US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3094

On March 02 2016 07:20 ticklishmusic wrote:
right, because ex-president bill clinton is all about that voter suppression

or, as a poll worker said, the lines are long because its a popular voting site in an urban area with high population density

unless bill is going to pull a george wallace this is a complete non issue

sigh

On March 02 2016 07:37 ticklishmusic wrote:
on the other hand, sanders' new best friend, alan grayson, is a guy running a hedge fund (or 3, but hey who's counting) in the Caymans and under the gun for ethics violations and probably insider trading of some sort. but hey, he's one of the good wall street millionahs.

On March 02 2016 07:50 xDaunt wrote:

The more that I think about it, the more frighteningly accurate it is. I suspect that I'm just a wee bit more principled, though.

On March 02 2016 07:50 xDaunt wrote:

The more that I think about it, the more frighteningly accurate it is. I suspect that I'm just a wee bit more principled, though.

On March 02 2016 07:58 oneofthem wrote:
wall street supports hillary for defense against a guy like bernie. not because hillary will do their bidding but having an actively hostile major party is a risk and hillary is another layer of hedging against that risk. it is very rational even if they hugely prefer rubio or cruz over hillary.

On March 02 2016 07:55 Adreme wrote:


Well I certainly hope so...in all seriously you are probably at least more honest as well....probably.

On March 02 2016 08:04 GreenHorizons wrote:


That's mostly fair. I mean obviously they would prefer Rubio and his plan to eliminate capital gains taxes but the idea that Hillary will get anything significant done is pretty specious. That Hillary will be a defense for Wall st is not what I thought people were looking for in a Democratic nominee.

On March 02 2016 08:09 plasmidghost wrote:
I want Trump to win and ascend to the zenith of memes, where he will be crowned God-Emperor of Mankind

On March 02 2016 08:06 kwizach wrote:

Are you actually going to stop whining about Hillary at one point? Or is Sanders' upcoming crushing defeat going to make things even worse in the next few days? Hillary has put forward a more serious plan for financial regulation and reform than Sanders. Let that sink in for a second.

On March 02 2016 08:15 GreenHorizons wrote:



Mmmhmm "serious".

I get that it's important to try to get Bernie out before the rest of the states (like New York) votes because it will look really bad for her to lose the state she represented as a Senator. Especially considering Trump is actually doing well there.

Hillary v Trump opens up a whole new path to 270, I'm going to keep reminding folks how terrible of an idea it is to put Hillary up in a general. Only Yoav mentioned that you'll all have to just pray that Hillary doesn't get indicted (even if later found innocent) or even that the FBI's leaks (which will come if she isn't indicted) don't expose something campaign ending. Bernie is the preference of many/most states that will actually vote D.

Hillary supporters have to admit that they supported her knowing full well her campaign could implode at any moment. What if trump releases his Transcripts? She'll be out of excuses and whatever he said won't matter.

Putting Hillary up in a general is a catastrophically bad idea I just want that to be clear and get everyone on record so that if she wins, I can remind you all how wrong you were.

On March 02 2016 08:17 kwizach wrote:

You've been on record for saying that about fifty times. We get it.

Wasserman Schultz is co-sponsoring a new bill that would gut the CFPB's forthcoming payday loan regulations. She's also attempting to gin up Democratic support for the legislation on Capitol Hill, according to a memo obtained by The Huffington Post.

On March 02 2016 08:23 mahrgell wrote:
Is there btw any upside to Sanders? When even his biggest fanboy dedicated his last 300 posts to only pointing out how terrible the opponent is? Sounds a lot like the "lesser evil/bad" theory.

On March 02 2016 07:54 jcarlsoniv wrote:


Bias aside, and not to necessarily suggest it's voter suppression - what he is doing there is illegal. At my polling place, there was a cute little sign randomly (150ft I guess) outside the polling place saying "No Electioneering Beyond This Point".

Is it a major crime? No, I think it's a misdemeanor or whatever. But it's still kinda messed up.



Has there been particular communication between them? Legit question - I really only saw that Grayson endorsed Bernie.

On March 02 2016 08:23 mahrgell wrote:
Is there btw any upside to Sanders? When even his biggest fanboy dedicated his last 300 posts to only pointing out how terrible the opponent is? Sounds a lot like the "lesser evil/bad" theory.

On March 02 2016 08:19 GreenHorizons wrote:


So long as people defend her or advocate for her I'll be around to remind folks how bad of an idea that is.

Until recently, Jared Taylor, long one of the country’s most prominent white supremacists, had never supported a presidential candidate.

“There’s been no one worth endorsing,” he said in an interview. “I mean, for heaven’s sake, was John McCain ever going to do anything useful as far as the legitimate interests of whites are concerned?”

But Mr. Taylor believes he has finally found someone who will: Donald J. Trump.

This year, Mr. Taylor’s voice could be heard on robocalls to voters across Iowa and New Hampshire, urging them to support Mr. Trump. “We don’t need Muslims,” he said on the call. “We need smart, educated, white people who will assimilate to our culture.”

Then came Sunday — a banner day for Mr. Trump in the eyes of white-power advocates.

In an early-morning social media post, Mr. Trump approvingly reposted on Twitter a quotation from Benito Mussolini (“It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep”). Then, in an interview on CNN, he refused to condemn the Ku Klux Klan or David Duke, its onetime grand wizard, after Mr. Duke declared his support for Mr. Trump.

“God bless this man,” exulted the Daily Stormer, a white supremacist website.

After the CNN interview, Mr. Trump pointed to his disavowal of Mr. Duke’s support two days earlier. In an appearance on NBC’s “Today” show on Monday, he blamed a “very bad earpiece” for his equivocation. And a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump, Hope Hicks, said he broadly disavowed all white supremacist groups.

Mr. Duke took no umbrage. “I’ll laugh it off — that’s fine,” he said in an interview on Fox News Radio on Monday evening. “Donald Trump: Do whatever you need to get elected.”

Intentionally or not, Mr. Trump’s remarks are resonating with — and mobilizing — white supremacists, many of whom have traditionally refrained from participating in the political process.

Mr. Trump’s support among white supremacists has been building from the day he announced his candidacy, when he characterized Mexican immigrants as “rapists.”

Since then, Mr. Trump — or “the glorious leader,” as one white-power writer is calling him — has only grown more popular with that constituency, which cheered his proposal to ban all Muslim immigration and his since-debunked claim to have seen “thousands and thousands of Muslims” celebrating the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, in New Jersey.

Mr. Trump has amplified the messages of some white-power proponents himself: In January, he resent a Twitter message from a site called @WhiteGenocideTm. And he has done the same with statistics on black-on-white crime that were later shown to be false.

Nor was Mr. Trump’s CNN interview on Sunday the first time he had been pressed to repudiate his white supremacist supporters.

In January, when Mr. Trump was questioned about the robocalls made on his behalf in Iowa by white supremacists, including Mr. Taylor, he said that he disapproved of the calls, but that his supporters were animated by a legitimate anger over the violent crimes being committed by “illegal immigrants.”

Mr. Trump’s failure to distance himself more sharply from white-power adherents has been minutely observed in online discussion forums.

The American Freedom Party, a white power group, has a daily hourlong podcast devoted to him. And Mr. Trump will be a frequent topic at American Renaissance’s annual conference in May.
...
“The march to victory will not be won by Donald Trump in 2016, but this could be the steppingstone we need to then radicalize millions of White working and middle class families to the call to truly begin a struggle for Faith, family and folk,” Matthew Heimbach, co-founder of the Traditionalist Youth Network, wrote on the group’s website in October.

On March 02 2016 08:26 KwarK wrote:

Sanders is a sane democratic socialist advocating common sense policies from the non-American perspective. He's the only one doing that so that's his upside. That America might stop trying to be a special snowflake and failing at shit every other country has already worked out. However there is an awful lot of resistance to the idea of learning from other people/past mistakes/generally learning anything. That means that Sanders is going to struggle to get anything done.

I get it. I didn’t start off as her biggest fan either. During the 2008 campaign, I wrote plenty of less-than-complimentary words about Hillary Clinton in my role as Barack Obama’s speechwriter. Then, a few weeks after the election, I had a well-documented run-in with a piece of cardboard that bore a striking resemblance to the incoming Secretary of State.
It was one of the stupider, more disrespectful mistakes I’ve made, and one that could have cost me a job if Hillary hadn’t accepted my apology, which she did with grace and humor. As a result, I had the chance to serve in the Obama administration with someone who was far different than the caricature I had helped perpetuate.