2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

eire4

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Were looking at a boycotted election. Where does that leave mainstream politics in America?:P

Current mainstream politics in America is a corrupt duopoly on power with the Republican and Democratic parties having no interest in operating in any other fashion then to keep the gravy train running for themsleves and not legislate and lead the country and the government in a manner that is in the best interests of the vast majority of Americans. The fact that this is the current sad state of affairs in America is no laughing matter given how rich and powerful a country they are. What happens there affects the world in very very big ways.

eire4

Amerika wrote: »

Okay, disgust for Clinton trumping ideology might be a reason the Sanders supporters could favor The Donald.

Newest possibility being floated is if Sanders is disrespected and ignored at the DNC convention. That Sanders and his followers might consider a run with the Green Party. Sanders could get on enough ballots to have a major impact on the general election and act as a spoiler to Clinton s aspirations. The Green Party have at least 20 states where their nominee will get a spot on the ballot, no matter what. And those states include New York, California, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Colorado.

Disgust at Clinton and the coporate Democratic leadership will lead some Sanders supporters to either vote Sanders in as a write in candidate or vote for Jill Stein of the Green Party. The Bernie or bust people are very clear on that and certainly as long as the corporate Democratic leadership keep behaving as they have been up until now that number may indeed grow to be a significant factor. Time will tell. One thing Sanders supporters won't be doing though is voting for a dangerous demagogue like Trump.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Christy42

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sorry mistook your post as support for Trump.

RobertKK

Trump going after Bill Clinton and saying he is a rapist. That three women have come out and have said they were abused by Bill Clinton.
CNN have people on who say the Clinton campaign are concerned new revelations will come out as Bill was partly free living post presidency.

hatrickpatrick

oscarBravo wrote: »

Do you have a reasoned critique of the article, or are you just reflexively criticising it because it criticises your idol?

To be fair, you can criticise any article which uses that unimaginably stupid, moronic and inflammatory headline. "Even if X was right about Y, they were wrong". To anyone reading it, that headline immediately translates to "I don't like this guy, and I'm looking for an excuse to bash him".

Amazingfun

Well the (mainly) Bernie people (and lots of illegals) were out in force protesting Trump in New Mexico, and again, they have given lots of people a new incentive to support Trump as they throw rocks at police horses and wave Mexican Flags on live TV, lol.

Live coverage can be seen here, although the mayhem is finally starting to wind down a bit:

Also, Milo from Breitbart was attacked by Black Lives Matter protesters in Chicago, another incident which gave many people an eye/earful of their truly pathetic tactics

In other news, Trump wins Washington and is now at an estimated (CNN) count of 1229! He just needs 1237 to cinch the nom, so this is brilliant news!

http://edition.cnn.com/election/primaries/parties/republican

Black Swan

Amazingfun wrote: »

In other news, Trump wins Washington and is now at an estimated (CNN) count of 1229! He just needs 1237 to cinch the nom, so this is brilliant news!

Trump has been running by himself for the Republican nomination since Cruz and Kasich dropped out, so he has been the de facto nominee for a month now, so there's no "brilliant news;" rather it's a moot point (as will his official nomination be anti-climatic during the 18-21 July Republican Convention in Columbus, Ohio). It's like cheering for your favourite NFL team in the Super Bowl, and the opposing team fails to show, and you win by default.

Amazingfun

Black Swan wrote: »

Trump has been running by himself for the Republican nomination since Cruz and Kasich dropped out, so he has been the de facto nominee for a month now, so there's no "brilliant news;" rather it's a moot point (as will his official nomination be anti-climatic during the 18-21 July Republican Convention in Columbus, Ohio). It's like cheering for your favourite NFL team in the Super Bowl, and the opposing team fails to show, and you win by default.

You keep saying this after his wins, and I keep explaining to you that he is not the only name on the ballot. And since the "Never Trump" campaign has lost power, instead of gaining, it's a real delight for those of us who have cheered Trump from the start to see him get such dominant results.

