2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Billy86

timmyntc wrote: »

Because people shouldn't have to apologise for the sins of their fathers?




Or their fathers' fathers' fathers as the case may be :pac:

Then we should still be part of the British Empire. Sure it wasn't the lads in the last century who took it off, it was their fathers fathers fathers. They had nothing to make amends for.

eire4

Akrasia wrote: »

The panama papers could really hurt Clinton. Bernie is really really strong on this matter, he spoke out against the trade agreement with Panama while Clinton strongly supported it, and the reasons why Sanders was against it were the very reasons that have been vindicated by this weeks leaks.

it also plays right into Sander's platform of the wealthy elites avoiding taxes and screwing the little guy.

I also would not be in the least bit surprised if there are some direct links to the Clintons discovered in these papers. Whether tenuous or real, they have a very wide network of political and corporate connections, and Trump or Cruz could find something to link to Clinton (possibly in retaliation to someone discovering a link to them)

Sanders would be mad to not hammer this point in the NY debate and his rallies

The nature of this scandal is that we are going to be drip fed news for weeks and months as more of the connections are unravelled. Clinton, even if she is never directly implicated in the leaks, is going to suffer by being one of the main facilitators via her enthusiastic support of the Panama trade agreement.

I think your right about the Panama Papers leaks playing right into the wheelhouse so to speak of Sanders campaign. However I don't think you will see Clinton or any other major American's implicated.
The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include

Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)


I even suspect the leaks involving Iceland may have been payback for Iceland burning bondholders during their financial/banking crisis although obviously that is purely opinion on my part.

JPNelsforearm

WarZ wrote: »

Apologizing is recognition to the victims and shows a genuine attempt to mend bridges.

And yes Britain have apologized multiple times. Blair apologized for the Potato Famine, Cameron apologized for Bloody Sunday, The Queen apologized for the plantations. And lets be honest, the Plantations in Ireland paled in significance to Slavery.

"mend bridges"? How does it do that? It accomplishes nothing, but sets precedent that people are responsible for the "sins of their fathers" as another poster pointed out.

Britain has not apologised "multiple times", apologies have been made for some incidents and Blair didnt apologise for the famine nor did he even make his statement in an official capacity. Again, this is exactly my point, we could get into an argument on what constitutes a proper apology, tone everything, its not worth it. David Cameron and the British government still claim part of Ulster, that is the only issue, apologising for what dead people did to dead people is a mugs game.

Im not getting into an "oppression off" as regards Ireland v the 400k African slaves in North America and who had it worse, whats the point, wrong thread.

JPNelsforearm

eire4 wrote: »

I think your right about the Panama Papers leaks playing right into the wheelhouse so to speak of Sanders campaign. However I don't think you will see Clinton or any other major American's implicated.
The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include

Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)


I even suspect the leaks involving Iceland may have been payback for Iceland burning bondholders during their financial/banking crisis although obviously that is purely opinion on my part.

Exactly, going after Putin gives the game away imo, Soros has been after him since he kicked him out of Russia, nothing on Clinton will surface.

Manic Moran

honru wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I believe California is a semi-closed primary for Democrats and closed for Republicans.

This means that voters that indicate "no party preference" are able to vote in the Democratic primary, but not in the Republican primary.

This has not been widely reported in the media, but this works to a considerable advantage to Sanders. He does far better with independents than Clinton, and this group are effectively shut out of voting in the Republican contest.

You are correct. I'm used to the non-presidential election system here, which is open primary.

K-9

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

I think an apology is pandering, and no, I dont think its needed, much the same way an apology from Britain is not needed nor wanted for 800 years of oppression. Its a platitude, 700k Americans died in a war over slavery, apologising for something you had no control nor involvement in is pointless, its a never ending ball to set rolling.

It isn't as simple as slavery as you know, it's about civil rights in the 60's too, women's rights, gay rights, Irish immigrant rights.

Segregation was an improvement on slavery, doesn't make segregation right!

Manic Moran

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

"mend bridges"? How does it do that? It accomplishes nothing, but sets precedent that people are responsible for the "sins of their fathers" as another poster pointed out.

Britain has not apologised "multiple times", apologies have been made for some incidents and Blair didnt apologise for the famine nor did he even make his statement in an official capacity. Again, this is exactly my point, we could get into an argument on what constitutes a proper apology, tone everything, its not worth it. David Cameron and the British government still claim part of Ulster, that is the only issue, apologising for what dead people did to dead people is a mugs game.

In fairness, some precedent has been set in the US. The US government has apologized to the Hawaiians for overthrowing their monarchy, and to native Americans for breaking treaties and generally trying to kill them.

However, in both cases, those can be seen as apologies by the US Government as the national government for acts by the US against other nations, not apologies for general treatment by other parties to any particular part of its own population. To this extent, agree with you that an apology by the US government is a little pointless, and that tangible effect is met useful anyway.

JPNelsforearm

Bill Clinton goes in on BLM protesters, will it overshadow Hillary's previous pandering and give the incentive to Sanders as regards the BLM rent-a-vote?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW5T4JHZJfU

He's the most coherent politician in the race, and he's not even running, lol.

