2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Rjd2

Brian? wrote: »

I'm not really in the habit of posting links to show opinion, but I just read this article and it's so damn sensible I had to post it:

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/paul-krugman-do-the-math-but-unfortunately-most-voters-seem-unable-to-1.2666049

Its a solid article aye.

Although this a little troubling, I can't recall but I am pretty sure the Clinton supporters didn't have the same contempt for Obama as many of the Sanders support for Clinton. I expect plenty of Sanders fans will rally behind Clinton once Bern drops out, but their will be some mainly working class white voters who will find Donald a more alluring option.

I dunno, I could be wrong here, but I doubt many Clinton fans would have thought that seriously about voting for Mc Cain.

I have a memory of a goldfish so someone who recalls the 2008 election more clearly than me has the permission to correct me:D

But that probably won’t last; many Clinton supporters said similar things about Barack Obama in 2008, but eventually rallied around the nominee. So unless Bernie Sanders refuses to concede and insinuates that the nomination was somehow stolen by the candidate who won more votes, Clinton is a clear favourite to win the White House.

ancapailldorcha

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

China, Russia & the middle east must be soaked with fundamentalist christians then!

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Well now that you come to mention it their are large Christian populations in all those region. Just saying.:o

Try and be more constructive please.

Billy86

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

At least we know why the world largely doesn't give a sh*t about climate change!

dem damn Christians.

Depends on how you look at it though; the people with vested interests I would assume are not doing it because 'God told them' (unless they're worshipping The Almighty Dollar) but it's a very useful and pretty easy way of selling it to the masses. Not saying that's the case in China or Russia as I don't know, but in the US there is no question that religion is used to peddle climate change denial and the likes in order to allow big business to maximise profits and other individuals to further their interests. It's not only religion of course (and not all religious people by a long, long shot), but this is one of the more glaring examples of something being used to get people to actively vote against their own interests without doing much questioning.

KingBrian2

Do we really believe Trump cares what the Televangelicals say to their masses? Trump is all for religious toleration so that means that your typical misogynist, white Christian male can make fool of himself if he cares for it. It is an obvious constituency to court this election cycle and same goes for another core right the American constitution provides him with, freedom to say whatever he likes without fear or spite that his views will be met with violence.

Billy86

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump is all for religious toleration

Nope.

And as for him not caring about the evangelicals...

He cared, he just failed to win them over.

KingBrian2

Billy86 wrote: »

Nope.

And as for him not caring about the evangelicals...

He cared, he just failed to win them over.

What so he is against Islamism and naturally that makes him a reactionary zealot.

Billy86

KingBrian2 wrote: »

What so he is against Muslims

Fixed that for you.

Being against an entire religion to the point you want to ban all adherents of it from entering your country at all is kind of the complete and utter polar opposite of religious tolerance.

511

Billy86 wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

When did Trump state he is against Muslims?

Being against an entire religion is kind of the complete and utter polar opposite of religious tolerance.

Isn't that the stance of many atheists?

Billy86

511 wrote: »

When did Trump state he is against Muslims?

When his campaign called for a total and complete shutdown of them entering the US.

Isn't that the stance of many atheists?

No, atheists would be intolerant of any religion... or would not believe in any but would tolerate them. Solely targeting a single religion is not related to atheism.

511

Billy86 wrote: »

When his campaign called for a total and complete shutdown of them entering the US.

He suggested a temporary ban "until we figure things out" after Paris and San Bernardino, putting lives of innocent Americans before Muslims' right to enter the US and if these terror attacks keep up, I can see us heading in that direction. Something has to be done about ISIS members and sympathizers attacking innocent lives, but I don't see any of the other candidates coming up with any other solutions, in fact, Clinton will probably exacerbate the problem.

The ban is probably unworkable as America will always lick the hole of wealthy, oil-rich Muslims but his I think his statement was a stroke of genius as it caused him to surge in the polls.

No, atheists would be intolerant of any religion... or would not believe in any but would tolerate them. Solely targeting a single religion is not related to atheism.

I can see the hypocrisy in Christians bashing Islam when their religion has a nasty history, but Christianity is pretty tame compared to Islam nowadays. Islam is the most intolerant popular ideology around and it affecting the lives of anyone near its Middle Eastern origin; Hindus to Buddhists and Christians to Jews, so it hardly a surprise that people are specifically targeting one religion while ignoring the rest.

If Hindus and Buddhists were blowing people up in the West, their faiths should be under the spotlight too, but as it stand, it's just Muslims that er carrying out the major religious terror attacks and that's why it getting the center of attention.

eire4

JPNelsforearm wrote: »

Mockery of failed lying politicians like Warren is neither name calling nor "school yard bully tactics", its been going on in politics longer than Trump has been on this planet.
Why should he have to pretend to be nice? So as to not offend the easily offended? What he said was innocuous, its an indictment of society that you'd consider it "disgraceful".

If Warren lied she should be called out on it and castigated absolutely. I have no issue with that. The slur was nasty though. That was grossly offensive to native Americans and is just yet another example of the dangerous demagogue that is Trump and his disgusting bigotry.

eire4

Brian? wrote: »

I'm happy for you if you're entertained by purile name calling. This mentality made Rush Limbaugh, Anne Coulter et al millions and now it's going to give us president Trump.

Let's mock and jeer everyone we disagree with. Mature discourse is for wimps. Loads of rolleye faces

That kind of blase attitude to ethnic slurs is very problematic. That blase attitude to ethnic slurs enables the bigots out there in the general population to act out their bigotry in dangerous ways when they see leaders behaving in this manner. It is very insidious and nasty behaviour.

eire4

Rjd2 wrote: »

Its a solid article aye.

Although this a little troubling, I can't recall but I am pretty sure the Clinton supporters didn't have the same contempt for Obama as many of the Sanders support for Clinton. I expect plenty of Sanders fans will rally behind Clinton once Bern drops out, but their will be some mainly working class white voters who will find Donald a more alluring option.

I dunno, I could be wrong here, but I doubt many Clinton fans would have thought that seriously about voting for Mc Cain.

I have a memory of a goldfish so someone who recalls the 2008 election more clearly than me has the permission to correct me:D

No reason for Sanders to go anywhere. There are 6 final states up for grabs next Tuesday including the biggest of them all California. Sanders has massively closed the gap in California and has a shot at an upset win there and winning the majority of the 6 states. If he does that then Clinton may still hold the pledged delegate lead but she would only be able to win the nomination via the rigged super delegates. If that does happen the corporate Democratic leadership will have opened the can of worms that I suspected they would all along. Sanders campaign has as one of its pillars that the system is broken and rigged and if that is the only way the corporate Democarts get the nomination they always wanted then the Bernie or bust mindset will just grow bigger within those who support Sanders. The corporate Democratic leadership have I feel consistently misread and misunderstood the Sanders supporters and just arrogantly assumed they would fall into line when the time came. Their arrogant behaviour has turned off more and more Sanders supporters many of whom are not Democratic Party supporters and thus we may see a large chunk of the Sanders supporters vote Bernie as a write in or vote for the Green Party's Jill Stein for president. The idea that any significant number of Sanders supporters would vote for a dangerous demagogue and billionare like Trump is laughable they will vote Bernie as a write in or vote Jill Stein of the Green Party.

KingBrian2

Billy86 wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

Being against an entire religion to the point you want to ban all adherents of it from entering your country at all is kind of the complete and utter polar opposite of religious tolerance.

You are literally putting your own taint on what I said. I distinctly said Islamism which is not the same as Muslims. Trump is against Islamism which is a political ideology that places Islam as the apex of society and will enforce it with physical violence. Indonesia, Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Algeria & Tunisia are not Islamist states although they have large political groups that espouse Islamism as the corrective to the ills of society.

