2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Overheal

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Ron Paul never had nearly the same popular following. He has 566k followers on Twitter and 1.3m FB Likes, to Sanders' 767k followers and 1.8m likes - and Paul has been in the limelight of election politics far longer. Both pale to Clintons 4.5m followers (and 1.6m likes).


As for Clinton's campaign going down in flames, that is certainly what the Republicans are trying to do, but they are fcuking up so badly at it, that its backfiring.

eire4

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No I believe if he were able to cause an upset and win the Democratic nomination I think he would have a good chance at winning a presidential election because the positions he takes and policies he supports are extremely popular. Be it the ending of the citizens united decision. Breaking up the big banks, restoring glass stegal etc. He has many policy positions that the majority of Americans support.
Last time I checked the vast majority of Americans loved their social security medicare, fire service, highways etc etc. Sure the stick the Republicans would use to beat him is the socialist bug bear which certainly would work with a section of the American public especially those for whom ignorance and hate is bliss. But the reality is the positions he actually holds are very very popular overall and the task for him would be to articulate those positions and then it would be very interesting to see what would the American public would do.


In my opinion winning the Democratic nomination is the much more difficult task then Sanders winning a presidential election as the Democratic nomination.

RobertKK

The Hillary questioning is getting good, they showed her a statement where she the day after said they knew it was not the film that caused the attack, while telling the public different.
Jim Jordan from Ohio is really going after her. Hillary looking defensive with putting her hand up to hold her head.
Hillary said one of the people captured is reportedly to have said the film motivated him.

The Democrat congress people are working hard to shield Mrs Clinton. It goes from one extreme to the other.

hatrickpatrick

I sincerely hope Clinton goes down in flames. I would almost prefer to see a Republican in the White House than Clinton, after she publicly attacked whistleblowers and defended the total erosion of digital liberties by the NSA.

She would be utterly toxic to freedom.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RobertKK

Republican questioning is good TV, really going after her in a heavyweight match, Democrat questioning is boring and is like a pillow fight.

Now the pillow fighters have decided they are in a heavyweight match and the select committee are arguing among them themselves.

20Cent

Benghazi has had 7 congressional investigations.
32 congressional hearings.
11 Reports into it.
It's been going on longer than the investigations into 911, the Warren report into the jFK assassination and even Watergate.

0 finding of any wrongdoing
0 evidence of intelligence failure
0 evidence of an order to stand down.

It has cost over $20 million the entire budget for the House Intelligence Committee.

The whole thing is a charade to attack Hillary Clinton and damage her presidential bid.

RobertKK

20Cent wrote: »

Benghazi has had 7 congressional investigations.
32 congressional hearings.
11 Reports into it.
It's been going on longer than the investigations into 911, the Warren report into the jFK assassination and even Watergate.

0 finding of any wrongdoing
0 evidence of intelligence failure
0 evidence of an order to stand down.

It has cost over $20 million the entire budget for the House Intelligence Committee.

The whole thing is a charade to attack Hillary Clinton and damage her presidential bid.

One could argue Hillary's support for regime change in Libya and the state of that country now, means Hillary Clinton's overall judgement was poor, irrespective of what happened in Benghazi.

But I only ever watched one video on liveleak or whatever it is called. It was before the fall of Gaddafi and the talk was about how we must protect the people of Benghazi.
The video showed a black person who was said to be working for Gaddafi being hanged in public in Benghazi, by people claiming to be Al Qaeda.

Clinton also wanted to bomb Assad which would have been a bigger disaster, but Putin clipped her hawkish wings.
I don't think she is very competent on the world stage.

20Cent

RobertKK wrote: »

One could argue Hillary's support for regime change in Libya and the state of that country now, means Hillary Clinton's overall judgement was poor, irrespective of what happened in Benghazi.

But I only ever watched one video on liveleak or whatever it is called. It was before the fall of Gaddafi and the talk was about how we must protect the people of Benghazi.
The video showed a black person who was said to be working for Gaddafi being hanged in public in Benghazi, by people claiming to be Al Qaeda.

Clinton also wanted to bomb Assad which would have been a bigger disaster, but Putin clipped her hawkish wings.
I don't think she is very competent on the world stage.

Agree regime change was a bad idea.

Pretty much all of the current candidates democratic and republican were for it.

eire4

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No indeed Ireland is not the United States I totally agree. You may be correct that a majority of Americans do not support a more Scandinavian style of American economy and society. A shame that as many different reprts on quality of life consistentely show Scandinavian countries at or near the top well ahead of the quality of life in America. 3 of the top 5 spots held below by Scandinavian countries. Heck even Ireland is ahead of the Unted States below.


RankCountry or territoryScore
(out of 10)1Switzerland8.222Australia8.123Norway8.094Sweden8.025Denmark8.016Italy8.007New Zealand7.958Netherlands7.949Canada7.8110Hong Kong7.8011Finland7.7612Ireland7.7413Austria7.7314

I suspect the euphemismtic phrase American exceptionalism in reality American arrogance is a factor in the above reluctance of some Americans to look more carefully at how other countries operate.




Now you state that:
"social Security, Medicare, firefighting services, and highways have broad support in both parties."


That is true I agree it is not however a moot point. They are all examples of socialism at work alive and well and very popular throughout the United States. The fact that many Americans do not know that parts of their economic system are already socialist is indeed ignorance.
The fact that 64% do not react positively to socialism shows the above ignorance and also shows how that ignorance has easily been allowed to feed hate. Be it McCarthyism or today where the word socialism is bandied about without ever anything specific being talked about that is supposedly bad. The word socialism has been painted and used as a pejorative in the United States to create fear and hate and this tactic has been a success so far. It is one of the ways the very wealthy and powerful get many people to vote against their economic interest.






Again I will state in my opinion Sanders has a much tougher task to win the Democratic nomination then he would have of winning an actual presidential election if he caused an upset and won the Democratic nomination for president. The below polling data show Sanders actually beating the current Republican leader Trump in most polls whereas of course Sanders is trailing Clinton currently in the race for the Democratic nomination.

CNN Sanders 53-44
PPP Tie 44-44
NBC 52-36 Sanders
Quinnipiac 47-42 Sanders
SurveyUSA 44-40 Trump

RobertKK

The Democrats on the congressional panel look to be doing an interview for a job, in case Clinton becomes president.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MadYaker

Trump says he'll run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. Could Sanders do the same?

20Cent

MadYaker wrote: »

Trump says he'll run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. Could Sanders do the same?

He's said he will respect the decision of the party and not run as an independent.

RobertKK

MadYaker wrote: »

Trump says he'll run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination. Could Sanders do the same?

Doubt Sanders would imo, seemed too cosy with Hillary at the Democrat debate with the defense of her emails. Like why would you want to help an opponent?

Trump as an independent would guarantee Hillary as president.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ECO_Mental

This bengazi hearing is a joke. I have been only watching an hour but she's doing a good job. It's really obvious that it's only desperate political stunt by the GOP which I think its going to back fire on them. Hillary is more than handling them. It's also giving a platform for the other Dems on the panel to say that this hearing is only a political stunt.

Black Swan

The Republican led congressional and GOP candidate focus on Benghazi is nothing more than a very biased and partisan attempt to discredit Hillary Clinton leading into the 2016 presidential election year, nothing more. I find Hillary boring and unimaginative, just like I find the Republican candidates running for president (with the exception of bombastic entertainment fool Trump), but this extraordinary focus on Benghazi is so obviously Republican partisan and a campaign ploy of little substance, especially when you consider the history of attacks on US diplomatic posts that occurred under ALL Democrat and Republican administrations. International Business Times gives a dated, incomplete and short list that demonstrates how absurd the Benghazi Republican focus has been, revealing its true partisan 2016 campaign ploy nature.

ECO_Mental

Even fox news are saying now that the hearing are only grasping at straws.

Overheal

http://gawker.com/hillary-clinton-smiles-radiantly-as-benghazi-hearing-de-1738078309

Quite the sideshow.

Memnoch

Do these guys not realise that their politicking on this issue might play well with core republican voters but any independents tuning in will see it as deeply partisan. It's only going to make them more likely to vote for Hillary.

But perhaps that's the point. Solidify their own position with the base.

Black Swan

ECO_Mental wrote: »

Even fox news are saying now that the hearing are only grasping at straws.

Benghazi and private emails for Hillary Clinton will not be "news" a year from now, having long since run its course and become boring for viewers. Viewer ratings draw advertisers, and given that the news media is 1st a business, odds are that something that's old will not draw sufficient ratings November 2016 to get much air time.

InTheTrees

Eleven hours of grilling her and they have nothing at all. Years of investigations and millions of dollars.

And she stood up to them really well. She was calm and composed and well prepared in the face of babbling grand standing republicans who were desperate to pin anything they could on her.

Black Swan

InTheTrees wrote: »

Eleven hours of grilling her and they have nothing at all. Years of investigations and millions of dollars.

The Hillary Clinton congressional investigation now surpasses the length of time for investigations into Pearl Harbor, WaterGate, and Hurricane Katrina?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

SimonTemplar

Overheal wrote: »

http://gawker.com/hillary-clinton-smiles-radiantly-as-benghazi-hearing-de-1738078309

Quite the sideshow.

That Cummings guy reminds me of Samuel L Jackson, especially that voice and the p*issed off frustration.

MightyMandarin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I don't see how the Obama waste is relevant, but if we're on the discussion of politicians wasting taxpayers money on needless expenses I think you'll find that politicians of all nations, parties and ideologies waste millions of taxpayer's money each year.

No need to single out Obama when it's pretty clear that everyone is doing it.

MightyMandarin

Memnoch wrote: »

Do these guys not realise that their politicking on this issue might play well with core republican voters but any independents tuning in will see it as deeply partisan. It's only going to make them more likely to vote for Hillary.

But perhaps that's the point. Solidify their own position with the base.

Fortunately that's not going to be enough to secure the white house. Statistically speaking, the Republicans need to start attracting more than the typical white pensioners who live in the south and start attracting hispanics and other growing groups in society. Independents and swing voters know damn well that this hearing was purely for political attacks on Hillary and the GOP were dumb enough to think the public would see it otherwise.

Yesterday was nothing but a circus act and Hillary wiped the floor with them. She's almost certainly secured the nomination now and the Republicans will have an almighty challenge in the next year in trying to stop her. The sooner they stop bickering among each other and drop the Trump and Carson comedy shows, the better.

PressRun

The Republicans are a joke, tbh. The party has veered into the desperate and embarrassing in recent times. They look petty, narrow-minded and just plain irrational in comparison to the democrats. There isn't a single person running for the nomination on the republican side who is actually electable. Clinton would make short work of any one of them in an election. They need to seriously get their **** together and stop trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator if they ever want to get back in the white house.