2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

ancapailldorcha

Brian? wrote: »

It's a quasi religious cult. Even down to fact that it's never written as founding fathers but capitalised as "Founding Fathers ". Implying divinity.

Funny you should use the words "slavish devotion" as well. This group of men who are imbued with such all seeing wisdom were almost all slave owners. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal...", not the ones we own and keep as property though!

That alone would cast the document into doubt in my opinion. If they couldn't see the ethical problem with slavery then they can't have been too intelligent in my opinion.

aloyisious

Amerika wrote: »

I want a judge that believed that the ordinary meaning of the US Constitution should govern, be opposed to the idea of a living constitution, and opposed to the idea that the judiciary can modify the meaning of constitutional provisions to adapt them to changing times.

Don't the various amendments mean the constitution is a living constitution, something not written in stone?

I'm looking at Article Three of the constitution which sets out what the SC can make judgements on and it seems to have the power, under it, to make determinations when it comes to actual cases and differences between different parties when it comes to citizens rights under the constitution. I'm no constitutional lawyer so will rely on wiser minds about it.

Lol at your admiration of the elderly governors......

Brian?

TheOven wrote: »

They love some of those amendments though.

The founding fathers knew the Constitution would need to be updated and amended as time passed. They knew they weren't all knowing, somehow this is ignored by strict constructionists.

Brian?

aloyisious wrote: »

Don't the various amendments mean the constitution is a living constitution, something not written in stone?

I'm looking at Article Three of the constitution which sets out what the SC can make judgements on and it seems to have the power, under it, to make determinations when it comes to actual cases and differences between different parties when it comes to citizens rights under the constitution. I'm no constitutional lawyer so will rely on wiser minds about it.

At the very dark heart of conservatism is opposition to change. To conserve the values set down in an 18th century document. Progress is anti conservative.

26000 Elephants

Brian? wrote: »

At the very dark heart of conservatism is opposition to change. To conserve the values set down in an 18th century document. Progress is anti conservative.

And that is the core of Fundamentalism. And Fundamentalism is at the heart of our problems.

Put 'fundamentalist' in front of the most innocent idea and it becomes dangerous.

Overheal

If we went to living document mode you'd need a well regulated militia. We've been down this road. Don't think too many judges believe the constitution is not a living document. It's designed as one.

Suryavarman

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

That alone would cast the document into doubt in my opinion. If they couldn't see the ethical problem with slavery then they can't have been too intelligent in my opinion.

They did see the problem with which is why they compromised and counted slaves as 3/5th of a person for census purposes thus reducing the political power held by slave states.

Jawgap

A foretaste of what's to come......

"Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition"

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/

"Donald Trump has selected one of the best-known climate skeptics to lead his U.S. EPA transition team, according to two sources close to the campaign.
Myron Ebell, director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute, is spearheading Trump’s transition plans for EPA, the sources said.

The Trump team has also lined up leaders for its Energy Department and Interior Department teams. Republican energy lobbyist Mike McKenna is heading the DOE team; former Interior Department solicitor David Bernhardt is leading the effort for that agency, according to sources close to the campaign.

Ebell is a well-known and polarizing figure in the energy and environment realm. His participation in the EPA transition signals that the Trump team is looking to drastically reshape the climate policies the agency has pursued under the Obama administration. Ebell’s role is likely to infuriate environmentalists and Democrats but buoy critics of Obama’s climate rules."

devnull

You'd have to say though, how can Trump keep his businesses running the way they are now?

Surely there would be some kind of conflict of interest?

TheOven

Newt Gingrich as SoS. Wow, calm down donald. The establishment stands no chance.

Stheno

devnull wrote: »

You'd have to say though, how can Trump keep his businesses running the way they are now?

Surely there would be some kind of conflict of interest?

I think he's supposed to set up what is called a blind trust to run then where he has no involvement but allegedly he is getting his adult children to run them

Any truth in the rumors he is going to appoint gingrich and guilani to his cabinet? I've vague memories of gingrich in the past and he was a horror very far right

26000 Elephants

John Ashcroft, former attorney general, asked to investigate Myron Ebell

It appears that certain White House officials [Cooney] conspired with an anti-environmental special interest group [Myron] to cause the lawsuit to be filed against the federal government.
The idea that the Bush Administration may have invited a lawsuit from a special interest group in order to undermine the federal government's own work under an international treaty is very troubling.

We believe an investigation is necessary to determine whether the idea of this lawsuit came from the White House itself, and if so, whether it represents improper conduct by public officials.

The swamp is filling up nicely. Ebell isnt even a scientist - he got an arts degree in philosophy . Good man.