ECO_Mental

I really wish Sanders would Feck off at this stage he's getting very annoying. I can't see what his problem is and why he thinks the system is rigged. Up until last year he was an independent "NOT" a member of the Dems and then for convenience he decided to join the Dems so he can have his 15mins. It's the same in any political party where the members have to vote internally as to who will be the leader. The senior Dems voted this time it will be Hillary, why would they have voted for a person who was never a been a member of the party. It would be like FG voting for Danny Healy Rae to be leader when eventually they get around to kicking Enda out If sanders wanted to run he should have run as an independent and not piggy back of the Democratic party structure. Ultimately the super Dems will have to live by their decision in the GE in casting their super votes just as FG had to live by their decision to have Enda in place when they should have walked back Into government a couple of months ago.

She has 3 millon more votes than he does, why didn't he complain at the start, because like trump i don't think he really thought he would get this far. It was a platform to say a few things get his 15mins and for trump also he wanted some publicity and say "hey it's Mr. Trump here and I'm really rich" get his 15mins and then wrote a book or sell few more condos. But more it was about his ego so he could say "I'm really rich"

Sorry started off about the Bern and finished on the Trump

Christy42

eire4 wrote: »

No reason for Sanders to go anywhere. There are 6 final states up for grabs next Tuesday including the biggest of them all California. Sanders has massively closed the gap in California and has a shot at an upset win there and winning the majority of the 6 states. If he does that then Clinton may still hold the pledged delegate lead but she would only be able to win the nomination via the rigged super delegates.

I don't get this logic. Sanders can only win with the rigged super delegates. Remove them and lower the target to compensate and Hillary wins.
Remove the undemocratic Caucuses and Hillary destroys Sanders.
She will have won more pledged delegates and more votes. The super delegates should go with her as she is the more popular choice even if her supporters aren't as loud.

Black Swan

What does the failed Trump University say about Donald Trump its founder, and now a 2016 presidential candidate?

Trump University opened 2005 and closed 2010. During this time students paid approximately $40 million, with Trump personally receiving approximately $5 million according to Time magazine. Republican presidential candidate Trump is currently a defendant in both the states of New York and California, and according to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman Trump University defrauded students.

Last Friday 27 May 2016 US District Judge Gonzalo Curiel ordered that Trump University procedures on dealing with students and the media should be unsealed for the California trial. Why not? Does Trump have something to hide regarding the failed Trump University operating procedures? In reply at a rally Trump said: "I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump. A hater. He's a hater."

It should be noted that lawsuits alleging fraud against Trump University and defendant Donald Trump began way before anyone knew that Trump was going to run for 2016 president.

ECO_Mental

Black Swan wrote: »

What does the failed Trump University say about Donald Trump its founder, and now a 2016 presidential candidate?

Trump University opened 2005 and closed 2010. During this time students paid approximately $40 million, with Trump personally receiving approximately $5 million according to Time magazine. Republican presidential candidate Trump is currently a defendant in both the states of New York and California, and according to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman Trump University defrauded students.

Last Friday 27 May 2016 US District Judge Gonzalo Curiel ordered that Trump University procedures on dealing with students and the media should be unsealed for the California trial. Why not? Does Trump have something to hide regarding the failed Trump University operating procedures? In reply at a rally Trump said: "I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump. A hater. He's a hater."

It should be noted that lawsuits alleging fraud against Trump University and defendant Donald Trump began way before anyone knew that Trump was going to run for 2016 president.

I wonder will this whole trump university thing be the downfall of him. Court case of him de-frauding people will seriously damage what creditably he has. Looking forward to the excuses his fanatical followers will come up with conspiracy etc

Igotadose

Nice logo. I wonder if Peugeot noticed.

ancapailldorcha

Igotadose wrote: »

Nice logo. I wonder if Peugeot noticed.

Please try to be more constructive that this.

K-9

ECO_Mental wrote: »

I wonder will this whole trump university thing be the downfall of him. Court case of him de-frauding people will seriously damage what creditably he has. Looking forward to the excuses his fanatical followers will come up with conspiracy etc

Doubt it'll affect the support he has, he's sticking it to the man basically.

He took over a thriving budget airline and destroyed it by putting in fake gold taps and laminate flooring! Also started Trump mortgages in 2006, didn't last too long as you probably guessed. There's a failed football team and a few other failures there too.

