2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Black Swan

Overheal wrote: »

A Trump PAC manager stepped down from her position following the #CubanMistressCrisis and is now saying what we suspected all along...that he doesn't want the presidency, he wants the book deals and the acumen.

Methinks that early in the 2016 presidential campaign Trump's original purpose was to gain visibility for the sale of his books, golf courses, fashion accessories, Celebrity Apprentice show, etc., which he has done in the past (this is not the first time he made noise about running for president). But after the extraordinary support he got in the polls for making "outrageous" statements (per his 1987 book about press manipulation), he decided to go for it. Love him or hate him, odds are he will be the GOP nominee for 8 November 2016.

I agree with Trump's Super-PAC former communications manager Stephanie Cegielski: “He certainly was never prepared or equipped to go all the way to the White House, but his ego has now taken over the driver’s seat, and nothing else matters."

Billy86

Overheal wrote: »

A Trump PAC manager stepped down from her position following the #CubanMistressCrisis and is now saying what we suspected all along...that he doesn't want the presidency, he wants the book deals and the acumen.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-campaign-defector-takes-full-responsibility-for-helping-create-this-monster/

There's a reason both his presidential runs have come on the back of a book release, and almost a third one a few years back too but he decided against runnjng last minute.

What a funny coincidence.

cHaTbOx

http://observer.com/2016/03/the-countless-failings-of-the-dnc/

The Democratic National Committee rigged the Democratic primaries to ensure Hillary Clinton would win the presidential nomination. Evidence suggesting this claim is overwhelming, and as the primaries progress, the DNC’s collusion with the Clinton campaign has become more apparent.

Hillary Clinton has known for years she would be running for president in 2016. Fundraisers were held on her behalf as early as 2014, before she announced her campaign, as it was well known throughout the Democratic establishment that she would run for president. Unlike Jeb Bush, also an establishment-backed Republican candidate with wealthy donors, no Democrats in office dared to run against Ms. Clinton. The DNC did not suspect an Independent and three virtually unknown former politicians would contend for the nomination. Aside from clearing out her competition in the primaries, the co-chair to Ms. Clinton’s failed 2008 campaign—Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is currently the DNC Chair—scheduled only six debates compared to the eight scheduled for Republican candidates and enacted a new rule effectively banning Democratic presidential candidates from participating in any unsanctioned debates.......

This article is well worth a read and summarizes everything that has been happening in the Democratic party election. It's astonishing the amount of corruption involved in the party to get Clinton nominated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqNjD5m9C_w

This video breaks down the victories at the weekend ,the media response and how the super-delegates being included in the delegate total. Sanders is calling out Clinton for a debate in New York before New York which would be very interesting. Clinton’s chief strategist Joel Benenson said that any future debates would depend on the “tone” of the Sanders campaign.That is pathetic response for someone who could be up against Trump. When a campaign relies on less exposure then you know something is wrong with "democracy". Clinton is scared to debate in the state where she was Senator. That says more than any debate outcome.

Overheal

That article does stack all of the little things that have gone on and painted a pretty interesting picture. One that surprises nobody, but still is an insult to the process. Actually that reaffirms only that I would rather not vote than vote for Hillary.

The Randy Riverbeast

Clinton won't debate Sanders because he is being too negative

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/clinton-campaign-says-no-more-debates-until-bernie-starts-be-nicer

This is the same person who said a presidential candidate should be willing to debate any time and may have to go against Trump.

Fr Tod Umptious

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Clinton won't debate Sanders because he is being too negative

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/03/clinton-campaign-says-no-more-debates-until-bernie-starts-be-nicer

This is the same person who said a presidential candidate should be willing to debate any time and may have to go against Trump.

That's why the Dems have a real problem, Trump will tear Clinton apart in a debate, not on issues, but on personality, and the public will love it.

embraer170

Ted Cruz against questioned on the sex scandal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW2B7Ky-0dk

Deflect, deflect, deflect...

JPNelsforearm

embraer170 wrote: »

Ted Cruz against questioned on the sex scandal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW2B7Ky-0dk

Deflect, deflect, deflect...

wow, to think he has a massive PR machine behind him and this is what he comes up with.

