2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII

[cobl04]

I'm becoming more and more sympathetic to Hillary simply because Sanders supporters are so annoying. I've had to unfollow someone on Twitter who I really liked... she was very big in the Black Lives Matter movement, was on the ground in Baltimore, but now just reposts Bernie memes and says she'd vote for Trump over Hillary. BEAL has a good point and you can see it in what Trump's been saying, he's wisely been very sympathetic to Bernie, which further drives his supporters' hatred for Hillary.

She must be having a big old laugh. Her only internal opposition is raging against the dying of the light and she is going to absolutely wipe the floor with Trump in November. I'd still vote for Jill Stein were I an American, but it's becoming somewhat more comforting to watch.

 

[Axver]

I must admit I don't fully get the Putin thing. I thought that for a good chunk of the US right, Russia still remained "the enemy", or at least since the rise of Islamophobia and the War on Terror "an enemy", a country about which there remains a nagging suspicion. So this sudden willingness to accept Trump's fondness for Putin has surprised me.

And frankly I think some of the Clinton supporters in this thread are going a bit far. Sanders has every right to stay in the race as long as he wants.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

If Sanders stays pounding away on his soapbox through the convention, and God forbid, afterwards... resulting in enough damage to HRC that she loses the general?

Yea, one man can take the country until a deep hole of shit we haven't seen in a long long time.

 

[Vlad n U 2]

I'm becoming more and more sympathetic to Hillary simply because Sanders supporters are so annoying.

I've found Bernie supporters to be pretty irritating, but for me they still pale in comparison to my opinion of Hillary diehards who are on another level.

I must admit I don't fully get the Putin thing. I thought that for a good chunk of the US right, Russia still remained "the enemy", or at least since the rise of Islamophobia and the War on Terror "an enemy", a country about which there remains a nagging suspicion. So this sudden willingness to accept Trump's fondness for Putin has surprised me.

And frankly I think some of the Clinton supporters in this thread are going a bit far. Sanders has every right to stay in the race as long as he wants.

I think there are some similarities re: Trump's supposed fondness for Putin and the right in European countries, for instance, Le Pen's NF and Orban's Fidesz. I'd go as far as to say that the European right wing is greatly sympathetic to Putin unless they are/have been engaged in historical conflict with Russia (Poland's PiS and the Ukrainian cluster of right wing/nationalist parties are as hostile to Russia as ever).

It may be worth suggesting that perhaps Trump's supposed fondness for Putin is a reaction to the Democrats'/mainstream Republicans' unconditional backing of the post-Maidan Ukrainian regime. But this is veering too far off topic I think.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

I must admit I don't fully get the Putin thing. I thought that for a good chunk of the US right, Russia still remained "the enemy", or at least since the rise of Islamophobia and the War on Terror "an enemy", a country about which there remains a nagging suspicion. So this sudden willingness to accept Trump's fondness for Putin has surprised me.

Exactly. This is what I meant with my earlier sentiments, but I don't think I made it as clear as you did .

And frankly I think some of the Clinton supporters in this thread are going a bit far. Sanders has every right to stay in the race as long as he wants.

I also agree with this. Speaking in general terms, my frustration is geared towards some of the supporters for BOTH candidates right now. Like I've said before, regardless of which of the two candidates one supports, this election should be a freaking cakewalk for liberals/Democrats given the clown circus that the GOP is right now, and yet the behavior of some of the supporters that I've seen in the news and online and whatnot has me seriously worried that we'll blow it come November and basically hand Trump the presidency. There's way too much sniping and condescending attitude and stubbornness from some supporters of both Hilary and Bernie out there, and it really needs to stop. People can support and promote their candidate without acting like jerks about it, it's not that hard.

 

[BVS]

And frankly I think some of the Clinton supporters in this thread are going a bit far. Sanders has every right to stay in the race as long as he wants.