Great businessman, I'm not too sure.

oscarBravo

KingBrian2 wrote: »

I distinctly said Islamism which is not the same as Muslims. Trump is against Islamism...

Yet another example of the "ignore what he said, let's talk about what I think he means" approach to defending Trump.

He didn't say that Islamists should be banned from entering the US, he very explicitly stated all Muslims, and when asked to clarify, he made it clear that that includes American citizens.

Akrasia

Christy42 wrote: »

I don't get this logic. Sanders can only win with the rigged super delegates. Remove them and lower the target to compensate and Hillary wins.
Remove the undemocratic Caucuses and Hillary destroys Sanders.
She will have won more pledged delegates and more votes. The super delegates should go with her as she is the more popular choice even if her supporters aren't as loud.

The main reason Sanders should stay in the race is because there is a non trivial chance that this email fiasco could blow up in Clinton's face before the convention and if that happens, the Dems might need to pick someone else or else hand the presidency to Donald Trump. Clinton's presidential bid is already in shambles given that she is polling neck and neck with Donald Trump. Clinton's trajectory is downwards, just like in her last attempt at becoming president.

If Sanders pulls out now, the Dems would probably try to parachute in Joe Biden into the nomination, but that would be politically impossible if Sanders is still running and has such good polling figures

Akrasia

K-9 wrote: »

Doubt it'll affect the support he has, he's sticking it to the man basically.

He took over a thriving budget airline and destroyed it by putting in fake gold taps and laminate flooring! Also started Trump mortgages in 2006, didn't last too long as you probably guessed. There's a failed football team and a few other failures there too.

Great businessman, I'm not too sure.

And the fact that he won't release his taxes is an indication that
1. He's not as rich as he says he is
2. He's not as generous as he pretends to be in charitable donations

I've given up expecting facts or reality to influence Trump supporters. They've shown already that they don't care about facts.

On the other hand, Clinton is very vulnerable to revelations and allegations that she lied. Trump supporters think he is honest and straight talking. While even Clinton's own supporters think she is dishonest.

Trump is just more charismatic and more skilled at influencing people's opinion of him.

K-9

Yep, I gave up arguing policy a while back. Trump is personality politics taken to its natural conclusion, it is all about him and nothing else.

That's not a criticism of him really, it's his strong point and he has got away with bare bone policies so far because of a weak GOP.

Christy42

Akrasia wrote: »

The main reason Sanders should stay in the race is because there is a non trivial chance that this email fiasco could blow up in Clinton's face before the convention and if that happens, the Dems might need to pick someone else or else hand the presidency to Donald Trump. Clinton's presidential bid is already in shambles given that she is polling neck and neck with Donald Trump. Clinton's trajectory is downwards, just like in her last attempt at becoming president.

If Sanders pulls out now, the Dems would probably try to parachute in Joe Biden into the nomination, but that would be politically impossible if Sanders is still running and has such good polling figures

Oh yeah Sanders has a message to spread so he may as well stay in to spread it and maybe go after super delegates.

Just taking issue with the argument that the system was rigged against him.

Amazingfun

oscarBravo wrote: »

Yet another example of the "ignore what he said, let's talk about what I think he means" approach to defending Trump.

He didn't say that Islamists should be banned from entering the US, he very explicitly stated all Muslims, and when asked to clarify, he made it clear that that includes American citizens.

Source?

oscarBravo

Amazingfun wrote: »

Source?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/262348-trump-calls-for-shutdown-of-muslims-entering-us

Trump, in a formal statement from his campaign, urged a “total and complete shutdown” of all federal processes allowing followers of Islam into the country until elected leaders can “figure out what is going on.”

Asked by The Hill whether that would include American Muslims currently abroad, Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks replied over email: “Mr. Trump says, ‘everyone.’ ”

Of course, he later rowed back on that. I guess that's the beauty of supporting a candidate who has absolutely zero consistency on any position: all you have to do is find a time when he said something you feel you can get behind, and ignore all the times when he said the opposite.