Source for above (PDF)

vetinari

TheOven wrote: »

Newt Gingrich as SoS. Wow, calm down donald. The establishment stands no chance.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic. Newt was house speaker, about as establishment as you can get. Amazing that he was able to brand himself as "non establishment"

TheOven

Brian? wrote: »

The founding fathers knew the Constitution would need to be updated and amended as time passed. They knew they weren't all knowing, somehow this is ignored by strict constructionists.

It would take some amount of arrogance for a person or group to put something like that together and think it would never need to be updated for hundreds of years into the future.

Stheno wrote: »

I think he's supposed to set up what is called a blind trust to run then where he has no involvement but allegedly he is getting his adult children to run them

Any truth in the rumors he is going to appoint gingrich and guilani to his cabinet? I've vague memories of gingrich in the past and he was a horror very far right

My mistake, seems he is just the favourite for the position. According to him what I feel is more important than reality so I can always feel like replacing him.

TheOven

vetinari wrote: »

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic. Newt was house speaker, about as establishment as you can get. Amazing that he was able to brand himself as "non establishment"

Very sarcastic. Can't really get deadpan through typing.

I'll be very surprised if any non establishment get in. Kind of need them if you want to get anything done.

LostinKildare

marienbad wrote: »

Can I ask our American friends now that the GOP have swept the board for their thoughts after this extraordinary night ?

So, so disappointed in my country that we didn't rise above it all and reject this grotesque embodiment of the ugliest impulses of the Ugly American --- greed, proud ignorance, narcissism, misogyny, racism, xenophobia.

Remember when Michael D Higgins contrasted the "good, decent Americans" with the "**** whipping up fear"? The **** won.
I'm heartsick.

And fearful about what's going to happen in the US over the next four years. I'm relieved I'm not living there now; it's going to be brutal for a lot of people, and the damage to the nation will be long-lasting.

Stheno

Does anyone think a woman will occupy a cabinet position of significance?

vetinari

Yeah, I've also seen a story that mentioned Steven Mnuchin will be treasury secretary.
He only spent about 15 years at Goldman Sachs. Remind me who the anti establishment candidate was again?

StringerBell

devnull wrote: »

You'd have to say though, how can Trump keep his businesses running the way they are now?

Surely there would be some kind of conflict of interest?

He only owns a very small percentage of Trump enterprises at this point, I would assume he will pass it on to the family, who will assure you he has nothing to do with the day to day running of the business or have any inside knowledge.

vetinari

Stheno wrote: »

Does anyone think a woman will occupy a cabinet position of significance?

I'd be surprised, none have been mentioned thus far.
My bet is an old white man sweep in terms of the cabinet.

ECO_Mental

Good luck to the Donald..... you know what they say about people who get their wishes!

Trump is soon going to find out all about the pressure cooker and bubble being the president of the US is.

First thing they are going to do is take his phone off him (no more twitter)

He will have to concentrate for more than 10mins at a time (this is a big struggle for him).

He will now have to release his tax returns(this will be interesting)

He will soon discover that Mexico will never pay for that F**king Wall

He will never be able to deport millions of immigrants.

I could go on and on but he will never be able to fulfil a fraction of his promises. I am sick of pundits' also saying that he understands the working man "he connected with them" bull****! What happened was words(insults) fell out of his mouth and a certain section of people found it entertaining. It them snowballed from there. We are now living in an age where a lot of people are getting their information and news from twitter/Facebook/conspiracy websites etc and they are not spending their time actually finding out the facts. (I mean we had people on here saying that Bill Clinton was running a Pedo sex ring.

I feel sorry for the people who Trump fooled and was supposed to be standing up for On BBC tonight they went to the rust belt and they talked to this poor man getting food stamps and he was convinced that Trump was going to sort out his problems etc because he's a business man!

I think Hillary is a good person who has been attacked for 30 solid years from the GOP. She ran a great campaign and she demolished trump in all the debates. But one thing (and 16 GOP politicians') could not see was how low in the gutter trump was willing to go! They had no defence, but she did have a good go those debates were brilliant but then COMEY out of left field a week before the election he puts out a b***sh** letter and that what ****Ed her.

I'm sick really, but lucky I don't have to live im the US and i won't be posting on here again for a while. But I will look forward to his fraud trial and tax returns:)

LostinKildare

Stheno wrote: »

Does anyone think a woman will occupy a cabinet position of significance?

Sarah Palin, Secretary of the Interior, to destroy all national parks with pipelines, fracking, and mining, and to lift protections of endangered species so they can be hunted from helicopters? Trump's sons will like that.

vetinari

Does he really have to release his tax returns? Not sure about that.

Stheno

LostinKildare wrote: »

Sarah Palin, Secretary of the Interior, to destroy all national parks with pipelines, fracking, and mining, and to lift protections of endangered species so they can be hunted from helicopters? Trump's sons will like that.

I'd be of the mindset that she is so polarising as to be a no go

26000 Elephants

Stheno wrote: »

I'd be of the mindset that she is so polarising as to be a no go

Polarisation does not appear to be a concern for him.

Stheno

He now has to get republican politicians behind him most of them despise her

26000 Elephants

Yeah, but they hate him equally. That in itself is not a barrier for career politicians. Its all about the deal and what they get from it.

Sparks43

Stheno wrote: »

Does anyone think a woman will occupy a cabinet position of significance?

They need someone in a miniskirt that can serve tea beer and pretzels.

Palin anyone?

Itssoeasy

I'm just reading about mike pence and good Christ he's got some iffy to say the least on social issues.

daithi7

Hmmmm, some good posts here and a really top class programme (the Pat Kenny Show) on tv3 tonight discussing the fallout from this very fractious and divisive American presidential campaign.

One issue that stinks for me is that it seems pretty clear the FBI (& specifically it's Director) were acting in a blatantly political manner throughout this election. They investigated the Hillary Clinton emails, cleared them& her, only to then reopen the investigation all over again in the middle of a fraught election campaign, while a media demagogue all the while labeled her 'Crooked Hillary'.

It seems pretty clear that the FBI were meddling in internal US politics, in a very blatant fashion. This is both very worrying and I suspect highly illegal. Since Trump is proposing to spend more on the US military machine, which in turn will probably seek (&/or cause a war , or several of them) to justify this hugely increased military spending, it's deeply troubling that one of the agencies of this military machine may have illegally assisted in his election by effectively tarnishing his opponent. If this is/was the case we could see an investigation and fallout of near Watergate proportions.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

P.s. it's a cruel irony (&I realise that most Americans struggle with the concept of irony) that whilst Trump purports to represent the disenfranchised, 'ordinary American', that in reality he is likely to repay their loyalty by causing wars for the military machine (who sponsor him), which will likely result in many hundreds of thousands of these 'ordinary Americans' being utilised to fight unnecessary wars to justify unneeded military expenditure. So many of these ordinary Americans will probably end up unnecessarily in military body bags. That's actually tragic if you think about it.

NIMAN

There was also the idea mentioned by a contributor to The Last Word today that maybe that FBI move was meant to give Clinton's campaign a late shot in the arm, since they came out and said she was fine just before people went to vote? Maybe it was meant to help rather than hinder?

daithi7

NIMAN wrote: »

There was also the idea mentioned by a contributor to The Last Word today that maybe that FBI move was meant to give Clinton's campaign a late shot in the arm, since they came out and said she was fine just before people went to vote? Maybe it was meant to help rather than hinder?

Yeah RIGHT!?

FrancieBrady

NIMAN wrote: »

There was also the idea mentioned by a contributor to The Last Word today that maybe that FBI move was meant to give Clinton's campaign a late shot in the arm, since they came out and said she was fine just before people went to vote? Maybe it was meant to help rather than hinder?

One of Kenny's contributors made the point that Obama would have known the intentions of the FBI. I think it being done to help her (end the speculation) is plausible and equally disconcerting.

TheOven

daithi7 wrote: »

Hmmmm, some good posts here and a really top class programme (the Pat Kenny Show) on tv3 tonight discussing the fallout from this very fractious and divisive American presidential campaign.

One issue that stinks for me is that it seems pretty clear the FBI (& specifically it's Director) were acting in a blatantly political manner throughout this election. They investigated the Hillary Clinton emails, cleared them& her, only to then reopen the investigation all over again in the middle of a fraught election campaign, while a media demagogue all the while labeled her 'Crooked Hillary'.

It seems pretty clear that the FBI were meddling in internal US politics, in a very blatant fashion. This is both very worrying and I suspect highly illegal. Since Trump is proposing to spend more on the US military machine, which in turn will probably seek (&/or cause a war , or several of them) to justify this hugely increased military spending, it's deeply troubling that one of the agencies of this military machine may have illegally assisted in his election by effectively tarnishing his opponent. If this is/was the case we could see an investigation and fallout of near Watergate proportions.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

P.s. it's a cruel irony (&I realise that most Americans struggle with the concept of irony) that whilst Trump purports to represent the disenfranchised, 'ordinary American', that in reality he is likely to repay their loyalty by causing wars for the military machine (who sponsor him), which will likely result in many hundreds of thousands of these 'ordinary Americans' being conscripted to fight unnecessary wars to justify unneeded military expenditure. So many of these ordinary Americans will probably end up unnecessarily in military body bags. That's actually tragic if you think about it.

