2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part X

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
But 'fascist' is such an illfitting term, if you want to talk about what you perceive as desire for a strong state (from say, Sanders and Trump supporters, which I'm getting the impression that this is what you're getting at), there are more suitable terms than just referencing a plainly far right political ideology. That's just my standard take.

For what it's worth, I prefer to keep usage of certain terms consistent and relevant. I'm not a fan of 'bending' them to fit a specific context as I think it is somewhat meaningless.

Irvine was making a comment on a specific post about jailing the Clintons. That is a somewhat fascist view, or at least, a view of undemocratic, authoritarian societies.
I agree, throwing that term around over a broad group, especiallyl on the left, is not really applicable.
 
Irvine was making a comment on a specific post about jailing the Clintons. That is a somewhat fascist view, or at least, a view of undemocratic, authoritarian societies.
I agree, throwing that term around over a broad group, especiallyl on the left, is not really applicable.

Yeah, I mean - 'authoritarian' is the most appropriate word to use in this instance, in my opinion.
 
I don't know who all here watches Colbert's late night show, but Jon Stewart popped up (for the second time this week), and hoooooooooly shit, he just gave one HELL of a blistering rant that I wish to God we could play over and over and over and over again for the GOP. It was so damn cathartic.


Here it is.

https://youtu.be/mNiqpBNE9ik
 
But 'fascist' is such an illfitting term, if you want to talk about what you perceive as desire for a strong state (from say, Sanders and Trump supporters, which I'm getting the impression that this is what you're getting at), there are more suitable terms than just referencing a plainly far right political ideology. That's just my standard take.

For what it's worth, I prefer to keep usage of certain terms consistent and relevant. I'm not a fan of 'bending' them to fit a specific context as I think it is somewhat meaningless.

:up:

calling either sanders or trump fascist is an insult to fascists.
 


THIS

This is exactly what I've been saying since the beginning; EVERYTHING they made up about Obama-Trump is.

I know certain people who should have this played on repeat every morning until the election.

Everytime you call Obama divisive and say racism is hyperbole; watch this.

Everytime you claim to be a principled conservative libertarian; watch this.

You just hired everything you claimed to hate just because he's white, has an R by his name, and scapegoats the right color of people.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Wish I'd stayed up to date with this thread. Unfortunately I didn't get to see as much of the RNC as I'd have liked to. All worth it for the return of Jon Stewart (and my my, doesn't he look good :love:)

At this point... I still think Hillary wins but it's no lock anymore. 2016 is officially the year that facts began to not matter. The most prescient thing Trump has ever said was the most outrageous thing he's said - "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and I could shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters". It is absolutely true (figuratively, of course, but the point stands).

And thank god for Super Deluxe and Vic Berger. These videos give me life.

 
Stewart was fabulous last night. However, he's preaching to the choir.

The part about this election that terrifies me, an urban California Latina, is that there are way more people in this country who would prefer me to not be here, than I thought. There are way more people in this country who would prefer to live in the time of segregation than I thought. It makes me ashamed to be an American to hear the vitriol spouted against immigrants and to know that it's mostly directed at people like me.

If trump is elected, I will be less safe.
 
I am glad I have people over this afternoon/evening so that I don't have to hear the news about Tim Kaine when it inevitably comes out.

I never thought Warren really stood a chance (wasn't sure she wanted it either) as I've said here but thought one of the other guys may pull through. Becerra in particular does great with crowds and on TV.

Tim Kaine with a spotty abortion record and zero charisma...heaven safe us from him in 8 years.

The Trump convention is really beyond commentary at this point.
 
So Elizabeth Warren was also on Colbert last night, and was also very good (I particularly enjoy that the most the democrat most aggressively responding to Trump is a woman - must drive him crazy).

Of note, she mentioned that she'll be speaking on the first night of the convention. To my knowledge, VP nominees have never spoken on the first night.
 
I am glad I have people over this afternoon/evening so that I don't have to hear the news about Tim Kaine when it inevitably comes out.

I never thought Warren really stood a chance (wasn't sure she wanted it either) as I've said here but thought one of the other guys may pull through. Becerra in particular does great with crowds and on TV.

Tim Kaine with a spotty abortion record and zero charisma...heaven safe us from him in 8 years.

The Trump convention is really beyond commentary at this point.

Warren would have been my first choice. My second would be Corey Booker. He's not as experienced, but with Hillary on the top of the ticket, he wouldn't need to be. Kaine is blah.
 
I don't think Kaine does anything to sway Bernie voters. Granted a percentage wouldn't come over even if Bernie was the pick, but I feel Hillary loses a chance to get a good amount of those voters that sit on the fence.

She has come out recently with some more progressive ideas, which she obviously took from Bernie, but any of that sway goes out with Kaine.

Of course the argument could be made she's just paying lip service, so wouldn't matter even if Warren was the pick.

The Clintons are smart politicians though, and I think their campaign will be run much, much better than Trumps. So in the end, the VP pick doesn't matter unless it's an idiot like Palin

I still feel this election will be over after the first debate. Hillary knows law/policy, there's no questioning that. It's up to independents to decide if that matters in a debate, or siding with a man who just screams and insults.




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Warren would have been my first choice. My second would be Corey Booker. He's not as experienced, but with Hillary on the top of the ticket, he wouldn't need to be. Kaine is blah.

