetting 'Drumpf's campaign ISN'T democracy, it's everything democracy DOESN'T stand for..
      Anonymous can make youtube movies or publish on their own websites, in which they tell why not to vote for 'Drumpf' is the only way if you saviour democracy..

    3. Re:Hypocrits by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      So Drumpf is allowed to, while making political speeches, direct his followers to 'beat the crap' out of dissenters, but Anonymous isn't allowed to attack in other ways. Gotcha.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    4. Re:Hypocrits by SuperDre · · Score: 1

      Please give examples of Trump telling his followers to beat the crap out of dissenters..
      There is a lot said about Trump, but the only ones that actually act in violence are the ones that protest against his speeches...
      And as I said, Anonymous can say anything they want about Trump and make video's on showing why it's bad to vote for Trump (with facts ofcourse), but hacking and crippling Trump's campaign is not ok, what they want to do it silence Trump, and that's the same as censoring because you don't like what is being said.. You know perfectly well, that's not fine in a democracy.. It's not like the lefties do it differently compared to Trump, except they trash other topics..
      But I guess that's too much for you to understand, so you think it's ok for Anonymous to actually 'attack' Trump..

    5. Re:Hypocrits by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      There may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience. So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hellâ" I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise. It wonâ(TM)t be so much â(TM)cause the courts agree with us too. -- Donald Trump

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  218. Re:all smoke, no fire by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    Well, except that this one seem to be all smoke, no fire.

    So a highly hazardous electrical fault? Or maybe a leak of toxic gas?

    I really love it when people use that line. It implies supreme stupidity given anyone who would ignore smoke with a lack of fire.

  219. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Using the power of the State (the IRS) to penalize political opponents isn't fascist?

    Obama never did this, so what's your point?

    Oh yes he did.

    Sincerely,
    ex-Revenue Agent

  220. orgasms by Tom · · Score: 1

    John Oliver was right: Trump very likely does get an orgasm every time someone mentions his name, so good job, Anonymous.

    Stop feeding the troll.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  221. Re:~50% by Tom · · Score: 1

    True of every bullshit that ever found followers. One of my favorite quotes of all time is from Pen & Teller, saying "Read the bible, we need more atheists". The same is true of the program of most political parties, especially the ones like the right-wing crazies gaining ground in Europe over the refugee crises at the moment, or all of the republicans in the race in the US right now.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  222. Re:all smoke, no fire by tburkhol · · Score: 1

    I believe if an ordinary employee had done what she had done, they at minimum would have been fired, and potentially would have gone to prison.

    You mean, if they'd sent work email from a personal account? That has been pretty common practice, at all levels of government and private industry, with laws restricting state business to state computers being relatively recent impositions.

    That's how this Clinton thing got started: someone trying to back-date a 2014 law, pretending it applies to 2009-2013. With much grubbing around, there's maybe a dozen emails on that server that might merit security classification (keeping in mind that wikileaks files indicate that extremely trivial information can "merit security classification"), and most, if not all, of those seem not to have been classified until after the fact. ie, not classified when she received or sent them, but classified now. If, out of thousands of secure and insecure communications over four years, there were a dozen transmitted over the wrong system, this hardly seems the traitorous breech of national security it's made out as.

    Is it a work email if she tells her daughter she's going to make an unannounced visit to Berlin on a particular day? Would it be work email if her security staff told their kid that the Secretary of State was going to Berlin? Would either of them contain classified information?

  223. Re:~50% by tburkhol · · Score: 1

    In particular, fascists criticized capitalism not because of its competitive nature nor support of private property, which fascists supportedâ"but due to its materialism, individualism, alleged bourgeois decadence, and alleged indifference to the nation.

    This reads like it was lifted from the Democratic Party's platform. It exactly describes the criticisms that progressives level against capitalism, and exemplifies their idea of what the American economy should look like.

    I don't think I've ever heard any Democrat say I should just take a crappy job like a good American. They mostly seem to say thing like the State should educate me so I can get a good job, or the State should encourage free trade so I can get inexpensive luxuries.

  224. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    Should we start removing race/sex questions from all federal paperwork?

    Yes.

    The liberals wont allow that though, because of their darling affirmative action crap.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  225. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Rockoon · · Score: 1

    Announcing that not only will he build a wall along the border, but he'll make Mexico pay for it.

    I actually believe him.

    The reason I believe him is that he has successfully gotten the media to fund his election campaign. If a Republican can get the media to fund their election campaign, its not hard to imagine that same Republican getting the Mexicans to pay for a wall.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  226. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by gsslay · · Score: 1

    So suggesting that America murders the families of terrorists doesn't even make your top six?

    Think about the full horror of that one a minute. One of the front runners for the Presidency of the United States wants to kill people on the basis of who they are related to.

    The comparisons with Hitler aren't exaggerations any more.

  227. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought that at first too. Then I was shocked to realize that we have a lot more intolerant, racist, misogynistic, and afraid people in the US than I thought. Obviously I knew there were some. But the sheer number of Trump supported made me realize that we, as a society, have a whole lot more work to do to educate and drive out the just plain awful ideas many people still have. It is a shame really. The fact that Trump is doing so well is a reflection on where we, as a country, are - and that reflection is hideous.