Every right? Absolutely. But at what point do you look at the bigger picture? At what point do you step back and wonder if you're doing more harm than good?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[BVS]

Oregoropa's posts are a great example of why the right have a crush on Putin. He admits to being giddy about his Trump endorsement in one post, but then uses Putin to attack Obama in another. Every logical person knows this is a hypocrisy, but they simple don't care. They firmly grasp tight onto old Cold War fears, but don't bother enough to really understand why. It's just another dog whistle. But on the other hand they love his fake machismo, remember Trump was once aligned with the WWE, they love this shit. Posturing will win over content any day of the week with this crowd, and Putin is great at it. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT CONTENT. Plus for a crowd that is so anti-gay they really seem to love his pecs, that picture of him on the horse is equivalent to Fabio on 90's erotic novels.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[BEAL]

If my posts implied or stated Trump:Sanders are Anarchists, that's not what I meant.

I meant their most feverish supporters. They would rather see the system come down if their guy can't win.

Yes, it's chaos, and to an anarchist they believe that is the only fair way to go.




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Vlad n U 2]

Oregoropa's posts are a great example of why the right have a crush on Putin. He admits to being giddy about his Trump endorsement in one post, but then uses Putin to attack Obama in another. Every logical person knows this is a hypocrisy, but they simple don't care. They firmly grasp tight onto old Cold War fears, but don't bother enough to really understand why. It's just another dog whistle. But on the other hand they love his fake machismo, remember Trump was once aligned with the WWE, they love this shit. Posturing will win over content any day of the week with this crowd, and Putin is great at it. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT CONTENT. Plus for a crowd that is so anti-gay they really seem to love his pecs, that picture of him on the horse is equivalent to Fabio on 90's erotic novels.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

It's the masculinity they love. In many ways Putin embodies that 'manly man' ideal that many conservatives love.

If my posts implied or stated Trump:Sanders are Anarchists, that's not what I meant.

I meant their most feverish supporters. They would rather see the system come down if their guy can't win.

Yes, it's chaos, and to an anarchist they believe that is the only fair way to go.




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

You still don't understand. Anarchists generally do not believe in electoral politics and in most cases reject it entirely. The idea that Sanders' and Trump's most diehard supporters are anarchists is silly, and just another attempt to somehow equate the two.

You need to read anarchist writings/literature/perspectives before you go frothing "CHAOS!!!1!!!11!" at the mouth.

 

[Axver]

There hasn't been a single election where diehard supporters of losing candidates for the nominee haven't threatened to pack up their toys and go home, or side with the opposition. It wasn't a serious issue before and it isn't now. This thread needs to calm down. A third party run - now there's a problem. Sanders hanging about because he still has a mathematical possibility and wants to stop Clinton veering further centre, centre-right for as long as he can - that's legitimate and valid.

Very few people on the first Tuesday in November are going to go into the polling booth and think "gee a few Clinton fans were real dicks six months ago so I'm voting Trump to spite them".

(Note I haven't really backed a horse in this race yet because I have reservations about both, would support either against any Republican, and in the end don't need to make a decision thanks to about 14,000km of ocean.)

 

[nbelcik]

I've been a big Bernie supporter since Day 1 but him and his supporters are really starting to piss me off. Threatening people and sending death threats is fucking awful, they're no better than Trump supporters at that point. Unlike some people on here, I really admire and respect Hillary and will be proud to cast my ballot for her this November, even though I voted for Bernie on Tuesday. A vote that isn't for Hillary is a vote for Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Why are we grouping like, the loudest cat in the room as "Bernie Sanders supporters?" Sanders supporters are pissing you off because some losers made some death threats... but they don't represent Sanders supporters. They're just some losers.

He seems to have disavowed those individuals.

 

[Hewson]

It's the masculinity they love. In many ways Putin embodies that 'manly man' ideal that many conservatives love.



.

 

[Irvine511]

I've been a big Bernie supporter since Day 1 but him and his supporters are really starting to piss me off. Threatening people and sending death threats is fucking awful, they're no better than Trump supporters at that point. Unlike some people on here, I really admire and respect Hillary and will be proud to cast my ballot for her this November, even though I voted for Bernie on Tuesday. A vote that isn't for Hillary is a vote for Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Remember when people said the Bernie Bros didn't exist?