This would have been the opportune time to take a chance on an up-and-coming politician like Booker, given that this election is in the bag for Clinton (barring some kind of catastrophic misstep on her part). At least I hope I am right about that.
 
I don't think Kaine does anything to sway Bernie voters. Granted a percentage wouldn't come over even if Bernie was the pick, but I feel Hillary loses a chance to get a good amount of those voters that sit on the fence.

How many Bernie supporters do you really think will hold out from voting for her, though? I know some of them have been really vocal about it, but I don't think that Bernie-or-bust crowd is really all that large. I mean, I voted for Bernie in the primary, but I'll vote for Clinton in the general without even a second thought. Granted that's anecdotal, but I think a more common mentality than Bernie-or-bust.
 
if it is Kaine, it shows that Clinton is going to try and pick off mainstream Republicans, especially women and potentially a few men.

and if she wins VA, it's pretty much over by 9pm. and she should win VA no matter who is the VP pick.

again, barring catastrophe. i just can't imagine that that speech last night -- which, i'm hearing, was lower rated than Mittens 4 years ago -- went over well to anyone who doesn't frequent the comments section of conservative websites.
 
It's entirely dependent on how many Bernie supporters were registered members of the party or independents that always voted with the party...like practically everybody that vote for Clinton in the primaries, those votes were basically always guaranteed to go to the D in November.

But everybody else including people like me that have never been part of the Democratic Party structure? Those are votes that are going to be very tough for her to win. Maybe it's a few million, maybe it's five hundred thousand. Who really knows...picking Kaine is going win over zero new converts and probably even be a detriment all things considered. But at the end of the day, she wants someone who fits her neoliberal politics and can work alongside her. That sure as hell isn't Warren.

I'm so glad it's not Booker. He's a solid guy (watch Street Fight) although he leans heavily on Wall Street, but the issue is pretty freakin' obvious...he's young and he's black. If you're against having political dynasties then you should be damn happy that Clinton didn't pick Booker because he'd win the primaries with ease, even if his sort of politics are further and further removed from the party's center as the years go on. As I said earlier, Kaine ensures that it's a wide open field in 2024.
 
if it is Kaine, it shows that Clinton is going to try and pick off mainstream Republicans, especially women and potentially a few men.

and if she wins VA, it's pretty much over by 9pm. and she should win VA no matter who is the VP pick.

again, barring catastrophe. i just can't imagine that that speech last night -- which, i'm hearing, was lower rated than Mittens 4 years ago -- went over well to anyone who doesn't frequent the comments section of conservative websites.

She won't pick off any of them because they'll be concerned with who is at the top of the ticket. Plus, the neoliberal politics of Kaine and Clinton and their pro-Wall Street stances and money are exactly the sort of thing that Trump can point at and continue to win over the diasffected in the heartland.

She'll win VA with ease, but the election night is not over simply because she wins that state. The trifecta of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida are going to determine everything with Clinton's success in the other swing states dictating how many of that trio she has to win.
 
if it is Kaine, it shows that Clinton is going to try and pick off mainstream Republicans, especially women and potentially a few men.

and if she wins VA, it's pretty much over by 9pm. and she should win VA no matter who is the VP pick.

again, barring catastrophe. i just can't imagine that that speech last night -- which, i'm hearing, was lower rated than Mittens 4 years ago -- went over well to anyone who doesn't frequent the comments section of conservative websites.

You always know how to put my mind at ease in regards to November :).
 
She won't pick off any of them because they'll be concerned with who is at the top of the ticket. Plus, the neoliberal politics of Kaine and Clinton and their pro-Wall Street stances and money are exactly the sort of thing that Trump can point at and continue to win over the diasffected in the heartland.

She'll win VA with ease, but the election night is not over simply because she wins that state. The trifecta of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida are going to determine everything with Clinton's success in the other swing states dictating how many of that trio she has to win.
I think you are right about OH, FL, PA
 
went over well to anyone who doesn't frequent the comments section of conservative websites.


Those are some of the scariest corners of the internet. Trump won't get accused of plagiarism because no one who knows what that word means can get past the first 5 or 6 without getting nauseous.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
She won't pick off any of them because they'll be concerned with who is at the top of the ticket. Plus, the neoliberal politics of Kaine and Clinton and their pro-Wall Street stances and money are exactly the sort of thing that Trump can point at and continue to win over the diasffected in the heartland.



She'll win VA with ease, but the election night is not over simply because she wins that state. The trifecta of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida are going to determine everything with Clinton's success in the other swing states dictating how many of that trio she has to win.



She's already targeting them, Kaine would only underscore this, not be the draw himself. He's not well known enough to be any sort of incentive. He would reinforce the central message of her candidacy -- we are experienced adults and we know what we are doing. The alternative is unacceptable.

Winning VA would indicate that the ground game is working, indicating that it will work well in the big 3 states.

I also don't think that PA and OH are the dystopic zombie-filled wastelands Trump described last night. It's insulting to think everyone living in these major states is some pissed off lunch pail Joe who wants to fight.
 
I don't think winning VA at all is indicative of those others states. It's home to some of the richest people in the country and a lot of DC insiders along with an influx of young, liberal leaning people (the latter point being the same for NC).
 
I think Trump needs to win all three to have a chance.

Clinton has more wiggle room.

Let's get to the debates and see what happens


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom