US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2965

On February 19 2016 23:36 GreenHorizons wrote:



That awkward moment when you have to appear strong and claim you would fill the slot, while simultaneously asserting that Obama shouldn't do what you would do.

LEWISTOWN, Ohio — Attempts to right a wrong exacted on the Shawnee Tribe almost 200 years ago are running into headwinds and government inertia in Ohio as the Native American nation seeks to reclaim its lost homeland.

There’s scant trace of the tribe’s rich history in rural western Ohio. A little patch of land off State Route 235 near Lewistown was the final redoubt of the tribe there. The last Shawnee left in the 1830s, and treaties made with them about land ownership were broken.

Indian Lake High School, with its Native American mural outside, might be the closest thing to homage that the area pays to its past. South of the school, farmland fans out in all directions, some of it marshy bottomland from the often overflowing Great Miami River.

But now this land could see a Native American nation officially return to Ohio for the first time, with the Shawnee reclaiming a tiny slice of their lost territory. Some 50 acres on the east side of Route 235 was recently purchased by the Eastern Band of the Shawnee and they are trying to get the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to recognize the parcel as restricted Indian Country.

“Our situation is that land was taken … We signed a treaty for what was then our reservation, and we were to come here to Indian territory,” said Chief Glenna Walker, who presides over the Eastern Shawnee, from the tribal headquarters in Oklahoma. “The government took additional land rather than just the reservation, land that belonged to [Nancy Stewart], a private tribal member.”

Unless the BIA designates the land restricted Indian Country, preferred development projects are stalled.

“We’d like to see it become a destination resort, which would help make the Indian Lake region an attraction again, a go-to place for central and southwest Ohio,” said Williams.

Part of getting BIA approval for the land is drumming up local support for the project, something that Bill Coyer, the president of the Indian Lake Chamber of Commerce, wasn’t quite ready to do without having more questions answered. He and a contingent of other local leaders were planning a fact-finding trip to the reservation in February to learn more.

“We have people who have been on government assistance for three and four generations. I want to know how and if this will create jobs for our area,” he said.

But others are more enthusiastic. Chad Doll, a councilman in neighboring Wapakoneta, said, “The project has been presented to me a couple of times, and I’m excited about the possible economic benefits our community might get from travelers who come through our community, which is about 14 miles away.”

For the Eastern Shawnee, this would be a symbolic return to their roots — as well as a potentially lucrative business opportunity.

On February 19 2016 23:16 Acrofales wrote:

Yeah. That op-ed was pathetic. I did Google cybersecurity legend, though, and he has spammed Google enough to be the only guy on the first page.

Vox has come up with an interesting take on the issue:
http://www.vox.com/2016/2/18/11054994/iphones-back-door-san-bernardino

In particular their take on the ramifications for the international situation is interesting. However, I disagree on their quick dismissal based on the idea that Apple will create a 1-shot tool just for that phone. The precedent this sets means that that is almost certainly not going to be the case.

Here is a bit more analysis on that aspect:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/17/inside-the-fbis-encryption-battle-with-apple

"Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices," he said. Cook described such software as "the equivalent of a master key, capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks."

US officials on Wednesday stressed that their request for Apple is only limited to Farook’s phone. “The judge’s order and our request in this case do not require Apple to redesign its products, to disable encryption or to open content on the phone,” the Justice Department said in a statement on 17 February.

SUMMERVILLE, S.C. — Some of Jeb Bush’s most steadfast allies think Saturday might be the end.

Donors, who poured millions into his campaign and super PAC, have stopped giving — one refusing a direct request to raise $1 million this week. Bush himself is hitting the phones, pleading for patience with his most influential supporters. And even some of his confidants are suddenly dejected after a dispiriting week capped off by South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley rejecting Bush in favor of Marco Rubio.

“What a kick in the balls,” said one of Bush’s closest supporters, one of the more than a dozen major Bush donors interviewed for this story.

The Bush team had been banking on a strong week, believing their candidate’s first solid debate performance last weekend would move the numbers in South Carolina. They thought bringing in George W. Bush on Monday night would generate more enthusiasm and positive earned media than it did. They held out hope that the former president could convince Haley, who’d hedged on backing Rubio after his slip in New Hampshire, to support a fellow governor.

But none of it panned out.

“The Haley endorsement just hurt,” said a Florida-based fundraiser who is close to Bush and had up to now remained optimistic about his chances. “We felt we had some momentum after New Hampshire. And Jeb was feeling good about his brother. But it wasn’t as good as we thought it would be. Then this happened.”

“It’s bad for the staff, for morale,” that donor said. “People are working hard and it’s tough when this happens. But this stuff happens.”

But even before Haley’s endorsement, several longtime Bush donors were emailing one another Tuesday morning, expressing a collective readiness to intervene and tell Bush, depending on his finish here Saturday night, that his time is up.

On February 20 2016 02:03 kwizach wrote:
If Jeb Bush drops out after SC/before March 1st, Rubio is probably going to start being a favorite in my book against Trump. Most projections I've seen show him crushing it against Trump in a 1-on-1, so we'll have to see how things go. Having Trump running might even benefit him, since he's going to be able to present himself as the "adult in the room", the "serious" candidate, and even the "moderate", when he's anything but.

On February 20 2016 02:03 kwizach wrote:
If Jeb Bush drops out after SC/before March 1st, Rubio is probably going to start being a favorite in my book against Trump. Most projections I've seen show him crushing it against Trump in a 1-on-1, so we'll have to see how things go. Having Trump running might even benefit him, since he's going to be able to present himself as the "adult in the room", the "serious" candidate, and even the "moderate", when he's anything but.

On February 20 2016 02:29 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:


Rubio as the adult in the room? Are you serious? It's already been shown that Rubio panics when confronted with a curve ball. Then there's Cruz who would dismantle him with Evangelical votes.

On February 20 2016 02:47 xDaunt wrote:
I don't see Trump losing at this point.

On February 20 2016 03:01 Deathstar wrote:

lol we still a long way to go.

In one major poll, Bernie Sanders is now leading Hillary Clinton nationally. In most others, he’s not far behind from the former Secretary of State. Vermont’s Senator already has an “edge over Clinton in matchups with GOP opponents,” dispelling Clinton’s electability myth. In an average of national polls, Bernie Sanders is less than eight points from Hillary Clinton, after being over 50 points behind in 2015. In addition, there’s only one person capable of challenging a Republican in 2016 without James Comey declaring national security was jeopardized by a private server.

Bernie Sanders is the only Democratic candidate capable of winning the White House in 2016. Please name the last person to win the presidency alongside an ongoing FBI investigation, negative favorability ratings, questions about character linked to continual flip-flops, a dubious money trail of donors, and the genuine contempt of the rival political party. In reality, Clinton is a liability to Democrats, and certainly not the person capable of ensuring liberal Supreme Court nominees and President Obama’s legacy.