Jump to content

2016 Presidential Election Thread Part 2


Skin

Recommended Posts

Will be interesting to see the reaction throughout the Republican base now that Trump is openly attacking GWB for lying about WMDs in Iraq. It's a basic element of the party line to uphold that mythology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will be interesting to see the reaction throughout the Republican base now that Trump is openly attacking GWB for lying about WMDs in Iraq. It's a basic element of the party line to uphold that mythology.

The only time during that debate where I was like, "Wow! I am agreeing with Trump on something!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to make a bold prediction. Bernie Sanders will be the Democratic nominee. He could win Nevada, come close in South Carolina and anything could happen Super Tuesday. If he does well Super Tuesday, I think he could very easily win New York and California. Anything can happen this election as we've seen so this prediction isn't that out there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a day! Justice Scalia passes away (folks, this is going to create a POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE in America with the coming confirmation fight on the vanguard of an election) and the GOP debate in South Carolina turns out to be a televised self-slaughter.

If you thought we'd seen the worst of American politics, y'all better get ready for a new level of hatred and upheaval. I don't even know how to process all the info. Conservatives have to be horrified beyond belief as their entire world is crumbling around them. And before anyone celebrates, I'd like to say that a desperate animal who's cornered on all sides is still an immensely dangerous one that is capable of extreme damage.

Personally, I'd love to see Obama use the next 9 days of Congress in recess to appoint an interim justice to the Court - and to make it an ultra liberal. He is allowed to do that for the time being. The GOP heads would probably explode, but it would force them to give any candidate he chooses an up-or-down vote rather than drag and delay for 11 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So happy if anything that the most important issue of this election that I feared most people would overlook will now be front and center like never before during a Presidential election. (At least to my knowledge in the modern era)

And what is this most important issue in your opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was the guy who failed to come out when he was prompted and just stood there? :dead:

That's Dr. Ben Carson during the last GOP debate in New Hampshire. Lord knows how he has lasted so long in this race. I suspect he'll drop out after South Carolina (and his pending doom there). I can see him endorsing Donald Trump, however.

I'm going to make a bold prediction. Bernie Sanders will be the Democratic nominee. He could win Nevada, come close in South Carolina and anything could happen Super Tuesday. If he does well Super Tuesday, I think he could very easily win New York and California. Anything can happen this election as we've seen so this prediction isn't that out there

Your prediction is quite bold, especially with only two states voting thus far. But I will give you this bit of fishing line...Nevada is (at this point) definitely winnable by Bernie. Despite the dearth of polling in the Silver State thus far, Hillary canceled an event in Florida this week to campaign with some unions in Nevada. Her internal polling outfit must be warning her that she needs to do some more work there or else she'd be focusing more on big, delegate-rich states voting in March.

However, a win in Nevada by the Bern would likely be close (like Iowa) and I don't know if it would be enough to help him winnow the gap in South Carolina. Mr. Sanders did a Q&A with an African-American group in Minneapolis on Friday night, and the shit didn't go well for him. In fact, he left the stage after a somewhat heated exchange and didn't finish answering questions. This is just one event, but Bernie has yet to show mass appeal to non-white audiences - and those are the ones who'd deliver him a victory in more diverse states like Nevada and South Carolina.

My prediction: If Hillary can beat Bernie in Nevada (even by a razor-thin "Iowa" margin) AND if she can blow him away in South Carolina with a 30+ point victory there, I predict she will sweep nearly all the March 1 states (give or take 2 or 3), and have a powerful grasp on the Democratic nomination by March 15 when the next round of big states vote.

If Bernie's movement is a real game-changer, he will have to derail her by March 1. After that, it becomes much, much harder for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was the guy who failed to come out when he was prompted and just stood there? :dead:

That would be your husband, why of course Madame. Now sing me the national anthem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's Dr. Ben Carson during the last GOP debate in New Hampshire. Lord knows how he has lasted so long in this race. I suspect he'll drop out after South Carolina (and his pending doom there). I can see him endorsing Donald Trump, however.

Your prediction is quite bold, especially with only two states voting thus far. But I will give you this bit of fishing line...Nevada is (at this point) definitely winnable by Bernie. Despite the dearth of polling in the Silver State thus far, Hillary canceled an event in Florida this week to campaign with some unions in Nevada. Her internal polling outfit must be warning her that she needs to do some more work there or else she'd be focusing more on big, delegate-rich states voting in March.