 

[Irvine511]

Why are we grouping like, the loudest cat in the room as "Bernie Sanders supporters?" Sanders supporters are pissing you off because some losers made some death threats... but they don't represent Sanders supporters. They're just some losers.

He seems to have disavowed those individuals.

Obviously not all Sanders supporters are throwing chairs in Nevada.

But it stands to reason that, at this point in the campaign, when he mathematically cannot win, those remaining passionate about a candidacy that cannot happen are a bit more untethered and angry and, likely, awash in fist-in-the-air social media.

I don't think Bernie should get out. Yet. But if the report in the NYT from yesterday is to be believed, that he is willing to damage HRC in order to advance his own agenda and transform a party he was never a member of until last year, he IS helping Trump and he is putting himself before what's best for the country. I sincerely hope he's not taking the privileged whiter-than-white Susan Sarandon view that a Trump presidency would be "good" for the American left.

It's a delicate balance. Does he really want to promote his more leftist views? Or does he actually want to damage Mrs Clinton? One does not necessarily require the other.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

One thing that needs to be taken into account is that Clinton shouldn't expect ownership of the votes in November of a lot of people that voted for Sanders as many of them aren't even Democrats to begin with...you can make the argument that Sanders has brought millions into the fold as potential Democratic party voters in November that wouldn't have been there had he not been in the race. It may ultimately be extremely beneficial to Clinton in the general election.

Therefore, somebody saying they won't vote in November because Sanders isn't the nominee isn't that ludicrous a proposition if it's from somebody that likely wasn't going to vote anyway. Clinton shouldn't expect that sort of person to just line up beside her when that person could give a fuck about a D being next to her name on the ballot. And I guess I fall in that bubble as well and only bothered caring about the primaries when there finally was a contender that espoused my viewpoints.

Axver is on the money about Sanders having every right to continue on with his campaign. He's the first far leftist candidate in the Democratic party to realize the significance of movement politics and how things aren't all nice and dandy just by electing a Democrat as President every four years. What's going on now is a movement to make sure that the Democratic platform is shifted significantly to the left enough to suit the members of the party and not just tailored for one individual running for President. Believe me, Sanders knows his goose was cooked immediately after losing New York and the campaign quickly responded with layoffs and the like. What's funny is that he's now running simply to bring light to the issues and move the platform in a specific direction - which is the exact same reason he ran in the first place before suddenly becoming an actual contender for the nomination. Clinton's supporters would have no problem if he was some factional Kucinich candidate earning 10% in the latest state primaries and bringing to light key issues, but they can't stand that he's a guy continuing to win states, and in their fear obsession with the Republican party, think it will actually somehow hurt them in November despite everything from changing demographics and Trump's insults effectively making it impossible for him to get anywhere near a plurality of the vote.

Let Sanders continue his cause and realize that this thread with its large slant towards Clinton supporters (and in particular ones that tend to loathe Sanders and his campaign) are a non-representative sample compared to the rest of the internet and a man who had an 87% favorability rating among Democrats the last time I checked. Literally everything that has harmed Clinton throughout this race has been due to her own past record and choices that she has made, not some vast conspiracy of lies and "shadowy donations". Clinton's failure to beat Donald friggin' Trump of all people will reflect more on her weaknesses as a candidate that have persisted for this entire century and next to nothing on Sanders running his campaign into June and then wanting a few concessions at the convention. The swing voters just won't care.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

I don't think Bernie should get out. Yet. But if the report in the NYT from yesterday is to be believed, that he is willing to damage HRC in order to advance his own agenda and transform a party he was never a member of until last year, he IS helping Trump and he is putting himself before what's best for the country.

It's not to be believed as it's been the most anti-Bernie/pro-Clinton rag of the bunch from Day One, even going as far as to altering headlines in published online articles when necessary to be less favorable to Sanders.

It's really the dumbest worry. Wait until the convention before you accuse the guy of throwing the party and the election under the bus to suit his own needs. Until he decides not to endorse her, you can't suddenly chastise the man and his supporters for a crime they have yet to commit.

And as for Nevada, come on, if that doesn't reek of the establishment trying to rig things so Clinton avoids an embarrassing loss, I don't know what does. They effectively changed the rules on the spot and discarded Sanders supporters without reason. Sanders supporters have every right to be furious. Now, if any of them stupidly act out in violence, that's on them and doesn't say anything about the nearly half of Democratic primary voters supporting the guy or the man himself (who would never condone such violence).

Passions will run high with candidates that actually inspire passion.

 

[LuckyNumber7]

Obviously not all Sanders supporters are throwing chairs in Nevada.

But it stands to reason that, at this point in the campaign, when he mathematically cannot win, those remaining passionate about a candidacy that cannot happen are a bit more untethered and angry and, likely, awash in fist-in-the-air social media.

I don't think Bernie should get out. Yet. But if the report in the NYT from yesterday is to be believed, that he is willing to damage HRC in order to advance his own agenda and transform a party he was never a member of until last year, he IS helping Trump and he is putting himself before what's best for the country. I sincerely hope he's not taking the privileged whiter-than-white Susan Sarandon view that a Trump presidency would be "good" for the American left.

It's a delicate balance. Does he really want to promote his more leftist views? Or does he actually want to damage Mrs Clinton? One does not necessarily require the other.

I don't think he owed it to back out when he couldn't mathematically win. He owes it to back out after California, when his message has reached the majority of the population. Or when Clinton clinches via combined delegates. Which are probably the same day.

I do think for now he is erasing the idea that he's running a campaign on an agenda, and getting his strongest word out there while acting as though he can still get the nomination. When it's locked for Clinton, he will concede.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Sanders needs something along the lines of 70% of the remaining delegates in order to squeeze by Clinton.

 

[BVS]

And as for Nevada, come on, if that doesn't reek of the establishment trying to rig things so Clinton avoids an embarrassing loss, I don't know what does. They effectively changed the rules on the spot and discarded Sanders supporters without reason. Sanders supporters have every right to be furious. Now, if any of them stupidly act out in violence, that's on them and doesn't say anything about the nearly half of Democratic primary voters supporting the guy or the man himself (who would never condone such violence).

Passions will run high with candidates that actually inspire passion.

Actually no, no rules were technically changed. Everything was done well within Nevada's convoluted primary rules. You can be furious all you want, but no you really don't have that right. This isn't the first time Sander's campaign staff has misinterpreted the rules in their favor in order to raise a stink.

 

[BEAL]

What I find odd is that his campaign hates the Super Delegates and yet don't mention that Sanders himself IS a super delegate. So he is a part of the establishment.

The rules, whether they are right or wrong, have been in place for years. Nothing changed for 2016.

 

[Irvine511]

It's not to be believed as it's been the most anti-Bernie/pro-Clinton rag of the bunch from Day One,

yeah, but no.

here's the actual article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/u...n-accuses-head-of-dnc-of-favoritism.html?_r=0

it's preposterous to view anything critical or counter of and to our own viewpoints is ultimately suspect and worthy of dismissal is positively cultish.

this "lies! lies!" mindset has plagued the right since the early 1990s and the rise of talk radio right up through the Bush years and the rise of Fox News where any sort of actual-yet-possibly-inconvenient information is automatically suspect. as is pushing the belief that entire organizations are in the tank for someone, or that people who disagree with you have the worst motives, or that a bunch of men sit in a room and twirl their mustaches, or that organizations have made collective decisions to promote Agenda A over Agenda B.

 

[Oregoropa]

Oregoropa's posts are a great example of why the right have a crush on Putin. He admits to being giddy about his Trump endorsement in one post, but then uses Putin to attack Obama in another. Every logical person knows this is a hypocrisy, but they simple don't care. They firmly grasp tight onto old Cold War fears, but don't bother enough to really understand why. It's just another dog whistle. But on the other hand they love his fake machismo, remember Trump was once aligned with the WWE, they love this shit. Posturing will win over content any day of the week with this crowd, and Putin is great at it. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT CONTENT. Plus for a crowd that is so anti-gay they really seem to love his pecs, that picture of him on the horse is equivalent to Fabio on 90's erotic novels.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Putin respects the strong horse


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[LuckyNumber7]

What I find odd is that his campaign hates the Super Delegates and yet don't mention that Sanders himself IS a super delegate. So he is a part of the establishment.

