US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3887

On May 27 2016 03:55 farvacola wrote:
Getting as much exposure for his message as possible?

On May 27 2016 03:54 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I just don't understand what you think Sanders will get out of a debate with Trump, GH. He's not going to win the nomination as a result. He's not going to convince anyone right of center that is going to vote for Trump not to vote for Trump. And anything he might accomplish in motivating his own supporters not to vote for Trump in the general can be accomplished just as easily off a debate stage. All it can do is dent Clinton numbers and give Trump more media coverage.

Please, explain to me what Sanders stands to gain here.

On May 27 2016 03:55 farvacola wrote:
Getting as much exposure for his message as possible?

On May 27 2016 03:57 TheTenthDoc wrote:


To who? Anybody tuning into the debate won't care about his message (Trump supporters), already loves his message (his supporters), or has heard his message (everyone who watched Democratic debates). He already has a ton of airtime at the convention, which will shape the party platform, and he's already shifted the national narrative. This isn't going to reach some new pockets of America that don't know who he is.

On May 27 2016 04:07 pmh wrote:
For the democrats this debate is great. Sanders does a lot better against trump in the polls then Clinton.
They know Clinton wont stand much change against trump at this moment in time, so they bring forward the strongest candidate to debate him while not exposing Clinton even more.
Then later on the sanders supporters will go to Clinton,they don't particulary like her but its still the same party at least.
Best for trump would probably to not attack sanders to much,but in a debate and with his temper,anything can happen.
Bernie is sort of like untouchable amongst leftwing people,somewhat similar to what trump has been. Letting them clash can only be good for Clinton I think,though she still has a very steep mountain to climb regardless.

Game on,
When exactly is this debate supposed to happen? I would not want to miss it.
My prediction is that trump,s position will be weaker after the debate.

On May 27 2016 04:10 GreenHorizons wrote:


Trump confirmed the campaigns were sorting out the details. I'm guessing some time next week.

WASHINGTON — House Republicans unexpectedly sunk their own $37.4 billion water and energy spending bill on Thursday because it included a provision ensuring that people who work for government contractors can’t be fired for being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

The bill failed 112 to 305, with 130 Republicans and 175 Democrats opposing it.

Nearly every Democrat voted against it, but that was expected. They’d raised concerns with riders in the bill that would undermine the Clean Water Act and allow people to carry firearms on Corps of Engineers lands. They also opposed language added late Wednesday by Republicans that would prevent the federal government from revoking funds to North Carolina over its controversial law affecting transgender people going to the bathroom.

The real surprise was seeing conservatives line up against the bill over an amendment added late Wednesday by Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.). His provision would preserve a 2014 executive order by President Barack Obama that bars federal contractors from discriminating against people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The House accepted his amendment 223 to 195, with moderate Republicans joining with Democrats to pass it.

Lawmakers fought over a similar LGBT amendment last week when Maloney unsuccessfully tried to attach it to a military spending bill. He had the votes to pass it at one point, but GOP leaders held the voting open after the clock ran out, and strong-armed just enough Republicans to switch their votes and bring it down. That sent the chamber into chaos, with Democrats shouting, “Shame! Shame! Shame!” at GOP lawmakers who changed their votes.

So it was already a sensitive issue when Maloney’s amendment came back up Wednesday night. Politico reported that as Republicans huddled Thursday morning before the vote, Rep. Rick Allen (R-Ga.) read aloud a passage from the Bible and asked people if they were prepared to violate their religious principles by supporting the bill. That didn’t sit well with some in the room.

“Many members were visibly disturbed by the comments,” a GOP source in the room, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told The Huffington Post. “At least one walked out.”

Beyond that, the conservative Heritage Foundation announced Thursday morning that it opposed the bill over Maloney’s amendment and vowed to include it as a key vote on its legislative scorecard — a public record of how conservative each lawmaker ranks. That drove scores of GOP lawmakers to oppose the legislation.

On May 27 2016 04:03 IgnE wrote:


Yeah you are right. Once anybody has said something once somewhere there's no point in trying to get more publicity. If we got rid of all the redundancies we'd have so much more time on our airways for reruns of Seinfeld and Friends.

On May 27 2016 04:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
It's good to know that the House Republicans hate gay people even more than they hate ensuring clean water and energy. >.>

On May 27 2016 04:44 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:


The Conservatives are up for reelection so they have to show their constituents that they are just as bigoted as they are. One can only hope this is another sign of organized religion/evangelicalism in it's death throes in this country.