BoJack Horseman

Great video.

Give it to those gob sh*tes Bill.
(GOP & the BLM mob)

Dohnjoe

eire4 wrote: »

I think your right about the Panama Papers leaks playing right into the wheelhouse so to speak of Sanders campaign. However I don't think you will see Clinton or any other major American's implicated.
The leak is being managed by the grandly but laughably named “International Consortium of Investigative Journalists”, which is funded and organised entirely by the USA’s Center for Public Integrity. Their funders include

Ford Foundation
Carnegie Endowment
Rockefeller Family Fund
W K Kellogg Foundation
Open Society Foundation (Soros)


I even suspect the leaks involving Iceland may have been payback for Iceland burning bondholders during their financial/banking crisis although obviously that is purely opinion on my part.

You are trying to insinuate that 370 journalists from 107 different organisations are in on some conspiracy

Can you explain how that part works?

I'll explain how the conspiracy thinking works. The CPI is American, therefore compromised, search among its many funders, highlight any that might have a connection to conspiracy, bankers or corporations (Rockerfeller, Soros) - conspiracy activated, no further thought required

211 Americans were contained in the documents so far. The yanks have tax havens much closer to home (3 US states) and there are at least 3 large law firms operating like Mossack Fonseca

eire4

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are trying to insinuate that 370 journalists from 107 different organisations are in on some conspiracy

Can you explain how that part works?

I'll explain how the conspiracy thinking works. The CPI is American, therefore compromised, search among its many funders, highlight any that might have a connection to conspiracy, bankers or corporations (Rockerfeller, Soros) - conspiracy activated, no further thought required

211 Americans were contained in the documents so far. The yanks have tax havens much closer to home (3 US states) and there are at least 3 large law firms operating like Mossack Fonseca

Any mention of Clinton or any other major players in the US among those 211 Americans?
I am not trying to insinuate anything just making my opinion clear on the America side of things with regard to the Panama Papers. I would love to be proven wrong and see major American players exposed as well but have not seen that so far.
By the way I appluad the leaking of those documents and think it is a good thing that such nefarious financial dealings and tax dodging is exposed.

Christy42

eire4 wrote: »

Any mention of Clinton or any other major players in the US among those 211 Americans?
I am not trying to insinuate anything just making my opinion clear on the America side of things with regard to the Panama Papers. I would love to be proven wrong and see major American players exposed as well but have not seen that so far.
By the way I appluad the leaking of those documents and think it is a good thing that such nefarious financial dealings and tax dodging is exposed.

I believe his second point comes up here. There is no single company with a monopoly on dodgy dealings. The fact that the Clinton's didn't pick this company to do deals with is not that unlikely. Also in all likelihood a load of politician's on both sides of the divide in the states.

Hopefully this can lead to a tightening of laws to stop this from happening via any dodgy company.

Black Swan

National poll results collected by the IBD/TIPP for the Republican presidential nomination:

Taken | Trump | Cruz | Kasich
24-29 Oct | 28 | 6 | 1
30 Nov-4 Dec | 27 | 13 | 2
4-8 Jan | 34 | 18 | 2
22-27 Jan | 31 | 21 | 2
19-24 Feb | 31 | 20 | 7
28 Mar-2 Apr | 38 | 31 | 19

It will be interesting to observe such polls through April-May-June to see if they maintain the relative percentage positioning between Republican candidates (28 March-2 Apr poll), or if there is a convergence as the 18-21 July GOP convention occurs in Columbus, Ohio, especially if Trump fails to meet or exceed the minimum number of delegates to secure the nomination before July.

Overheal

Some media outlets are trying to downplay and even discredit the fact that Sanders has been invited to speak at the Vatican

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-vatican-idUSKCN0X5257

Akrasia

Overheal wrote: »

Some media outlets are trying to downplay and even discredit the fact that Sanders has been invited to speak at the Vatican

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-vatican-idUSKCN0X5257

The negative anti sanders media campaign has really ramped up in the last week or two. The establishment are clearly worried that he has a chance to win the nomination

Manach

Sanders beats Clinton in Wyoming caucuses
"
Bernie Sanders has won the latest stage in the battle for the Democratic nomination in the US presidential poll by securing victory in Wyoming.
The state's 14 delegates will be awarded proportionally. Mr Sanders has won seven of the latest eight states.
" - http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36005198

Manic Moran

CNN says eight out of nine

Overheal

20 v 17 state wins

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html?_r=0

eire4

Manic Moran wrote: »

CNN says eight out of nine

Your both correct. Sanders has won 7 of the last 8 states. But 8 of 9 contests including the Democrats abroad primary.

Black Swan

If it wasn't for the Democrat superdelegates mostly going to Clinton, Sanders and Clinton would be running this race very closely. This makes me wonder what might happen during the Democratic convention if they remain close up until then?

Black Swan

Black Swan wrote: »

If it wasn't for the Democrat superdelegates mostly going to Clinton, Sanders and Clinton would be running this race very closely. This makes me wonder what might happen during the Democratic convention if they remain close up until then?

