US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3736

On May 05 2016 03:28 farvacola wrote:
The notion that Hillary will have a difficult time beating Trump in the General is hilariously off-base. I already can't wait for November

On May 05 2016 03:31 GreenHorizons wrote:



This is the feigned naiveté I've been talking about. You're suggesting Hillary didn't give the impression that Democrats who didn't support her wouldn't get support back, that is just absurd.

We want to add that DWS wasn't in Hillary's camp from the start, while we're pretending we don't know what happens in politics?

On May 05 2016 03:35 Plansix wrote:

GH, only naïve person in this thread is you and your conspiracy theories about Clinton. You have nothing but your baseless claims and refusal to accept that Sanders lost.

On May 05 2016 03:35 zeo wrote:

Can someone with TL+ check what farvacola said about Trump's chances in the primaries around November/December?

On May 05 2016 03:31 oBlade wrote:

You can impeach anyone who holds office, not just the president, but that excludes Hillary since all she's doing is campaigning right now.

On May 05 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:


Yeah me and Politico with our wild conspiracy theories. I'm trying to help prevent Democrats from walking into a bloodbath they seem blind to but you all are stubborn as hell to even admit that if a Republican were doing what Hillary is with campaign finance, Democrats would be screaming from the rafters, but their blind loyalty has them defending it.

On May 05 2016 03:35 zeo wrote:

Can someone with TL+ check what farvacola said about Trump's chances in the primaries around November/December?

On May 05 2016 03:45 Plansix wrote:

The Politico article did not how any wrong doing, only that the DNC was holding on to the money raised by Clinton. Since all of the races start after the convention, its not this mind blowing thing that the DNC is waiting until after to release it.

Also the article didn’t say that the DNC wasn’t helping, only that the money specifically raised by Clinton was being held.

And bro, I'm not a democrat. Never have been.

On May 05 2016 03:45 Plansix wrote:

The Politico article did not how any wrong doing, only that the DNC was holding on to the money raised by Clinton. Since all of the races start after the convention, its not this mind blowing thing that the DNC is waiting until after to release it.

Also the article didn’t say that the DNC wasn’t helping, only that the money specifically raised by Clinton was being held.

And bro, I'm not a democrat. Never have been.

WASHINGTON — Hopes of stopping Donald Trump short of the Republican nomination ahead of this summer’s convention came to a crashing end Tuesday night after Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas dropped out of the race following his loss in Indiana.

What hope remains is being channeled into a Plan C: Have another Republican run for office in addition to Trump.

Around Washington, chatter about the possibility of an independent run by a traditional conservative is becoming louder. It is fueled in part by the business end of the political cycle: Campaign consultants eagerly await — and financially plan for — the quadrennial, billion-dollar payday that is a presidential election.

Rest assured, the Donald Trump campaign will offer no shortage of opportunities for grifters. But if you’ve been a charter member of the Washington establishment, your calls probably aren’t getting returned as quickly as you might like, especially if you’ve spent the past half-year typing the #NeverTrump hashtag into your Twitter feed.

But there are also political reasons to run an independent candidate. A traditional conservative on the ballot who could peel a few points away from Trump would virtually assure Hillary Clinton of victory — giving business-minded conservatives who prefer Clinton a way to support her without having to support her directly. As importantly, a third-party conservative candidate could potentially draw in Republican voters disaffected by having Trump on top of the ticket, thereby giving a much-needed boost to down-ballot candidates.

On May 05 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:


Yeah me and Politico with our wild conspiracy theories. I'm trying to help prevent Democrats from walking into a bloodbath they seem blind to but you all are stubborn as hell to even admit that if a Republican were doing what Hillary is with campaign finance, Democrats would be screaming from the rafters, but their blind loyalty has them defending it.



Pretty sure xDaunt and I were the first ones to say Trump would win the Republican primary. Everyone else (I think) was still speculating he wouldn't get it just a month or so ago.

Watch as the same folks ignore us again on Trump's chances in the general.

On May 05 2016 03:50 Gorsameth wrote:

Still waiting for that evidence.

And xDaunt's record isn't that great, he was pretty convinced Romney would sweep.
And a month ago? Dude a month ago we all knew Bernie was dead and Trump would have a large delegate lead, the only question was if he would clinch or not.

On May 05 2016 03:55 GreenHorizons wrote:


There was no question he would clinch really, just media propaganda pushing the possibility he wouldn't. It's long been obvious Trump was more likely to clinch than Clinton, the media however, had a very different narrative. One great example is that the Media has said the D race has been over since March yet it's the one going to the convention, while they've been feeding you all the narrative that Republicans we're probably not going to have a nominee before the convention.

If folks haven't picked up on the propaganda yet it's hard to believe they are really paying attention.

Saying "colleges have been treated as sanctuaries of learning where firearms have not been allowed," Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal vetoed a bill Tuesday that would have allowed licensed owners to carry guns on campus in all but a few buildings.

The "campus carry" legislation, HB 859, would have allowed guns on campuses and in buildings owned by any public college, technical school or other institution, providing exceptions only for areas used for athletic events, dormitories, and fraternity and sorority houses.

As member station WABE reports, Deal's veto comes two years after he signed the so-called guns everywhere bill — officially, the Safe Carry Protection Act, which broadly increased the places gun owners in Georgia can carry weapons. As NPR reported at the time, the list of approved places included "unsecured government buildings."

But on Tuesday, the governor said guns shouldn't be allowed on campuses, as WABE says, "at least not without stricter rules on where they can be carried."

Deal unsuccessfully lobbied the bill's sponsors for changes that would have forbidden guns to be brought into settings such as day care facilities and faculty or administrative offices, WABE's Johnny Kauffman says.

This is Deal's second veto of high-profile legislation in recent months: In late March, he announced his plan to veto a controversial bill that would have allowed people to cite their religious views as a reason to deny services to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

On May 05 2016 03:12 oneofthem wrote:
the real ugliness is basically the misinformation trump will unleash on the liberal order of things. this is not easy to stop because of a combination of the likely attack being somewhat true and the difficulty of figuring out why this is, and why trump doesn't work. it's basically up to identity politics and minorities to save the day.

On May 05 2016 04:01 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
If it makes someone any better the Phillipines have their own version of Trump and he's actually leading in the election after saying he should have been the first to rape somebody.