So I shall continue to post the good news when it comes, as I am sure you will do if any emerges for the candidate you support

oscarBravo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To be fair, you can criticise any article which uses that unimaginably stupid, moronic and inflammatory headline. "Even if X was right about Y, they were wrong". To anyone reading it, that headline immediately translates to "I don't like this guy, and I'm looking for an excuse to bash him".

To be fair, the headline is only stupid if - to paraphrase Richard Dawkins - you only read articles by their headlines and ignore the detailed footnote that is the article itself.

The article makes it clear what the headline means, and I've explained it here myself: Trump may be "right", in the sense that yes, the plane took off from Paris or whatever, but he's still wrong, in the sense that he's jumping to completely unjustified conclusions.

If you want to ignore the actual point of the article and criticise it on the basis of deciding for yourself what the headline means, knock yourself out.

Billy86

Amazingfun wrote: »

Well the (mainly) Bernie people (and lots of illegals) were out in force protesting Trump in New Mexico, and again, they have given lots of people a new incentive to support Trump as they throw rocks at police horses and wave Mexican Flags on live TV, lol.

And your source to show 51+ percent of them were Bernie Sanders supporters is where?

eire4

Billy86 wrote: »

And your source to show 51+ percent of them were Bernie Sanders supporters is where?

I watched the events unfold on 3 different stations last night myself and would have no idea who the protestors were. Either way the protestors who got violent in any way only did their cause (assuming their cause was to protest against the hateful words and policies of Trump as regards immigration in particular) harm last night with their behaviour. This is exactly what the dangerous demagogue that Trump is wants and it only helps him.

K-9

RobertKK wrote: »

Trump going after Bill Clinton and saying he is a rapist. That three women have come out and have said they were abused by Bill Clinton.
CNN have people on who say the Clinton campaign are concerned new revelations will come out as Bill was partly free living post presidency.

Something about a murderer or cover up as well.

The National Enquirer could be the paper of record in this election.

K-9

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To be fair, you can criticise any article which uses that unimaginably stupid, moronic and inflammatory headline. "Even if X was right about Y, they were wrong". To anyone reading it, that headline immediately translates to "I don't like this guy, and I'm looking for an excuse to bash him".

Not Really, objectively the headline means there's a wider principle at stake, that even if it turns out a politician
is right about something, they went about it the wrong way. It isn't anything new in journalism, put it that way.

RobertKK

K-9 wrote: »

Something about a murderer or cover up as well.

The National Enquirer could be the paper of record in this election.

There was a death of a person associated with the Clintons, I remember at the time there were conspiracy theories he was murdered, and made look like a suicide.
The truth is, who knows...


Anyway it is looking bad for Hillary Clinton given she has been found to have broken federal rules with her emails.
The odds must be higher that the FBI will indict her, and might explain why Bernie has not dropped out.

Akrasia

K-9 wrote: »

Not Really, objectively the headline means there's a wider principle at stake, that even if it turns out a politician
is right about something, they went about it the wrong way. It isn't anything new in journalism, put it that way.

Exactly. If that Donegal postman said we'll definitely have a white Christmas this year he's wrong even if it snows. Trump shouldn't be presuming the results of an air crash investigation with zero evidence to go on. If trump is president is there a risk that he could start a conflict if something happens to an American airliner?

Black Swan

Amazingfun wrote: »

So I shall continue to post the good news when it comes, as I am sure you will do if any emerges for the candidate you support

None of the above. All the candidates that began last summer, both Democratic and Republican, represented a sad commentary on the nation with the world's largest GDP and military. Over 318 million people, and they cannot offer someone better for the presidency than those that ran, or the 3 still running? Obviously the most intelligent and qualified people that made America great are not running for president 2016. None of the remaining 3 candidates left standing have ever addressed in-depth the important domestic and international issues that affect their nation, rather it has been an oversimplistic spouting of sound bites for the media, along with a continuous bad mouthing of each other, all too often personal and irrelevant to what really is important to the nation. Sad commentary indeed!