It could be possible that Comey knew that the new emails being found would be leaked so had to do it to appear unbiased. Rudy admitted to getting info before backtracking.

Arytonblue

NIMAN wrote: »

There was also the idea mentioned by a contributor to The Last Word today that maybe that FBI move was meant to give Clinton's campaign a late shot in the arm, since they came out and said she was fine just before people went to vote? Maybe it was meant to help rather than hinder?

Well if we're going by the polls, and I know some will say that we shouldn't after the result, her lead was at it's highest on the eve of Comey's announcement, hardly in need of an elaborate shot in the arm, that was two weeks before election day and the race suddenly became competitive after it, it was only a few days prior to Nov 8 where he came out and said it was all for nothing anyway (definitely fishy IMO) so if there had been damage done, which there was by all accounts, it was too late in the day for it to be fully reversed. Whilst big changes can happen in a single day in elections there is a certain level of inertia with most voters, more than likely if a voter's intentions were being influenced by the email scandal, hearing it was being looked into AGAIN would hold greater weight than hearing they were 'non-pertinent', a certain element of confirmation bias with a lot of undecideds of 'yep, she's definitely crooked, Trump was right'.

On that topic, for all the talk of how 'biased' the meeja apparently was by boldly reporting Trump's own damaging quotes, they certainly wasted no time to pounce on that announcement, still mentioning it even after it was shown to be a non starter, calling it this years 'October Suprise' without rightly totally discrediting it, hardly something they'd do had they been bought off by the maniacal Clintons.

daithi7

Arytonblue wrote: »

Well if we're going by the polls, and I know some will say that we shouldn't after the result, her lead was at it's highest on the eve of Comey's announcement, hardly in need of an elaborate shot in the arm, that was two weeks before election day and the race suddenly became competitive after it, it was only a few days prior to Nov 8 where he came out and said it was all for nothing anyway (definitely fishy IMO) so if there had been damage done, which there was by all accounts, it was too late in the day for it to be fully reversed. Whilst big changes can happen in a single day in elections there is a certain level of inertia with most voters, more than likely if a voter's intentions were being influenced by the email scandal, hearing it was being looked into AGAIN would hold greater weight than hearing they were 'non-pertinent', a certain element of confirmation bias with a lot of undecideds of 'yep, she's definitely crooked, Trump was right'.

Yeah, it holed her campaign below the waterline. The FBI , and it's Director, have grievous questions to answer here imho.

Also, (spoiler alert: tinfoil hat time from me ) this issue brought 3 very strange bedfellows into partnership I.e. The KGB, the FBI & Donald Trump. Because the Kgb hacked the emails & released them in the middle of a US presidential campaign, then the FBI & it's Director played political king maker (or queen killer) with them, and finally Donald Trump exploited the enterprise of both the KGB & the FBI to tarnish his opponent 'Crooked Hillary'.

Now what do all these three 'partners' have in common????? they are all promoters of the military machine. Hillary was hijacked by the military machine imho, and that's the real story of this election.

P.s. perhaps this unlikely triumvirate are the new 'Axis of Evil!' !?

Amazingfun

Protest @ Trump Tower :

http://www.ustream.tv/stopmotionsolo

Harry Angstrom

daithi7 wrote: »

Hmmmm, some good posts here and a really top class programme (the Pat Kenny Show) on tv3 tonight discussing the fallout from this very fractious and divisive American presidential campaign.

One issue that stinks for me is that it seems pretty clear the FBI (& specifically it's Director) were acting in a blatantly political manner throughout this election. They investigated the Hillary Clinton emails, cleared them& her, only to then reopen the investigation all over again in the middle of a fraught election campaign, while a media demagogue all the while labeled her 'Crooked Hillary'.

It seems pretty clear that the FBI were meddling in internal US politics, in a very blatant fashion. This is both very worrying and I suspect highly illegal. Since Trump is proposing to spend more on the US military machine, which in turn will probably seek (&/or cause a war , or several of them) to justify this hugely increased military spending, it's deeply troubling that one of the agencies of this military machine may have illegally assisted in his election by effectively tarnishing his opponent. If this is/was the case we could see an investigation and fallout of near Watergate proportions.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

This is one of those situations where the FBI are damned if they do and damned if they don't. If they didn't investigate the Hillary/Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner shared laptop emails until after the presidential election, they'd be accused of being pro-Hillary. If they investigate the Hillary/Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner shared laptop emails before the presidential election, they're accused of being pro-Trump. Seems to me the FBI came out very quickly to exonerate Hillary of any wrongdoing. Not suggesting for a moment that they might have been lent on by higher powers....
Considering what's at stake, the naïveté or the sheer stupid-mindedness of Hillary and her aides beggars belief. And they were perceived as being the intellectual superiors of Trump and his advisors.......

Harry Angstrom

daithi7 wrote: »

P.s. it's a cruel irony (&I realise that most Americans struggle with the concept of irony) that whilst Trump purports to represent the disenfranchised, 'ordinary American', that in reality he is likely to repay their loyalty by causing wars for the military machine (who sponsor him), which will likely result in many hundreds of thousands of these 'ordinary Americans' being conscripted to fight unnecessary wars to justify unneeded military expenditure. So many of these ordinary Americans will probably end up unnecessarily in military body bags. That's actually tragic if you think about it.

I'm sorry, but this is absolute nonsense. Do you honestly think that Donald Trump will start conscripting people? Really? Think about it again before you give a definitive answer.

Hank Scorpio

Amazingfun wrote: »

Protest @ Trump Tower :

http://www.ustream.tv/stopmotionsolo

Trump should open a window and throw a giant bucket of water over them, maybe that would wash away the brainwashing from the MSM.

Chanting "We reject the president elect".. Who cares?

Hank Scorpio

ECO_Mental wrote: »

She ran a great campaign and she demolished trump in all the debates.

According to who? The MSM? The American public don't seem so sure. I'll give you she won the first debate.

Trump killed her here, and that was end of that. No where to run or hide and she responded smirking and telling people to check her "Neutral" website to fact check Trump.

He also turned the bus video footage over by explaining what "Good Person" Hillarys husband Bill has done to Women down the years. She got slaughtered.

daithi7

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

I'm sorry, but this is absolute nonsense. Do you honestly think that Donald Trump will start conscripting people? Really? Think about it again before you give a definitive answer.

Ok, conscripted was a slip of the keyboard finger,(original post has now 1 word edited) but my main point is that I believe Trump will lead the US into unnecessary wars, which will lead to many ordinary Americans who serve in the forces suffering and perishing as a result.

Harry Angstrom

daithi7 wrote: »

Ok, conscripted was a slip of the keyboard finger, but my main point is that I believe Trump will lead the US into unnecessary wars in which many ordinary Americans (who serve in forces) will suffer and perish.

Considering the Obama/Hillary administration is as culpable as any other for the destabilisation of the Middle East and North Africa, while Trump seems to be far more accommodating towards some kind of entente towards Putin and Russia, I'd venture to suggest that Trump mightn't be half as hawkish as some people think he might be.

Bret Hart

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

Trump should open a window and throw a giant bucket of water over them, maybe that would wash away the brainwashing from the MSM.

Chanting "We reject the president elect".. Who cares?

I wonder how many of them there,got off there ass and voted.

Hank Scorpio

Bret Hart wrote: »

I wonder how many of them there,got off there ass and voted.

I'm surprised there's so many of them clustered together violating their safe space.

meepins

Hank Scorpio wrote: »

I'm surprised there's so many of them clustered together violating their safe space.

United in their hatred of white people.

realitykeeper

As a right winger I have to say building walls and taxing imports is not the way to make America great again. America needs to compete by abolishing the minimum wage and slashing government salaries by 90% and by sacking 90% of government employees. If American companies cannot turn a profit in America they will shut up shop even if moving abroad is not a viable alternative. If the US does not abolish its minimum wage, eventually the only employer that can afford it will be the US government and if the US government is the only employer left in the US, the dollar will not be worth the paper it is printed on.

Donald Trump may be aware of these things because he did point out a massive recession is coming whereas Hillary was not even aware of the impending economic implosion which QE will cause.

Jawgap

The devil, as they say, is in the detail.

https://twitter.com/mwlapointe/status/796419859559182336

Overheal

Stephen Colbert manages a very uplifting monologue much of which was ad lib just minutes after hearing the results last night. Good bipartisan watch I promise. Watch on FB:

https://www.facebook.com/showtime/videos/10157731288890486/

Hank Scorpio

Very easy to twist polls to show a specific viewpoint



The Washington Times shows the >100K mark at 50/50 which further dispels the point that a big majority of elites voted for Trump. That's before you take into account Hillary having 88% of African American vote and the majority of minorities.

One of the main reasons she lost was the upsurge in Hispanic vote, 30% for Trump. He also had a 2 point gain on Romney with the black vote.

Trump had 80% of the evangelical vote where income isn't a factor, it's worth mentioning too. I believe people are scared of situations like what's happening in Germany and France with immigration laws.