  228. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find that last one a little surprising. You'd think he'd be all over fearmongering "Remember Fort Hood!?

  229. Re:Nothing to see. by DuckDodgers · · Score: 2

    The Bush Administration hosted private federal government emails on Republican National Committee servers. When that was discovered, the data was subpoenaed in connection with the firing of US Attorneys in 2007. And the RNC wiped the data rather than turn it over.

    How come every conservative has forgotten about this? They're all out for Hillary's blood without noting that she's following precedent by President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. I will gladly support her prosecution for this - just as long as they're prosecuted first, since they broke the same fucking laws first but nobody conservative cares.

  230. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least he was direct and to the point.

  231. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, don't give up just yet. Don't forget that we Americans love a rich loudmouth, and will follow one even in spite of bad ideas.

    Trump is a vanity/celebrity candidate, that's all. Once he loses, people will renounce him in droves.

  232. Re:~50% by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

    I have to assume you love Trump and are flaming this discussion to discredit people who disagree with him. If you're serious in your dislike for his ideas, find something better to do.

  233. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the evangelicals backing him..."

    This is fucking stupid. The one single most good thing about Trump is he has so far pretty much neutered the Christian religious-right part of the Repubs. His popularity is a huge swell of 'normal' repubs finally being able to sideline the religious nutjobs. The repub party should stick to individual freedoms and economics. Trying to dictate morality is to lower oneself to the level of the left.

  234. Guaranteed to backfire. by sabbede · · Score: 1
    An attack like that will only solidify his support. Even if Trump hadn't already proven himself capable of turning attacks into support, the social dynamics would do it for him.

    And then there are all the political speech and procedural issues. DDoS attacks and hacks are not how we handle political discourse. Trying to forcibly silence a candidate is wholly unacceptable, no matter who or why. If they don't like Trump, they can engage in the process by speaking and voting against him. NOT by interfering with his speech. That is not how democracy works.

  235. Just imagine if the USA was all WHITE... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...wouldn't that be just AWFUL.

    Who for, exactly?

    The non-white PARASITES, who can't stand their own countries, and can't stand living among their own kind, that's who.

    Why don't they want to live in their own countries? It's so obvious they are criminal parasites, the second they start whining when a white person dares to say "I don't want to live with you." What white person wants to live with non-whites, who will get you sacked from your job or even put in prison if you dare to say that you don't to live with people like that? Oh, the irony.

  236. Showing true colors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they are in favor of unmitigated infiltration of America. They would like to see the Unarmed Army that is taking over Europe, come to the USofA.
    Support of Hillary, in favor of putting Americans in dangerous places and not protecting them. In favor of using the FBI to spy on Americans.
    Or Bernie, I will tax you out of your job, so I can buy votes from non-workers.

  237. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 2

    My dad's convinced someone has recordings of those speeches and the only reason we haven't seen them is that someone wants to release them post nomination like that Romney speech.

  238. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Americans would never vote Sanders in. Most of us see how badly socialism is in other countries, and some of them only work because America gives them a lot of money to make them work. Sanders got a lot of support because Hilary will likely end up in jail before the election. Clinton's trust level is under 10%

    Hilary would let Americans die and not care, like the 4 from Bingazie. As she has said about those 4 dying "What difference dose it make?"

  239. Re:Nothing to see. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    Except, it is well documented that while she was in office, it was absolutely against policy, and the records retention laws she broke are much older and are still the same laws.

    Also, receiving classified information on an unclassified system, and not reporting it is a serious breach, and is enough to put her in prison. She claims that the items weren't marked as classified when she received them, but as an original classification authority, she is expected to know the information was classified without the markings. So either she is incompetent, just didn't care, or broke the law. She had information in her email which was classified Top Secret //HCS, which means someone removed the markings, because you don't just come across that information, and it is automatically classified at the origin.

    Condoleezza Rice didn't even use email, so not sure why you are using her as an example, and Colin Powell used a commercial email account, which he reported. Neither of them ran their own poorly secured email server, and neither of them failed to turn over their email when repeatedly requested to do so like Hillary did. She hung onto her email several years after leaving office to try and impede the investigation into Benghazi. Benghazi happened in 2012, she didn't turn over her email until 2015, after repeated requests for those emails. She also turned them over in the least convenient way possible by printing them all out and handing over paper copies. She could have handed over a flash drive, but she instead chose to print out all the emails so that the metadata was intentionally lost.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  240. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

    I guess you aren't famliar with politics from the 1800's; this used to be very common. In fact politicians used to have duels over this sort of thing...

    --
    Bring back the old version of slashdot.
  241. Hillary? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be a better move for them to find a way to quash Hillary's campaign? In a Sanders VS Trump position, would Trump stand a chance?

  242. Re:Nothing to see. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    HUMINT is classified at the source. Someone removed the classification, and as an original classification authority, the Secretary of State is expected to be able to identify classified information. It isn't retroactive classification, everything that has come out as being classified was classified at the source. Only Hillary is trying to make this out to be some kind of argument over what should and shouldn't be classified, HUMINT is never classified less than TOP SECRET//HCS.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... (scroll down to the HUMINT section)
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...

    HUMINT involves human sources of information, and could lead to the death of the source, so it is always highly protected information. Either Hillary is Incompetent or Corrupt, which would you prefer?