It appears that national co-founder and 2nd US president John Adams was correct when cautioning the American people about the evils of their two-party system, given the results of the current brood of candidates running for the 2016 Democrat and Republican presidential nominations. This election has been a complete farce since its beginning, and certainly does not command any respect beyond the US territorial boundaries.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amazingfun

Black Swan wrote: »

None of the above. All the candidates that began last summer, both Democratic and Republican, represented a sad commentary on the nation with the world's largest GDP and military. Over 318 million people, and they cannot offer someone better for the presidency than those that ran, or the 3 still running? Obviously the most intelligent and qualified people that made America great are not running for president 2016. None of the remaining 3 candidates left standing have ever addressed in-depth the important domestic and international issues that affect their nation, rather it has been an oversimplistic spouting of sound bites for the media, along with a continuous bad mouthing of each other, all too often personal and irrelevant to what really is important to the nation. Sad commentary indeed!

It appears that national co-founder and 2nd US president John Adams was correct when cautioning the American people about the evils of their two-party system, given the results of the current brood of candidates running for the 2016 Democrat and Republican presidential nominations. This election has been a complete farce since its beginning, and certainly does not command any respect beyond the US territorial boundaries.

lol, yes, I already understand you (and some others here) have bad feelings about how things have turned out, but it still has zero relevance to my posting the results of Trump's latest victory. Perhaps you will have the ability to just accept that there are some who *gasp* disagree with you, so we can avoid this kind of song and dance going forward

Btw, for those interested, keep this link handy for the coming rallys Friday in Fresno and San Diego to see live coverage of the almost-certain protests:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXbuP19AWDM

There was an attempt at a protest in Anaheim earlier but the California police were well prepared and two steps ahead of them, unlike the chaos in NM, and it fizzled out fairly fast.

Black Swan

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

There will be no Anthem in 2016 Permabear. Quite the opposite, with cheering fans for the latest pseudo-reality telly show host, where loud-mouthed outrageous sound bites and network ratings rule, not meaningful content. Gary Johnson is no charismatic Galt, nor a Fountainhead architect to reshape the future. Nor is anyone of note in presidential 2016, making me wonder if it's time to Shrug, and move on to a place where meritorious behaviour is esteemed and shared? But does such a place exist, or is it just another fiction of our Brave New World?

Amazingfun

Trump was on The Jimmy Kimmel show tonight:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-tells-kimmel-hed-be-willing-to-debate-sanders-for-charity/

Kimmel asked Trump if he'd be willing to debate Sanders, given that Hillary Clinton had turned her primary opponent down for a California debate. Trump declared he would -- as long as the proceeds go to charity.

As he accepted the hypothetical debate, Trump asked, perhaps jokingly, how much Sanders would be willing to pay him -- for charity -- then conceded that it would be fine if a network were willing to put up the money. Trump also said he has never met Sanders.

Sanders took to Twitter right away with his response:

@BernieSanders
Game on. I look forward to debating Donald Trump in California before the June 7 primary.

Many Sanders supporters are overjoyed, as this really puts the pressure on Clinton now.

The fun continues, lol!

Akrasia

I would absolutely love to see a Trump v Sanders debate. It would be 'Huuuuge'

Clinton was in this position before, Previously she had declined to participate in a town hall 'debate' until Sanders agreed to do it anyway so it would have just been Sanders and Trump on the stage.

Clinton said in her previous campaign that a presidential candidate should be prepared to debate anywhere, anytime. How things have changed.

Brian?

Amazingfun wrote: »

lol, yes, I already understand you (and some others here) have bad feelings about how things have turned out, but it still has zero relevance to my posting the results of Trump's latest victory. Perhaps you will have the ability to just accept that there are some who *gasp* disagree with you, so we can avoid this kind of song and dance going forward

Btw, for those interested, keep this link handy for the coming rallys Friday in Fresno and San Diego to see live coverage of the almost-certain protests:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXbuP19AWDM

There was an attempt at a protest in Anaheim earlier but the California police were well prepared and two steps ahead of them, unlike the chaos in NM, and it fizzled out fairly fast.

I tried to let it go, but I couldn't. You're getting information from a source that can't even spell thieves properly.

hatrickpatrick

oscarBravo wrote: »

To be fair, the headline is only stupid if - to paraphrase Richard Dawkins - you only read articles by their headlines and ignore the detailed footnote that is the article itself.

The article makes it clear what the headline means, and I've explained it here myself: Trump may be "right", in the sense that yes, the plane took off from Paris or whatever, but he's still wrong, in the sense that he's jumping to completely unjustified conclusions.

If you want to ignore the actual point of the article and criticise it on the basis of deciding for yourself what the headline means, knock yourself out.

That's not the point that I was making though. Regardless of whether your article is the most well thought out, well researched, detailed analysis in the history of journalism, if you choose to use a clickbait-ragebait headline for it you deserve to be condemned and have your article ignored. The internet, and the media in general, desperately needs less of that sh!te.

I apply that across the board by the way - I'm a Sanders supporter and I despise fellow supporter H.A. Goodman (Huffington Post) for flooding the election cycle with headlines like "Even though Sanders is behind, he's still ahead. Here's why" and worse "Even if Sanders loses the nomination, he's still won".

All it does is piss people off and render the argument, however well thought out that argument might be, entirely powerless (and annoyingly, many of Goodman's arguments actually do make sense). You can't write a good article with an inflammatory headline and still ultimately call it a good article, in my view. If your intention in headline writing is to piss people off, you're a crappy journalist.

ancapailldorcha

Black Swan wrote: »

There will be no Anthem in 2016 Permabear. Quite the opposite, with cheering fans for the latest pseudo-reality telly show host, where loud-mouthed outrageous sound bites and network ratings rule, not meaningful content. Gary Johnson is no charismatic Galt, nor a Fountainhead architect to reshape the future. Nor is anyone of note in presidential 2016, making me wonder if it's time to Shrug, and move on to a place where meritorious behaviour is esteemed and shared? But does such a place exist, or is it just another fiction of our Brave New World?

I don't know, BS. Neither candidate is well liked outside of their own dedicated support bases. Many Republicans detest Clinton, some moreso than their current nominee. Likewise, many of Bernie Sanders' supporters will be disappointed when, and it's a when, their nomination goes to a corporate foreign policy hawk.

The Economist has run an article on Johnson in this week's issue here.

In any case, this election has exposed the sham of the two-party system and if Ms. Clinton is indeed successful in taking the Oval Office, some significant changes will need to be made as it will have been a lucky escape.

KingBrian2

Trump has won the GOP nomination the news has come true. This is a watershed moment for Republicans everywhere in America. Who knows where it goes from here but the mood of that country and it is noticeable across the Atlantic is one of demanding accountability from elected office. Too many dangerous people have been allowed into office thus far that time has come to an end. Policies that actually help the people have to be made possible as opposed to the insincerities of the politicians in office at the moment.

Hande hoche!

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump has won the GOP nomination the news has come true. This is a watershed moment for Republicans everywhere in America. Who knows where it goes from here but the mood of that country and it is noticeable across the Atlantic is one of demanding accountability from elected office. Too many dangerous people have been allowed into office thus far that time has come to an end. Policies that actually help the people have to be made possible as opposed to the insincerities of the politicians in office at the moment.

Tis astonishing when you think back to last year and all that has happened in between as regards the GOP race.

JPNelsforearm

This is why the people love Trump.
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/735903260402290688

ancapailldorcha

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

This is why the people love Trump.
https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/735903260402290688

C'mon. You're well aware that this isn't the place for funny pics and tweets.

JPNelsforearm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

C'mon. You're well aware that this isn't the place for funny pics and tweets.

No, Im being serious, press tries to create faux pc outrage over this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOyaQ74n8Ys

Trump gives them two fingers in response, its why he has been as successful as he has been.


http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/elizabeth-warren-slams-donald-trump/

"Sen. Elizabeth Warren delivered a fiery condemnation of Donald Trump on Tuesday, continuing her role as an unflinching antagonist to the presumptive Republican nominee and leading both high profile politicians to sharply and publicly mock each other.

In a speech at the Center for Popular Democracy's annual gala, the progressive stalwart took aim at Trump's business record and populist rhetoric during a 10-minute invective, and Trump responded by calling Warren "Pocahontas," reviving a 2012 controversy how the Massachusetts senator described her Native American heritage."