However, a win in Nevada by the Bern would likely be close (like Iowa) and I don't know if it would be enough to help him winnow the gap in South Carolina. Mr. Sanders did a Q&A with an African-American group in Minneapolis on Friday night, and the shit didn't go well for him. In fact, he left the stage after a somewhat heated exchange and didn't finish answering questions. This is just one event, but Bernie has yet to show mass appeal to non-white audiences - and those are the ones who'd deliver him a victory in more diverse states like Nevada and South Carolina.

My prediction: If Hillary can beat Bernie in Nevada (even by a razor-thin "Iowa" margin) AND if she can blow him away in South Carolina with a 30+ point victory there, I predict she will sweep nearly all the March 1 states (give or take 2 or 3), and have a powerful grasp on the Democratic nomination by March 15 when the next round of big states vote.

If Bernie's movement is a real game-changer, he will have to derail her by March 1. After that, it becomes much, much harder for him.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Either way it's a win win since they're both good candidates. Nightshade, can you help explain these new developments with the whole email scandal. Is this starting to look bad for her, like, being charged kind of bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does Putin keep showing off his body like he's so hot?

Because it's very Mussolini-esque

Cult of physical strength /the macho/ the "labourer" aesthetics (even though with the complicity of the Russian Orthodox Church he has amassed a personal stolen fortune estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of $$)

Number one staple of any dictatorship. Except for this guy, in current times at least

kimhair-kim_3209242k.jpg

Back to Putin/Mussolini

566465747-benito-amilcare-andrea-mussoli

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Either way it's a win win since they're both good candidates. Nightshade, can you help explain these new developments with the whole email scandal. Is this starting to look bad for her, like, being charged kind of bad

They both are good candidates, I completely agree. I worry about Bernie more in the general election, but you know, if he can outwit the Clinton machine he deserves that nomination - and I will support him if even I don't get my first choice.

The email thing is a PR mess. It really is, but it's also like a plate of cold spaghetti that is taking a lot of time to unravel. I feel like there are these new "revelations" every month that seem to indicate a Sword of Damocles is hanging over Clinton's head, but I am doubtful anything will come of them. Why?

  1. First of all, the State Dept. rules allowed her to use a private server to conduct government business over email - as long as the correspondences were archived (which she claims were and she submitted those emails already). She also claimed that when she sent responses via email to State Dept. employees the government servers would've captured those in their system so the burden is off of her to submit those. That's a pretty blurry defense, but again, you can't charge her for criminal intent with that as technically she's right.

  2. So, if we established that the State Dept. ALLOWED her to do this and knew about it (as they did with Sec. Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice), she is somewhat safe and clear from being charged for doing it since she didn't break any laws in place at the time.

  3. Now, we get to the classified and top secret emails. She claims she never SENT any - meaning she never put classified material in an email and sent it from herself (as the point of origin). However, she CLEARLY received emails with secret info (which is why the CIA is going back and re-classifying emails in her archive). However, her escape here is that whoever sent them didn't put the proper markers on the emails that indicate they were classified or top secret so she can claim she didn't know it was intended to be secret. That absolves her somewhat. Now, clearly you and I both know that she had to see something in an unmarked email and know that it shouldn't be on a non-government, non-secured server (although knowing the ultra-secretive Clintons, their homebrew server was probably more secure than the government's, but I digress). However, the rules I've seen thus far are murky about how she'd be charged for not noticing someone else's error.

  4. Another point of note her is that the emails which are being retro-actively classified were NOT marked classified at the time. So if they truly weren't, they can't tell her to go back in time and report them if she truly did not know. This kind of eliminates the charge of criminal intent.

  5. Obama is rumored to want Clinton to succeed him, and not Sanders. I believe that he & other prominent Democrats have access to the email investigation and what the FBI is finding as they go. If a bomb was going to drop before the election, he'd be distancing himself (as would others), trying to recruit a stronger candidate into the race NOW, or encouraging her to (publicly) drop out. We aren't seeing any of that. In fact, he practically endorsed her right before the Iowa caucuses with lots of kind words and respect. Obama is super intelligent. I truly do not believe he'd back someone he thought was about to be indicted.