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  243. Genuinely bad idea by jodido · · Score: 1

    I'm sure if you're against Trump this seems like a good idea. But what will you say when a group of pro-Trump hackers dismantles the campaign you support? If you don't like what Trump has to say, answer it. Trying to silence him will a. fail and b. only prove to his supporters that he's right.

  244. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As an Anon, I can honestly say that although Trump is not what he pretends to be, a majority of the people agree with what he says. Muslims have issue with him, but they have issue with anything that is not Islam.

    Anonymous is everywhere, is everything. We drive your cars, fly your planes, teach your kids, mow your lawn, do your banking, are your bodyguards, and we even walk your dog.

    Anonymous is also as diverse in opinions and views of world events. Anonymous is like a flock of birds, with each bird (Anon) having the free will to fly in any direction one wishes, and if anough others like that direction, they will follow and form a flock.

    A vast majority of Anonymous has formed a flock around the idea that Censorship is bad, that freedom is good, and most of what Mr. Trump has said alligns with this.

    The few anons against him are Muslims, and some of the power elite that don't think they can control him. But this campaign does not represent a majority of Anonymous.

  245. Re:~50% by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    If the choice is between Trump and Hillary, this election will have the highest percentage on Third Party candidates of any in history.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  246. Re:~50% by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    Does it hurt to have such a serious learning difficulty?

    Bush used the military to exact personal revenge? So he sent them after his high school bully?

    Iraq was about WMD, the same WMD that the other side of the isle, including Clinton were talking about.

    http://politics.slashdot.org/c...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Afghanistan was the source of the attack against the WTC, so it couldn't be that you are speaking of.

    Please teach us what personal revenge Bush used the military to perform.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  247. Re:~50% by kheldan · · Score: 1

    Hey, man, I don't know who that was, or whether that person was a follower or a troll trying to make trouble for me, so how about you step off?

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  248. The repulicans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The republican have been driving down this road of religious fervor , scare tactics, hate and the whole 49% thing.
    They finally reached their destination and there s a Trump hotel at the end of it.

    Time to check in.

  249. Who needs democracy? by Kinthelt · · Score: 1

    I guess democracy is only a good thing when the electees are your favourites. The usual SJW bullshit: If you don't like the message, start crying.

    --

    "Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

  250. Re:Nothing to see. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How come every conservative has forgotten about this?

    As far as republicans are concerned, the only events past 1950 that actually happened are the ones that are conveniently embarrassing for the democrats. Republican actions that may seem equally bad or worse simply didn't happen in their minds.

  251. Re:all smoke, no fire by Raenex · · Score: 1

    You mean, if they'd sent work email from a personal account? That has been pretty common practice, at all levels of government and private industry, with laws restricting state business to state computers being relatively recent impositions.

    While I've seen people do it on occasion as a matter of expediency when they were away from work, I don't think it was at all common to use a non-work address as a primary address, and certainly not for a job with sensitive information.

    http://www.politico.com/story/...

    "The State Department has had a policy in place since 2005 to warn officials against routine use of personal email accounts for government work, a regulation in force during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state that appears to be at odds with her reliance on a private email for agency business, POLITICO has learned. "

    With much grubbing around, there's maybe a dozen emails on that server that might merit security classification

    There are at least 22 with Top Secret classification, not just "might merit security classification". Of course, it's just common sense that using a personal address as primary address for government business greatly amplifies the risk for this happening.

    If, out of thousands of secure and insecure communications over four years, there were a dozen transmitted over the wrong system, this hardly seems the traitorous breech of national security it's made out as.

    I suggest reading the link from my last post, which shows the government going after low-level employees for relatively minor breeches.

    The whole thing reeks, from her "Foundation", to her and Bill's speaking engagements, to her relationship with Sidney Blumenthal, all the way to her use of a personal email server as a primary government business address completely under her control:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    "Experts such as Metcalfe agree that these practices are allowed by federal law,[25][28] at least in case of emergencies,[20] but discourage the practice, believing that official email accounts should be used.[19] Jason R. Baron, the former head of litigation at NARA, described the practice as "highly unusual" but not a violation of the law. In a separate interview, he said, "It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario--short of nuclear winter--where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of government business."[20][29][30] Baron told the Senate Judiciary Committee in May 2015 that "any employee's decision to conduct all email correspondence through a private email network, using a non-.gov address, is inconsistent with long-established policies and practices under the Federal Records Act and NARA regulations governing all federal agencies".[31]"

  252. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    what happens when you kill a terrorist??? and leave the family???

    the family grows up to become terrorists because we killed their daddy (rightfully)

    what is the problem, war is hell. it sucks. but these people dont think twice about killing innocent people, you have to fight by the rules of the worst player in the game if you want to win

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  253. Re:Nothing to see. by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    So to clarify you are calling Colin Powell corrupt as shit and saying he lies through his teeth?

    Yes.

    eg. His "Weapons of Mass Destruction" speeches - 100% barefaced lies before the entire world. Trillions of dollars have been spent and a lot of people have died as a result of those speeches.

    PS: Does a candidate's chances in the next election really depend on having a working website? Maybe it's just me but I have a hard time imagining Trump supporters going online and informing themselves about anything.