All he has to say is "No, I have never cheated on my wife", end of story and it'll die off and be forgotten about, he is giving this story serious legs.

LuckyLloyd

It's because he's guilty. He wouldn't be the first man in a position of power to indulge and he won't be the last. It really shouldn't matter what politicians get up to (no more than it would colour your perception of someone you worked with), but the problem in this case is the kind of moral politics Cruz has been trying the espouse. You can be a hypocrite on all sorts of policy matters, but if you dip the pen in stray ink they'll get you for that.

Billy86

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It's because he's guilty. He wouldn't be the first man in a position of power to indulge and he won't be the last. It really shouldn't matter what politicians get up to (no more than it would colour your perception of someone you worked with), but the problem in this case is the kind of moral politics Cruz has been trying the espouse. You can be a hypocrite on all sorts of policy matters, but if you dip the pen in stray ink they'll get you for that.

Whether the Cruz story is true or not, it's what makes the Republican/Tea Party "squeaky clean, family values" identity of the last 8-10 years so hilarious as well, you'd think they would have noticed by now that it's pretty much impossible to keep all the skeletons in the closet.

Personally, I just can't wait until 30 years from now when the two nominees have racist youtube comments and snapchat d*ck pics from their teens coming back to haunt them :pac: . Every politician will have so much internet dirt on them that you have to wonder if this kind of stuff will even play much of a role.

eire4

InTheTrees wrote: »

Well how do Fine Gael elect a new leader? How do Fianna fail?

I dont think its unreasonable that party leadership get a guaranteed vote. Super delegates can vote for bernie if they want. Maybe they will.

"Behave in that manner"? It seems pretty fair.

What you or I think is fair is not relevant here. I am just talking about what will happen with the Sanders supporters a very large chunk of whom are not Democrats if the super delegates decide the Democratic nomination.

MadYaker

When Hillary wins the nomination I'd imagine Bernie will endorse her and urge his supporters to vote for her. Maybe she'll take him on as running mate? She could do a lot worse and she has to pick a male. There's no doubt that competing against Bernie has made her a better candidate.

InTheTrees

eire4 wrote: »

I am just talking about what will happen with the Sanders supporters a very large chunk of whom are not Democrats if the super delegates decide the Democratic nomination.

I agree. If it goes to the convention it will undoubtedly be much more contentious.

I think Hillary will clinch the nomination in the next month or so and Bernie will bow out graciously and encourage his supporters to vote for her.

If a large number of his supporters are not Democrats then no doubt they'll go their separate way.

briany

InTheTrees wrote: »

I agree. If it goes to the convention it will undoubtedly be much more contentious.

I think Hillary will clinch the nomination in the next month or so and Bernie will bow out graciously and encourage his supporters to vote for her.

If a large number of his supporters are not Democrats then no doubt they'll go their separate way.

Neither of them want Trump winning, but I would imagine Bernie would try to get policy concessions from Hillary before endorsing her. On the other hand, Bernie may be so opposed to Trump that he reluctantly endorses her anyway. It would sort of be Trump chicken between the two candidates.

Amerika

MadYaker wrote: »

When Hillary wins the nomination I'd imagine Bernie will endorse her and urge his supporters to vote for her. Maybe she'll take him on as running mate? She could do a lot worse and she has to pick a male. There's no doubt that competing against Bernie has made her a better candidate.

Hillary is old, and possibly unhealthy. Therefore it would make no sense making an old white guy the choice for VP of a diverse and younger based party. He’d be too old to run in eight years. I think Sanders would be happy going back to the Senate and extracting some firm promises from Clinton, because of his new found popularity, on the issues he cares about most.

B_Wayne

Trump aide has been charged with battery against journalist.... Yet it's the Sanders' supporters that are the problem.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35919863

Billy86

B_Wayne wrote: »

Trump aide has been charged with battery against journalist.... Yet it's the Sanders' supporters that are the problem.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35919863

Watch the Trump fans turn around and blame the journalist. Note for mods, I'm honestly not being even remotely glib or sarcastic about this.

BoJack Horseman

B_Wayne wrote: »

Trump aide has been charged with battery against journalist.... Yet it's the Sanders' supporters that are the problem.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35919863

It's not an aide... its the campaign manager himself

choppy surveillance footage of the brutal assault has been released:

JPNelsforearm

Billy86 wrote: »

Watch the Trump fans turn around and blame the journalist. Note for mods, I'm honestly not being even remotely glib or sarcastic about this.

LOL, 100% blame the journo as nothing happened, completely politically motivated, sad really

BoJack Horseman

It will be confusing... who to side with?

The right wing campaign manager or the right wing hack?

mbur

I can understand why the us media ignore Bernie Sanders when they can and downplay his recent successes. He is critical of their owners and that means he has to find other ways of spreading his message. He seems to have that under control so far.

What I find impressive is that the media here also seem to be doing the same thing. The Examiner today ran a full page article on the US election. Bernie's success not mentioned. Tonight on RTE1 drivetime Philip Boucher-Hayes' can't get past Trump vs Cruz.

Why are we only getting half the story?

BoJack Horseman

mbur wrote: »

Why are we only getting half the story?

Trump is box office & Clinton is the presumptive nominee.

when most coverage is a 60-second bit, they are going to be picky.
No excuse for the print media though.

Black Swan

mbur wrote: »

I can understand why the us media ignore Bernie Sanders when they can and downplay his recent successes.

The news media is first a business. Its performance is measured and driven by ratings, which in turn sells advertising, and makes associated profits and ROI for its investors. With a few exceptions (subject to interpretation), Bernie Sanders rarely says "outrageous" things to draw press attention like Trump, who is a colourful and sensationalist candidate that frequently says "outrageous" things. Should Trump win the 8 November 2016 election, it will not be due to his qualifications and experience for the highest post in US government (e.g., Trump has ZERO governance, ZERO foreign diplomacy, ZERO military for CIC), rather he will win due to being a master of media and viewership/readership manipulation per his 1987 book.

Billy86

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

LOL, 100% blame the journo as nothing happened, completely politically motivated, sad really

You never fail to deliver. Notice the Trump campaign manager starting physical altercations? And you wonder why violence follows the campaign wherever it goes.

Billy86

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

It's not an aide... its the campaign manager himself

choppy surveillance footage of the brutal assault has been released:

Nobody's going to be confusing him for James Harrison, but the guy was charged with battery and not assault, and nobody said it was brutal. The incident itself if innocuous enough obviously but the fact is that grabbing and reefing a journalist and woman who was walking beside Trump and asking him questions (as journalists have a funny tendency to do) is one of the most effective and efficient ways of escalating tensions and violence for the simple reason that it is an act of violence itself.

Whatever about where the charges go, that video is clear as day in showing Trump's bloody campaign manager of all people, committing an act of violence without any provocation. Between this carry on and offering to pay for legal bills for others committing acts of violence on Trumps behalf, it's clear as day where bulk of the blame for violence at his rallies lies.

Thargor

That Cruz video is pretty bad, he'll be asked about that again.

embraer170

Amanda Carpenter responds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=323&v=8LRvQiTaRq4

She 100% denies it... but the tone of the interview/questions puts it very far from a piece of impartial journalism.

Billy86

embraer170 wrote: »

Amanda Carpenter responds:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=323&v=8LRvQiTaRq4

She 100% denies it... but the tone of the interview/questions puts it very far from a piece of impartial journalism.

Holy crap, American Ryan Tubridy! :eek:

KingBrian2

Black Swan wrote: »

The news media is first a business. Its performance is measured and driven by ratings, which in turn sells advertising, and makes associated profits and ROI for its investors. With a few exceptions (subject to interpretation), Bernie Sanders rarely says "outrageous" things to draw press attention like Trump, who is a colourful and sensationalist candidate that frequently says "outrageous" things. Should Trump win the 8 November 2016 election, it will not be due to his qualifications and experience for the highest post in US government (e.g., Trump has ZERO governance, ZERO foreign diplomacy, ZERO military for CIC), rather he will win due to being a master of media and viewership/readership manipulation per his 1987 book.

If Trump becomes President expect a lot of advertisements for Washington consultants.

embraer170

Billy86 wrote: »

Holy crap, American Ryan Tubridy! :eek:

And this is CNN.:eek: