US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2851

On February 06 2016 06:24 Mohdoo wrote:


I am certain Sanders is ahead in Oregon now. I have never seen so many political bumper stickers supporting a single candidate. My point was just that Sanders seems incapable of breaking the 40-70 crowd because they fundamentally disagree with socialism and his view on the radical changes that need to happen in our country.

I will be absolutely shocked if Sanders does not win Oregon. While I can't speak for Eastern or Southern Oregon (basically giant redneck camps, as evidenced by the recent nature reserve shit), Western Oregon is feeling the bern big time. Similar to Washington, a lot of our population is in very progressive areas and we tend to dictate state policy. This makes the rednecks down south and to the east really salty.

On February 06 2016 03:51 KwarK wrote:

Technically true. Hillary was planning on standing down in 2016 after having done her 8 years.

On February 06 2016 08:37 Liquid`Drone wrote:
gotta say, I was really impressed with Clinton in this debate. She comes off as extremely knowledgeable and speaks with authority on every subject. I certainly agree more with Sanders' message, but debate-performance wise, he wasn't at her level.

On February 06 2016 09:01 Rebs wrote:


He wont be at her level as a legistlator either. He will get cock blocked and do old man grumpy things. This idea that this country is going to overwhelmingly or solidly put democrats in the house and senate, shit on the conservatives and pass instant revolutionary reform is far fetched, but hey "why dont we try". Why not try jumping off a 20 meter roof and see if you dont break shit ? Sighface...

All because people are afraid that Hilary will pass "republican" legislation.

On February 06 2016 09:01 Rebs wrote:


He wont be at her level as a legistlator either. He will get cock blocked and do old man grumpy things. This idea that this country is going to overwhelmingly or solidly put democrats in the house and senate, shit on the conservatives and pass instant revolutionary reform is far fetched, but hey "why dont we try". Why not try jumping off a 20 meter roof and see if you dont break shit ? Sighface...

All because people are afraid that Hilary will pass "republican" legislation.

On February 06 2016 09:11 GreenHorizons wrote:


Really all that would have to happen is people voting, I know it's a longshot, but it's fully possible.

On February 06 2016 09:20 Mohdoo wrote:


Sure, possible. Would you ever consider betting on that happening, though? Politics isn't a place for fantasies and dreams.

On February 06 2016 09:33 Mohdoo wrote:
You'd bet on a complete and total political revolution? Not just Bernie getting elected?

On February 06 2016 09:01 Rebs wrote:


He wont be at her level as a legistlator either. He will get cock blocked and do old man grumpy things. This idea that this country is going to overwhelmingly or solidly put democrats in the house and senate, shit on the conservatives and pass instant revolutionary reform is far fetched, but hey "why dont we try". Why not try jumping off a 20 meter roof and see if you dont break shit ? Sighface...

All because people are afraid that Hilary will pass "republican" legislation.

On February 06 2016 09:46 Mohdoo wrote:
It sounds like it's more so that you are willing to go all-in because it is something that you believe in very intensely, not that you review the dynamics of the situation and conclude that a political revolution is most likely.

On February 06 2016 09:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:


Let's be real though, Clinton will be just as cock-blocked as Bernie-voting for anything she proposes is a total death sentence for your Republican political career. The only way any Dem candidate is going to get anything done is through executive action or a huge momentum shift in the House.

On February 06 2016 09:01 Rebs wrote:


He wont be at her level as a legistlator either. He will get cock blocked and do old man grumpy things. This idea that this country is going to overwhelmingly or solidly put democrats in the house and senate, shit on the conservatives and pass instant revolutionary reform is far fetched, but hey "why dont we try". Why not try jumping off a 20 meter roof and see if you dont break shit ? Sighface...

All because people are afraid that Hilary will pass "republican" legislation.

Bruises, reddened marks and bandaged body parts featured in nearly 200 images of US detainee abuse that the Pentagon was forced to release on Friday, the result of a court battle that has lasted more than a decade.

While the American Civil Liberties Union – which has fought for the publication of the photos of Bush-era torture in Iraq and Afghanistan since October 2003 – hailed the belated disclosure, it pledged to keep fighting for approximately 1,800 more images the Pentagon continues to withhold, which it believes documents far more graphic detainee torture.

The photos are part of a cache relevant to investigations of detainee abuse at two dozen US military sites around Iraq and Afghanistan, and perhaps Guantánamo Bay. Many showed detainees in states of undress having their bodies inspected, with rulers and coins held up for comparison and placement of injuries.

In November, Ashton Carter, the US defense secretary, cleared the way to release 198 of the images after a federal judge rejected longstanding government attempts to suppress the entire cache.

In allowing the release of the photos, Carter has reversed the decisions of two of his Pentagon predecessors and a bevy of senior military officers over the years. Nevertheless, the ACLU called the release insufficient, selective and indicative of a cover-up of detainee abuse stretching across the Bush and Obama administrations.

“It’s most likely the case that these are the most innocuous of the photos, and if that’s true, it’s a shadow of meaningful transparency,” said Alex Abdo, an ACLU attorney who has worked on the photo litigation since 2005.

The photos appeared decontextualized, without indication of what specific abuses investigators inspected, where detainees were held, or under what circumstances.

On February 06 2016 07:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
The fact that Hillary flipped out during the last debate and accused Bernie of running a smear campaign against her means she's incredibly scared. No one believes her, as he's gone out of his way time and time again to stay focused on the important issues and ignore the distractions and personal attacks (e.g., "sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails"). She can scold the Republicans all she wants on how they're attacking each other, but there's no way she's going to convince anyone that Bernie is a bad guy. But I guess she's trying to resort to these tactics because right now, he's her biggest competition.

In the Iowa Democratic party’s chaotic attempt to report caucus results on Monday night, the results in at least one precinct were unilaterally changed by the party as it attempted to deal with the culmination of a rushed and imperfect process overseeing the first-in-the-nation nominating contest.

In Grinnell Ward 1, the precinct where elite liberal arts college Grinnell College is located, 19 delegates were awarded to Bernie Sanders and seven were awarded to Hillary Clinton on caucus night. However, the Iowa Democratic party decided to shift one delegate from Sanders to Clinton on the night and did not notify precinct secretary J Pablo Silva that they had done so. Silva only discovered that this happened the next day, when checking the precinct results in other parts of the county.

The shift of one delegate at a county convention level would not have significantly affected the ultimate outcome of the caucus, but rather, it raises questions aboutthe Iowa Democratic party’s management of caucus night.

The Iowa Democratic party had long been plagued with organizational issues around the caucus and failed to find hundreds of needed volunteers to oversee individual precinct caucuses just over a week before Monday. The result was a disorganized process that lent itself to chaos and conspiracy theories. Although Andy McGuire, the chair of the Iowa Democratic party, is a longtime Clinton supporter whose license plate once read HRC 2016, no one familiar with the issue has accused the error of being a partisan process. Instead, they have blamed simple mismanagement.

The party issued a statement early on Tuesday, detailing final delegate numbers that had Clinton winning the caucuses. However, the statement came shortly after party officials gave the impression to the Sanders campaign that no statement with results would be issued at all that night.

Instead, they were told “they would reconvene at 9am and let’s talk”. As of now, Clinton has a lead of just over two-tenths of a percent over Sanders in the overall apportionment of delegates in Iowa. This would equal an overall share of 23 delegates to the national convention for Clinton, to Sanders’ 21. The Iowa Democratic party has refused to audit the results.