Billy86

K-9 wrote: »

Doubt it'll affect the support he has, he's sticking it to the man basically.

He took over a thriving budget airline and destroyed it by putting in fake gold taps and laminate flooring! Also started Trump mortgages in 2006, didn't last too long as you probably guessed. There's a failed football team and a few other failures there too.

Great businessman, I'm not too sure.

The (American) football team is actually really interesting, as there were various issues involved - it was part of a league set up to compete indirectly against the NFL (in the same way that some soccer leagues run March - Dec, to avoid competing with the bigger leagues in Europe) - but the common thought it that Trump was by far one the biggest reason it failed. All the hallmarks of his other business failures are there - doing an incredible job and making noise and garnering interest... then being too aggressive too soon, having a lack of self control or discipline leading ultimately to massive debts, employees still unpaid 30 years later, bullying and bullying until he met someone he couldn't bully (the NFL) and everything imploded on him and those around him as the league went bust.

There is an excellent ESPN documentary on it called 'Who Killed the USFL?' which is part of a series of sports documentaries they did/are still doing that are also brilliant. Bit off topic, but would recommend several of them (from sports I like, to things like Nascar and Terry Fox's charity cancer run across Canada) as they often cover beyond just the sport itself.

eire4

ECO_Mental wrote: »

I really wish Sanders would Feck off at this stage he's getting very annoying. I can't see what his problem is and why he thinks the system is rigged. Up until last year he was an independent "NOT" a member of the Dems and then for convenience he decided to join the Dems so he can have his 15mins. It's the same in any political party where the members have to vote internally as to who will be the leader. The senior Dems voted this time it will be Hillary, why would they have voted for a person who was never a been a member of the party. It would be like FG voting for Danny Healy Rae to be leader when eventually they get around to kicking Enda out If sanders wanted to run he should have run as an independent and not piggy back of the Democratic party structure. Ultimately the super Dems will have to live by their decision in the GE in casting their super votes just as FG had to live by their decision to have Enda in place when they should have walked back Into government a couple of months ago.

She has 3 millon more votes than he does, why didn't he complain at the start, because like trump i don't think he really thought he would get this far. It was a platform to say a few things get his 15mins and for trump also he wanted some publicity and say "hey it's Mr. Trump here and I'm really rich" get his 15mins and then wrote a book or sell few more condos. But more it was about his ego so he could say "I'm really rich"

Sorry started off about the Bern and finished on the Trump

Well there certainly are lots of voices in the US on the corporate Democratic side saying Bernie should drop out but that thankfully is not going to happen.


You say you cannot see his point that the system is rigged. Well it is rigged and has been at many levels. Case in point the chair of the DNC Wasserman-Schultz has been doing her best to rig the system since day one. Making sure the super delegates are all lined up for Clinton from before a vote was cast so immediately it looks like from the get go that Sanders has no chance as he is 500 odd delegates behind before a vote is cast. Then she loads up all the most favourable southern states at the start so Clinton can stack up an ever bigger lead. The fact that Sanders has won 20 states overall and has closed the gap to 54-46% on pledged delegates is amazing and speaks to Clinton's weaknesses. Then we have how the corporate Democrats tries to stack the convention committess and shut Sanders out. Then we have just 2 days before the Oregon and Kentucky primaries Wassserman-Schultz demaning an apology for so called violence at the Nevada convention by Sanders supporters and another corporate Democratic senator claiming she feared for her safety. Then a few days later after the vote is over there is mass back peddling as there was no violence and Senator Boxers claims were shown also to be false. These are just some aspects of the rigged corporate Democratic party and why Sanders has a problem with them.


Now as for his joining the Democrats well that is par excellence an example of how rigged and corrupted the American political system is. The 2 party cartel on power in Washington DC between the corrupted Democratic and Republican parties is so strong and so powerful that there is no possibility of any thord party emerging on a national level as a realistic challenger. Thus because of the rigged and corrupted nature of the American political system Sanders had to join the Democratic party to fight the corrupted system form within and we have seen the response from the corporate Democratic leadership who have fought against him from day 1.