    --
    No sig today...
  254. Anonymous vs. Trump by Ideonaut · · Score: 1

    It will never work, since Trump supporters communicate via CB radio.

  255. oh admit it by Phantom+of+the+Opera · · Score: 1

    If it were anyone else with this particular issue, you wouldn't give a flying fuck.

    The bigger problem is voters not giving a damn about the legalized bribary which is the United States political system.

  256. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, I think this is something that I'd have to think about before answering. Maybe Trump is the same? Should the government be prohibited in gathering basic census type information from those coming into our country, if only so that it can be charted? Should we start removing race/sex questions from all federal paperwork? The issue becomes more complex the more I think about it.

    That's nice. By the way, I wasn't going to vote for you as president either.

  257. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice of him to pay the legal fees for the hillary supporters who attacked his rally in a false flag attempt on Sanders.

  258. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WOW
    Just WOW.

  259. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He flailed around, imitating a reporter in general, on TV and uploaded to YouTube. He didn't know that that reporter was disabled; you honestly think that he knows what every "reporter" who writes about him looks like? He stated that he didn't know the guy was disabled, nothing left to see here.

    He opposes ILLEGAL immigration, not all immigration. He also proposed stopping people from problematic countries TEMPORARILY until their situation can be assessed, like any sane country would do.

    <---- HuffPo is that way.

  260. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Your media polls mean nothing. The fan base doesn't care. She's winning the votes that count.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  261. Re:Nothing to see. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    All that stuff is a distraction. We should be looking into and documenting why people keep on voting for her and Trump in the primaries. It is by far the most fascinating part of all the kabuki.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  262. Comment by WallyL · · Score: 1

    I can see the game titles now:

    Anonymous: Total War
    Trump: Total War
    Anonymous: Total War 2: The Re-Election Campaign

    Coming to a GameStop near you!

  263. You should know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Awww. Did he mess up your cute little incompetent head?

  264. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    None of this negates the fact that Hillary Clinton is, to all appearances, the tool of Wall Street. If the dems go with her, any republican win is on them.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  265. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    The votes that count in this election are the independents - they are larger than both the democrats and the republicans. You can't win an election without them, and Hillary is not trusted by most of them.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  266. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You've had 20+ years of searching to find anything on her, and you still can only wave your hands and say the word "prison" without even an accusation."

    Wow. Guess you never went to that place called 'school'.

    If you have been alive for more than the last 20 years you would know there is more proof of crimes for this hag than most of the scumbag politicians that were in office since 1990.

    The Adults in the United States of America (known as: We The People) tend to view any unjustifiable generosity towards this hag as Treason.

    When you decide to learn something, check out the definition of 'federal crime' and 'treason'.

    Reality and Facts are important. I suggest you start learning what they are and sticking to them like a religion.

  267. makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The hackers are also political hacks.

    Thanks for helping spoon-feed your opinions down our throats, anonymous!

  268. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    I'm only counting the results. 'Trust' means diddly.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  269. makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The hackers have become political hacks ...

    I wish the libs would stop trying to spoon-fed their opinions down people's throats.

  270. Why not other politicians then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "You say what your audience wants to hear but in reality you don't stand for anything except for your personal greed and power." - Anonymous

  271. Re:Nothing to see. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    Which is why I'm waiting for somebody official to state that she did something definitely wrong. The Clinton-bashers have made very loud ruckuses over minor things for a long time, which is why I tend to not believe accusations against Bill and Hillary until there's some semi-impartial finding of wrongdoing. If the Congressional Republicans aren't satisfied with a mere dozen inquiries into one incident without finding anything wrong, why should I take their accusations seriously?

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  272. Why so much hype by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is everyone so much in a up roar over Trump. He is saying nothing different from any other politician. Actually, Trump is not using code words to describe his message.

  273. 78 year old brown shirt w/ a pony tail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Watch out everyone!

  274. What about this administration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After Snowden's revelation and Hillary's complete incompetence as Secretary of State it would seem they'd have easier targets for more damning information. Trump may or may not be president but who the hell wants Hillary? She can't even be trusted with handling important information.

  275. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AC you are responding to is either a troll or a fool, possibly both. However, I will say this for him: he can write a complete sentence and articulate his thoughts far better than you. If you are only going to pollute the board with pointless exclamations, don't bother.

  276. Re:all smoke, no fire by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

    The FBI, under a democratic president, has been investigating Clinton since last August, but they only revealed the investigation last month. And they're still investigating ...

    I hope you aren't holding your breath waiting for that indictment...

    --
    This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
  277. Re:~50% by slashdotwannabe · · Score: 1

    Sir, your commentary is enlightening and a revelation in terms of the depth of your argument and your stunning logic is flawlessly displayed. It is a masterful commentary on the intellect you possess.

    Says the commentor who apparently doesn't know the meaning of "facism" (did you even READ your cite? It doesn't say what you think it does) "totalitarianism", "one-party state", "dictatorship", "militarism", et al ad nauseum.

    As for "direct action", that's exactly why we HAVE a Chief Executive. It's what executives are empowered to do: take action. Next, what's wrong with a mixed economy? Can you point out for me a pure economy anywhere on the planet? While you're at it, you might want to provide context for "third position", given that it could mean ballet, violin, or a third political party to name just a few. What the fuck are you talking about by "new man"? Did he join AA or something?

    You're all hat, no cowboy.

    --
    This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
  278. Re:Nothing to see. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    So you won't accept she did something wrong until after the pardon? How convenient for you.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  279. Re:Nothing to see. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Trump and Sanders are both getting support from the other side. Trying to get their opposition to nominate the un-electable.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  280. Re:~50% by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    I wonder if there are more republicans 'supporting' Sanders or democrats 'supporting' Trump.

    Two unelectable candidates give the win to Vermin Supreme...I can dream.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  281. Re:~50% by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    You asked Hillary's girlfriends? Who got chewed by both?

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  282. Re:~50% by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

    You've got it backwards, the brownshirts are the ones infiltrating Trump's rallies and trying to prevent him from speaking.

    Last Friday in Chicago it wasn't the Trump supporters who were throwing bottles at people, damaging cars with Trump stickers on them, blocking an ambulance and injuring police officers.

    The leftists are so terrified that Trump's message is resonating with the People that they are willing to do anything possible to shut him up. They know that their ideas cannot compete with.

  283. When I hear The Donald speaking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it brings back fond memories of der Führer und his mesmerizing speeches in which he pointed out how much to blame were die Juden (und all die anderen Leute); everyone else but the Germans for their own circumstances. And blaming everyone else is a fine American trait as well. Nicht wahr? {/sarcasm}

  284. Re:~50% by jpapon · · Score: 1
    Totalitarianism? How? Obama has very little actual power. He can't even get a Supreme Court justice through, and he's specifically granted that power in the Constitution.

    One-party State - His party controls neither house, and has very little influence over either of them.

    Dictatorship - See Totalitarianism.

    Militarism - No more than any other US President. Sure, there's the drone strike thing, but Obama has also been extremely reluctant to bring the US into the conflict in Syria... so I think calling him militaristic is a massive stretch.

    Mixed Economy - I don't know what to tell you. The US has been a mixed economy for a long time, and is less of a mixed economy than many modern states. Obamacare is still primarily private, certainly less of a mixed economy than most healthcare systems.

    --
    -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
  285. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd say you are still being rather generous. You don't achieve a position in the highest halls of power without being some form of megalomaniac power-junkie. The actual percentage of psychopaths in Washington government is likely north of 90%.

  286. Re:~50% by Bartles · · Score: 1

    What does labor have to do with the quote I posted? I can't remember the last time I heard a Democrat promote free trade.

  287. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    And the current results are meaningless, because they don't include that huge pool of people who actually determine the outcome of elections because they are not committed to one party or the other.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  288. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Then why did the IRS apologize for targeting opponents of the President? And do you suggest they did it of their own volition, with zero input or request from the person who would benefit from such targeting?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  289. Things that AC claims are irrelevant: by Rujiel · · Score: 1

    Julian Assange, Glenn Greenwald And now anonymous, too? How convenient that the leaks or hackers that delivered infomation most damning for the government are those for which AC shows up like clockwork to condemn. Seriously, who organically questions the relevance of leaks as if they were TMZ headlines?

  290. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Maybe Clinton's not a fascist; how about a despot instead, just like President Obama?

    And what has Trump said - actually said, not what's been "rumored" or "interpreted" - that is fascist?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  291. Re:~50% by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    OK, what actual statement by Trump leads you to believe he's Hitler incarnate? Not "what he was rumored to have said", not "what we believe he means", actual words. Would love to hear that. In the mean time, we have a woman who claims no one died in Libya (Ambassador Stevens' family would disagree), that she never had classified information on her private server, that the IRS never targeted conservative groups - and that her husband never was a sexual predator.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  292. Re:all smoke, no fire by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    Let them delay it - in the final election, this will be a huge point of how "the establishment" looks after its' own, even if it's not true. Politics is perception, not reality.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  293. Do they really want the Secret Service after them? by danbuter · · Score: 1

    This just got the Secret Service very interested in these guys. I don't think it's going to end well for them.

  294. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    What are you talking about? I don't know what you mean. The actual primary results indicate that Clinton and Trump will win.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  295. They're not trying to solve problems by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    they're trying to take everything (money, power) for themselves. They're greedy bastards hiding behind a veneer of decency. "They" here aren't the rubes voting for Ted Cruz's theocracy to be or Rubio's Trickle Down Economics. They are the 1% who power Cruz's and Rubio's existence.

    They don't want what's best for everyone. They want to take everything for themselves. Trump supporters figured this out. They just don't know what to do with that information...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  296. Anonymous Cowards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Fellow Americans....
    We as a Nation are out of control... In 43 presidents our debt grow to 1.6 trillion... In one president two term President the debt has grow to 19.5 trillion... I don't care who you are voting for but we need to stop the spending... All our candidates for President suck but why is it OK for a terrorist computer hacking group to single out a Candidate. Our boarders do need to be protected better. We need to scale back all the handouts we are giving... Also the Refugees that were taken into Germany assaulted over 600 women.... Why because they were walking by themselves after dark... So in Muslim law these women are deemed prostitutes and can be raped and assaulted.. One teen girl was walking her dog half a block from her house and some Syrian men raped her... We as a country are moving to Communism at an alarming rate. Groups like Anonymous apparently want that. Because with out a strong America Anarchist can rise up... Then all the protest will be shut down by Military force and our rights will be removed.... So elect a Bernie and Hillary both promise more handouts and open door policies that allow drugs to flow into our country because they both know that the Military will be called in to put down "We The People"... "A borrower is servant to the lender." Who's backing your Candidate... If Anonymous wants to do all of us favors look into who has donated money to Clinton, Bernie, Trump, Cruz and all... That's where there loyalty lies...