I realize that is a very convoluted list of points, but I hope it explains it from a birds-eye view. I realize in politics anything can happen and there could be surprise evidence or perhaps the Republicans will be able to spin the story along further to hurt her, but the truth is that after Benghazi, they look inept. If you have charges to file then file them. Indict her. A single indictment would probably end her Presidential campaign - and you just know the GOP is itching to do just that...so why haven't they? If the issue is so clear cut and she broke the law then file the charges and convene a grand jury.

Is any of that happening? No. And we've gotten thousands of emails released. Supposedly even ones that were top secret. Still....no charges from the FBI or a GOP-controlled House. Maybe they are waiting until closer to the election but I really doubt that kind of weapon would remain under wraps.

Personally, I think she made a stupid decision to use private email to conduct government business, and yes I believe she resists being transparent. However, I don't believe her to be a spy or funneling top secret info to the Chinese. Ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They both are good candidates, I completely agree. I worry about Bernie more in the general election, but you know, if he can outwit the Clinton machine he deserves that nomination - and I will support him if even I don't get my first choice.

The email thing is a PR mess. It really is, but it's also like a plate of cold spaghetti that is taking a lot of time to unravel. I feel like there are these new "revelations" every month that seem to indicate a Sword of Damocles is hanging over Clinton's head, but I am doubtful anything will come of them. Why?

  1. First of all, the State Dept. rules allowed her to use a private server to conduct government business over email - as long as the correspondences were archived (which she claims were and she submitted those emails already). She also claimed that when she sent responses via email to State Dept. employees the government servers would've captured those in their system so the burden is off of her to submit those. That's a pretty blurry defense, but again, you can't charge her for criminal intent with that as technically she's right.

  2. So, if we established that the State Dept. ALLOWED her to do this and knew about it (as they did with Sec. Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice), she is somewhat safe and clear from being charged for doing it since she didn't break any laws in place at the time.

  3. Now, we get to the classified and top secret emails. She claims she never SENT any - meaning she never put classified material in an email and sent it from herself (as the point of origin). However, she CLEARLY received emails with secret info (which is why the CIA is going back and re-classifying emails in her archive). However, her escape here is that whoever sent them didn't put the proper markers on the emails that indicate they were classified or top secret so she can claim she didn't know it was intended to be secret. That absolves her somewhat. Now, clearly you and I both know that she had to see something in an unmarked email and know that it shouldn't be on a non-government, non-secured server (although knowing the ultra-secretive Clintons, their homebrew server was probably more secure than the government's, but I digress). However, the rules I've seen thus far are murky about how she'd be charged for not noticing someone else's error.

  4. Another point of note her is that the emails which are being retro-actively classified were NOT marked classified at the time. So if they truly weren't, they can't tell her to go back in time and report them if she truly did not know. This kind of eliminates the charge of criminal intent.

  5. Obama is rumored to want Clinton to succeed him, and not Sanders. I believe that he & other prominent Democrats have access to the email investigation and what the FBI is finding as they go. If a bomb was going to drop before the election, he'd be distancing himself (as would others), trying to recruit a stronger candidate into the race NOW, or encouraging her to (publicly) drop out. We aren't seeing any of that. In fact, he practically endorsed her right before the Iowa caucuses with lots of kind words and respect. Obama is super intelligent. I truly do not believe he'd back someone he thought was about to be indicted.

I realize that is a very convoluted list of points, but I hope it explains it from a birds-eye view. I realize in politics anything can happen and there could be surprise evidence or perhaps the Republicans will be able to spin the story along further to hurt her, but the truth is that after Benghazi, they look inept. If you have charges to file then file them. Indict her. A single indictment would probably end her Presidential campaign - and you just know the GOP is itching to do just that...so why haven't they? If the issue is so clear cut and she broke the law then file the charges and convene a grand jury.

Is any of that happening? No. And we've gotten thousands of emails released. Supposedly even ones that were top secret. Still....no charges from the FBI or a GOP-controlled House. Maybe they are waiting until closer to the election but I really doubt that kind of weapon would remain under wraps.