New York will go for Clinton on the 19th by about 40 delegates then it'll be wrapped up on the 26th when Connecticut, Delaware Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island give her another 30-50 gap. Maybe, just maybe then people will accept that the race is run.

Black Swan

Deleted User wrote: »

New York will go for Clinton on the 19th by about 40 delegates then it'll be wrapped up on the 26th when Connecticut, Delaware Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island give her another 30-50 gap. Maybe, just maybe then people will accept that the race is run.

I wonder how California's 548 Democratic delegates will go 7 June 2016? The most recent Field, SurveyUSA, LATimes, and PPIC polls show Clinton ahead from 6 to 14 depending upon the poll.

eire4

Deleted User wrote: »

New York will go for Clinton on the 19th by about 40 delegates then it'll be wrapped up on the 26th when Connecticut, Delaware Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island give her another 30-50 gap. Maybe, just maybe then people will accept that the race is run.

Certainly New York should go to Clinton and fairly comfortable given she is the former New York state senator. The latest polls from this weekend have Clinton leading in New York from 16-18 points depending on the poll so while Sanders has closed the gap from the landslide numbers of March it is going to take one heck of a turn around for him to turn New York into another Illinois never mind another Michigan.

eire4

Black Swan wrote: »

I wonder how California's 548 Democratic delegates will go 7 June 2016? The most recent Field, SurveyUSA, LATimes, and PPIC polls show Clinton ahead from 6 to 14 depending upon the poll.

I think one thing is for sure Sanders has no intention of throwing in the towel. Obviously in an ideal world he would want to win the Democratic nomination but his campaign is more then just that goal I think. He seems to be about trying to build a movement within the left wing of the Democratic party to try and take it back from the bought and paid for corporate Democrats who currently control the party.

Manic Moran

Does that CA poll include the independents who may vote Bernie?

Akrasia

eire4 wrote: »

Certainly New York should go to Clinton and fairly comfortable given she is the former New York state senator. The latest polls from this weekend have Clinton leading in New York from 16-18 points depending on the poll so while Sanders has closed the gap from the landslide numbers of March it is going to take one heck of a turn around for him to turn New York into another Illinois never mind another Michigan.

That new poll is worrying from a Sanders perspective.

The one glimmer of hope is that the poll was conducted by phone, with Landline (748) and cellphone (655) numbers

The weighting decision to call more landlines than cellphones might favour Clinton because her voters are older more 'settled' (home owners, retired etc) while Sanders voters are younger and many of them don't have a landline number (about 40% of americans don't have land lines, and that number is much higher for young people)

PEW research has a 60% cellphone vs landline split, this fox poll is the opposite.

Maybe I'm clutching at straws. We'll see next week.

In the week before the election, there is the big debate and Sanders' visit to the Vatican which will give him a lot of media attention

There's also the Clinton Emails and the Panama papers which could potentially throw up a story at any time that could put Hillary on the defensive before the polls open...

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

Does that CA poll include the independents who may vote Bernie?

USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times California survey 16-23 March 2016 included Democrats, Republicans, and "DECLINE TO STATE REGISTRATION OR NO PARTY PREFERENCE." Didn't see a Bernie breakout by no party preference, but may have missed it.

This survey suggested that Californians don't like Trump, especially Latino Californians:
Trump total White favourable 29, total unfavourable 67
Trump total Latino favourable 9, total unfavourable 87

Does it make you wonder why such a great number of California Latino voters polled disliked Trump? Furthermore, of all candidates surveyed, Trump was clearly the most unfavourable.

In any case, a close race between Trump and Clinton, California's largest state 55 ECs might make a difference (55/270 = 20.4%).

JPNelsforearm

Hillary's "great foreign policy experience" is Obama's "worst mistake" of his presidency.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36013703

Hey though, as Bernard Sanders says, no one cares, we are sick of hearing about those damn emails etc etc....

Sanders had the chance to hammer her, opted not to, Trump will crucify her if he isnt gazumped by the RNC

KingBrian2

Clinton should win New York since the policies Sanders advocates would drive away the very business interests that centrist Democrats are precisely voting for Clinton for. Namely to make gvt involvement in business less and less bureaucratic.

Rjd2

Bernie is finished whether we like him or not (I do!). New York will likely be a bloodbath and he will probably concede shortly after that.

Cracking article below which explains how little of a chance he has
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-is-even-further-behind-in-votes-than-he-is-in-delegates/

Sanders already has a nearly impossible task ahead of him in trying to erase Clinton’s pledged delegate lead. He’s down by 212 delegates, meaning he’d need to win 56 percent of those remaining to nose in front. He has dominated caucus states such as Idaho and Washington, but only two caucus states — Wyoming and North Dakota — remain on the calendar. What’s more, the biggest states left — New York and California — favor Clinton demographically.

Including caucus results, Clinton leads Sanders by almost 2.4 million raw votes, 9.4 million to just more than 7 million, according to The Green Papers

.


Nobody will switch from Hilary to Bernie when he is so far behind in popular votes especially once she has won New York.