  297. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sanders is a card caring Communist... Really that's who you would vote for no more Freedoms...

  298. Re:~50% by aphelion_rock · · Score: 1

    I guess that Anonymous have finished off Islamic State.
    I am sure Trump would be quaking in his boots.

  299. Trust, but Verify by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Trust, but Verify https://petitions.whitehouse.gov//petition/usa-presidential-candidate-should-qualify-fmri-analysis

  300. Trump by Lauriy · · Score: 1

    I can imagine his terror before the amount of attention he's going to get out of this.

  301. Irrevelant by TheEden · · Score: 1

    As commendable as Anonymous` actions may be what they do is, in the end, irrevelant. Not to mention the obvious fact that Trump capitalize on hatred, this wont help the global problem America seem to have at the moment - lack of adequate leaders. They might as well declare war on anyone running for president, just for the fun of it.

  302. Re:~50% by tburkhol · · Score: 1

    Let me walk you through it, slowly.

    You claimed that the democratic party is fascist because "fascists criticized capitalism [...] due to its [..] indifference to the nation." Since labor is part of the capitalist system, your claim implies that a good, Democratic fascist would expect labor, like all other aspects of the community, to sacrifice its well-being for the state. A good fascist expects people to take crappy jobs out of national pride to benefit the state.

    You claimed that the democratic party is fascist because "fascists criticized capitalism [...] due to its [...] individualism" This means a good Democratic Party fascist wants people to be cogs in the great machine of state, rather than educated, free/independent thinkers. School, in fascism, is for indoctrination not education. Now, you may differ on whether "science" amounts to secular indoctrination, but no one really thinks US schools are mass brain washing camps

    You claimed that the Democratic party is fascist because "fascists criticized capitalism [...] due to its materialism, [and ] bourgeois decadence." Both NAFTA and the TPP were negotiated by Democrats. NAFTA, in particular, was ground-breaking at the time, representing a dramatic change from decades of import tariffs and policies intended to safeguard US businesses and US strategic capabilities. These agreements reduce the costs f production and allow delivery of more material goods at lower prices, encouraging materialism and decadence.. If you haven't heard Democrats promote free trade, then you haven't been listening.

  303. Anonymous will regret this profoundly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump is going to be elected.

    Afterward, the members of Anonymous will discover the meaning of the word "consequences".

  304. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you kill the terrorists daddy you might then need to kill the daddy's brother and if you do that daddy's brothers entire family.

    Pretty soon you find yourself having to wipe out the entire population of large parts of the middle east.

    Or what if terrorist's brother has immigrated to Europe? Do you launch a drone strike on his home in Germany? Do you just quietly murder him and his family? Maybe just "disappear" them?

    At what point will we have not only killed all the terrorists, but all the potential terrorists as well?

  305. My view on anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have they revealed anything truly groundbreaking?

    Democrats against Trump.
    Republicans against Trump.
    China against trump....

    IMHO, anonymous just a puppet of the establishment.

  306. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Hillary has a bigger penis.

  307. Re:~50% by Bartles · · Score: 1

    Let me walk you through it, slowly.

    You claimed that the democratic party is fascist because "fascists criticized capitalism [...] due to its [..] indifference to the nation." Since labor is part of the capitalist system, your claim implies that a good, Democratic fascist would expect labor, like all other aspects of the community, to sacrifice its well-being for the state. A good fascist expects people to take crappy jobs out of national pride to benefit the state.

    Yes. I claimed Progressives are like fascists. Someone who is completely and unabashedly fascist would expect everyone to sacrifice for the State. We have very few who fit that description in the United States. Progressives certainly do criticize capitalism for it's selfishness and non-collective goals. And the left certainly encourages people to work for the State, or work in areas closely associated with the State. Whether it be social work, non-profits, federal or state government, education, journalism...etc. You should really leave your ellipses at home. I noticed you ignored the first paragraph, and focused on a minute portion of a single sentence in the second bring a thought not even described to the forefront to make your point.

    You claimed that the democratic party is fascist because "fascists criticized capitalism [...] due to its [...] individualism" This means a good Democratic Party fascist wants people to be cogs in the great machine of state, rather than educated, free/independent thinkers. School, in fascism, is for indoctrination not education. Now, you may differ on whether "science" amounts to secular indoctrination, but no one really thinks US schools are mass brain washing camps

    I claimed that of Progressives not Democrats. Progressives certainly do lean towards collective goals rather than individual goals, after all it takes a villiage. They would love it if everyone were a cog in the wheels of the State. Whether it be as a recipient of welfare, an unwilling provider of taxes, a government employee, a worker in a highly subsidized and regulated industry, a scientist on the government payroll aligned with the goals of the State, it goes on and on. The left controls the education system in this country. It certainly has become an indoctrination system. It serves to disseminate progressive ideology at the expense of a well rounded and competent education. See all the unemployed students with social work, english, women's and african american studies, and communications degrees with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of debt, owed to the state or state sponsored loan companies. They'll forgive the debt (proposed), of course, if you take a job in service to the State. You can look at college after college and see that greater than 90% of the political donations from employees go to the Democratic party and it's affiliates. If the roles were reversed you'd be claiming brainwashing left and right. And once again you have ignored most of the point and focused on a very small portion of a statement to make your point.

    You claimed that the Democratic party is fascist because "fascists criticized capitalism [...] due to its materialism, [and ] bourgeois decadence." Both NAFTA and the TPP were negotiated by Democrats. NAFTA, in particular, was ground-breaking at the time, representing a dramatic change from decades of import tariffs and policies intended to safeguard US businesses and US strategic capabilities. These agreements reduce the costs f production and allow delivery of more material goods at lower prices, encouraging materialism and decadence.. If you haven't heard Democrats promote free trade, then you haven't been listening.

    I claimed that of Progressives not Democrats. NAFTA in particular was written 25 years ago by Republicans and pushed strongly by G H W Bush who ran out of time before his term ended. Even though Democrats had majorities in both the house and the Senate, Repub

  308. Re:Nothing to see. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    I won't accept that she did something wrong before I know she did something wrong. Do you have a problem with that? I don't know what the FBI investigation will conclude, but since I haven't been told by about 524 different anti-Clinton sources that they definitely found definitive wrongdoing I assume they haven't finished.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  309. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    The primary results are irrelevant. Clinton's delegate count includes superdelegates, who can drop her like a stone because they can vote any way they want on the first ballot, unlike regular delegates. Trump still may end up running as an independent. Nothing can be counted on. An indictment of Hillary or a brokered republican convention can change everything.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  310. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Clinton's delegate count includes superdelegates

    That's what locks it up for her. Nobody's going to make wakes. With an indictment comes an immediate pardon. And besides, she is still winning the regular delegate count also. Your media polls are garbage. Only the real votes matter.

    The brokered convention may happen on the republican side, and Trump may go independent, another plus for Clinton. His function is to scare people into voting for her. Sander's function is to herd more money into the DNC. If Hillary has to drop out, watch for Biden to reemerge.

    You probably should keep an eye on congress. That is where the real fight is. And things don't look good there at all. It's still all democrats and republicans. Not a single independent in sight.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  311. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    How do you pardon someone who has been indicted but not convicted? That would be the kiss of death, an admission that she was guilty and that everyone knows it. The superdelegates would have no choice but to back sanders - having someone as president who was indicted and then pardoned would make it almost impossible for other governments to do business as usual.

    It would be as ludicrous as Nixon staying in office by pardoning himself.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  312. Re:~50% by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

    Clinton is the one with actual WWIII-starting credentials. Her legacy is the destruction of Libya, the rise of ISIS and the flight of many million people. She's right in Bush's steps already for the militarism, and in Obama's step for pandering to high finance / Wall Street interests.
    So as someone not residing in the US, seeing Hillary R. Clinton be elected (I almost wrote re-elected) would be a big enough (on-going) disaster that I hope you Americans have "fun" and choose the other guy instead. Hell, I would rather have an idiot that infuriates everyone on the world stage than an affably evil presidentess that's all well-spoken and presentable. The hairball guy might be less likely to start WW III as a result.
    And if the US gets a tiny little bit isolationist, the better. The trans-atlantic "partnership" or whatever it's called this month needs to fail, thanks.

  313. Re:The Tepublican machine tells us by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    How do you pardon someone who has been indicted but not convicted?

    Um, Nixon? He wasn't even indicted. Ford pardoned him. He resigned to avoid risking his pension and other bennies, like taking the plea and admitting no wrongdoing. And it didn't take long for Saint Ronnie to rebuild the old facade.

    You seem to think that people care. They don't. They will elect the worst of the worst if there's something in it for them. That is what keeps the crooked incumbents in office for 30 years plus. And notice how the fanbois on both sides dig in their heels when they feel they are under attack. Right now the facts mean squat. It is pure animal tribalism at play. And we are once again repeating history, showing how little we have advanced from the primordial soup. Clinton and Trump are ahead of the pack for perfectly natural reasons. Any so called human 'morality' is totally nonexistent, aside from the theatrics to control the population.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  314. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To the broader point, progressives constantly malign wealth, profit, greed, and materialism amongst other things.

    Indeed, but that's what America is about. Those values played an important role in the founding of the nation.

    If people valued their money more than their freedom, they wouldn't have dumped that tea. They wouldn't have risked their hides to fight for independence.

    In fact, many wouldn't have come to the New World in the first place, as many came due to religious persecution, not to get rich. Some early colonies were built with the purpose of maintain some sort of religious purity over wealth. Just look at the Amish.

    When the nation was founded, its value - that of freedom over wealth or profits - is extremely Progressive for its time. The Progressivism slowly but surely increased over time, rarely decreased.

    Even in today's very wealthy world, most Americans still believe in the religion that preaches that it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven than a camel to go through the eye of a needle, and that our savior is not a wealthy successful businessman but some hippie son of a carpenter who hangs around hookers.

  315. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    Or the part where he said that not only should America torture suspected terrorists for information, America should torture them regardless because it acts as a deterrent.

    If we're picking the most extreme Trump moments, there's plenty of choice. Though I think the worst part is that the Trump insanity is making the other Republican candidates look like moderates - without Trump beside them it would be quite clear that the whole party has been getting more extreme too.

  316. Re:~50% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bush wanted to get at Iraq from the day he entered the White House. This is common knowledge outside of the Fox News crowd. Pretty much the first the first thing that came out of his mouth once he managed to put down "My Pet Goat" was how can we blame Iraq? WMD was just an excuse, and just like the yellow cake thing, he knew it was bullshit. It's too bad that so many others bought it, though Clinton is a warmonger so no real surprise she went along with it.

    Though you're right. There really isn't any evidence that Bush's hard-on for invading Iraq had anything to do with revenge. It's just kind of assumed. But it could have been just been purely profit for Cheney and Haliburton.

  317. Re:~50% by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it is too bad that the whole UN, and all the US politicians bought it that Saddam was refusing access to the UN weapons inspectors after being given a final ultimatum, it is too bad that he was giving speeches about gassing Iranians. It is just too bad that you are so hyper partisan that you can't even see that most of the world thought he had the WMD because he was acting like he did and was refusing access to the UN weapons inspectors.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  318. Re:Lying about him makes it worse - he really is b by gsslay · · Score: 1

    So your solution to defeating terrorism is to become terrorists?

    You want to live in a terrorist state?

  319. Anonymous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever the problem is, Anonymous is not the answer to that problem. A bunch of self-appointed vigilantes.

    And I say that as someone growing very weary of our security establishment and their current tactics.

  320. STUPID JEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bit off more than their rat mouths could handle now the white European I'd once again here to put you all through the wringer.. good luck with that.

    We know about 9/11 (mossad did that), and all the other subterfuge you've been inflicting on us stupid goyim for ages.

    You are fucking done.

  321. What Complete Idiots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, some of the things that Donald Trump (who is a total assclown) are quite disturbing, but as an American citizen, he has the right to say them. So long as what he does is within his constitutionally-guaranteed rights, Anonymous has no business, or right, to stop him. Now if they an prove he's done something wrong, such as participating in a nefarious plot to hold someone important hostage ("...for ONE MILLION DOLARS!") or to take over the world, provide the evidence to the people. Otherwise, Anonymous should keep its Thought Police nose out of American politics.

    It's bad enough we have a Congress that can't do its job and racist, hateful bigots everywhere, we don't need some self-appointed asshat cyber watchdogs mucking things up. If the American people are so ignorant and brainwashed by television and social media to elect some assclown as president, then they deserve what they get.

    If you cannot support, defend or act within the U.S. Constitution, then you are against it, and an enemy of this nation and its people. That goes not only for Anonymous, but ignorant militias and members of our very government.

  322. Anonymous Behaving Like Fascist Thugs by thesquire · · Score: 1

    Whether or not one supports or likes Donald Trump, the announced efforts and intentions of the Anonymous Collective is reminiscent of the Brownshirts of the German Nazi party. While one might laugh at or enjoy their attacks upon government anti-democratic and authoritarian agencies and programs like the spying of the NSA and similar despicable apparati, it is quite another thing to silence Trump's open and above-board bid for the Republican nomination. Trump is engaged in part of the democratic process, which ought to be protected by the US constitution. To attempt to silence him and interfere with his democratic rights and the public's right to hear him is at the very least similar to if not on a par with the fascist intimidation tactics of Hitler's Brownshirts in 1930's Germany. This kind of behavior is no better than that of the NSA. These irresponsible and stupid children (or highly immature adults) don't seem to realize or understand that. What a crazy society we live in.

  323. Anonymous hates democracy and freedom by PeterHolland765 · · Score: 1

    Aparently Anonymous doesn't like democracy or freedom. Whether or not you agree or disagree with Trump. Disagreements should be debated in the political arena. With arguments. Doing stuff like this is a sign of weakness, apparently they have no arguments against him. Tactics like this is what fascists, national socialists, communists and islamists use. Attacking political opponents. Anonymous is like a totalitarian dictatorship. Deciding what is best for us to see or not see. Like Kim Jong Il, Stalin, Hitler, Saddam,Islamic State, Taliban, Hamas or other totalitarian nutcases. If everybody were to take down sites of people with different opinions it would become a big mess. Democracy is all about making different opinions and then make a choice. I think that if the fascist scriptkiddie cowards of Anonymous (if they were men they wouldn't do it anonymous) would attack a candidate that is all the more reason to vote for that candidate.

  324. Re:Yawn... Democrats are left by PeterHolland765 · · Score: 1

    You live in North Korea? Because I live in Europe and the democrats are definitely left wing compared to Europe. Both the democrats and republican parties are extremely broad political party's. The democrats are from the far left to the political middle. Comparing to European party's it contains anything from socialists, greens, socialdemocrats, socialliberals to center liberals, left christian democrats (I am using liberal not as the synonym for left but as the political liberalism). Sanders is radical left but other democrats are much closer to the middle. The republicans are from the center to far right. Comparing to European party's It contains anything from center liberals, conservative-liberals, christian democrats, moderate nationalists, conservatives, orthodox religious conservatives. Palin is far right religious orthodox but Giuliani is pretty liberal.