Personally, I think she made a stupid decision to use private email to conduct government business, and yes I believe she resists being transparent. However, I don't believe her to be a spy or funneling top secret info to the Chinese. Ludicrous.

Just a few quick points and then I am done with this as well, at least for now. First of all, my understanding is that the use of retroactive classification has been tested and approved by the courts, and employees are regularly held accountable for releasing info that was unclassified when they released it but classed retroactively. Clinton has run through any number of excuses, explanations, etc none of which have held water, but the bottom line is that anyone holding a top security clearance is trained and obligated to recognize and protect the sensitivity of the material itself, marked or unmarked, and treat it as classified as soon as it was produced. She was fully briefed on classification procedures, and if there were ANY questions it was her legal responsibility to seek further clarification. Because as the nation's chief diplomat, the Secretary of State is responsible for ascertaining information that needs to be protected and then ensuring that all classified information under their control is properly handled.

Of four former secretaries asked about personal email accounts, two have said they rarely used email (Rice and Albright), the third used personal email but had no records to turn over but is now cooperating to recover them if possible (Powell) and the fourth was Clinton.Clinton used a private email account for her entire tenure as secretary -- and did not even have a government-issued email. Under rules in place while Clinton was SoS employees could only use private email accounts for official business (non classified) if they turned those emails over to be entered into government computers before leaving office, which she did not do until a year later and only after Congressional requests for documents related to the Benghazi attacks.

So Clinton suddenly finds reason to support an audit of the Inspector General on Rice and Powell whose appointment she blocked while at State for an unprecedented 5 1/2 years. lol These previous secretaries may have had a few (10-12) inappropriate emails on private servers. Hillary has been found to have had thousands, which makes sense in context since multiple personal accounts were the only accounts she was using. She cannot do her job without classified, top secret information, that may seem obvious but has also been finally clarified in an interview with a former Inspector General. Information that can only be manually transmitted from ultra secretive government top secret servers was somehow getting from those secured systems to her private secret system. The question is how, in a technical sense, cut and paste or a thumb drive ?? and by whom ? The FBI is most likely questioning her top aides under oath as we speak. Whether investigators are coming under political pressure to drag out the case is another issue but this is still a massive problems for the Clinton campaign. If the investigation is being slowed down deep into the primary season it could well be because the emails are so threaded with top secret info that reviewing them and redacting the portions that could harm national security is simply proving more complicated than anticipated.She even signed that Nondisclosure agreement which says something like classified information is marked or unmarked classified and that all of your training prepares you to treat all of that sensitively and that you are required to know the difference. :newspaper:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what is this most important issue in your opinion.

This election? The Supreme Court like I have been saying way before Scalia died. If a republican gets in get ready for America to go back to the stone age with the nuts they will no doubt appoint. If a dem gets in be it Hillary or Bernie you can assure that by and large this country will keep moving in a more liberal direction.

If you ask me the scale has slowly been tipping to the liberal side for awhile now but if a dem can pull off another win thus making the Supreme Court a by and large left leaning court depending on how many people this person gets to nominate it is officially GAME OVER for the far right loons who have been desperately trying to hold on to any kind of power through obstruction or gerrymandering or fake scandals.

VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump dropkicked Jeb and his fat retard war criminal brother up & down that stage last night. He's the only guy on the Republican side I want to win. Bush says he's sick & tired of Trump attacking his family well then GTFO! No one was looking for the Bush's, we don't want you. He keeps bringing in his family to campaign for him. Go away and no one will ever think or speak of your goddamn family again. Jeb should be laying low because quite frankly they should all be in jail and that includes his stinkin' mother who gave birth to that abortion, GWB.

Sanders/Trump 2016

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This election? The Supreme Court like I have been saying way before Scalia died. If a republican gets in get ready for America to go back to the stone age with the nuts they will no doubt appoint. If a dem gets in be it Hillary or Bernie you can assure that by and large this country will keep moving in a more liberal direction.

I agree. That's my #1 reason to vote as well. The Court has a very long-term effect on politics and this country. Unless you want to see progress fall backward for decades, everyone who can should vote Democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeb! : "My mom is the strongest woman I know."

Trump : "She should be running."

PMr9e5.gif

Love that gif. Am I the only one that thought they might start throwing some punches last night.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...