You can't be serious...

 

[BigMacPhisto]

yeah, but no.

here's the actual article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/u...n-accuses-head-of-dnc-of-favoritism.html?_r=0

It's an opinionated article with an extremely negative headline from a paper that has done everything in its power to hurt the Sanders campaign. I'm somebody who looks at things objectively and believes in the actual facts, but this is merely an editorial with a lot of speculation.

And even then, it doesn't even raise any interesting questions beyond wondering if Sanders is going to ask his supporters to get behind Clinton. To me, the key takeaway from all of this is that Clinton needs people like me more than we need her and we damn sure should make her actually work for her votes rather than just get in line and check the box.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

You can't be serious...

It's been grasping at straws like this for months now when it comes to the Clinton supporters. Nothing new here. I think a lot of them just feel overwhelmed when on the internet since like it's a 10-to-1 slant in favor of Sanders due to his large number of young and active supporters whereas Clinton's key constituencies are older voters that barely even use the internet. To them, it feels like the world has gone haywire and that a cult has taken over the party and OMG TRUMP GONNA WIN!!!!

When to the rest of us, we've had two solid candidates having some strong debates over policy specifics and what it means to be a progressive. As I said earlier, if the Democratic party just kowtowed to the fear mongers, we'd have never had President Clinton or President Obama and the person with the most name recognition would instantly win the primary by Super Tuesday every single time.

Just a big divide since the older voters and diehard party members are really into the Iraq War, no fly zones, fracking, Super PACs, minimum wage increases that max out at $12 and the like. I mean, they must be or else they wouldn't be getting behind someone they disagree with politically, right?

God, so many people in this thread love that fracking. It's a shame.

 

[BigMacPhisto]

Sanders needs something along the lines of 70% of the remaining delegates in order to squeeze by Clinton.

Again, nobody thinks he can do it and that dream literally died after the loss in New York. Of course Sanders isn't going to say it's over. He wants to maximize his political capital and get as many delegates as he can before the convention. What's so hard to understand about all of this?

 

[BigMacPhisto]

One thing that needs to be taken into account is that Clinton shouldn't expect ownership of the votes in November of a lot of people that voted for Sanders as many of them aren't even Democrats to begin with...you can make the argument that Sanders has brought millions into the fold as potential Democratic party voters in November that wouldn't have been there had he not been in the race. It may ultimately be extremely beneficial to Clinton in the general election.

And what timing:

The Hidden Importance Of The Sanders Voter | FiveThirtyEight

 

[BEAL]

You can't be serious...

What? That Bernie has taken part of a process that's been going on since the 80s, and only when he joins a race and starts gaining "momentum" he criticizes the process because it doesn't favor him.

The supers were strongly in favor of Clinton in 2008, and they switched over to Obama once he proved he could win swing states and his performance across the board with all voters (not just young, the middle class, and white)

The supers would have switched over to Bernie too had he not been beaten so badly in the south and the swing states. Bernie hasn't shown he can get the voting class needed to win a general election

No conspiracy, the numbers didn't add up in his favor.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Again, nobody thinks he can do it and that dream literally died after the loss in New York. Of course Sanders isn't going to say it's over. He wants to maximize his political capital and get as many delegates as he can before the convention. What's so hard to understand about all of this?

What is so hard to understand about the damage that's being caused by the Democratic party seemingly looking even more chaotic than the Republicans looked, and they nominated Donald Fucking Trump?

Does he have to drop out? No, he doesn't have to do anything.

But this election is too damn important to burn the house down over the platform of an ideologue not who want even in the party a year ago.

It's not just the looming international disaster of a Trump presidency. We can get over that. It's the Supreme Court. Too much is at risk to play around here.

If he can't win, which even you admit that he can't, he should be working to compromise with Clinton to ensure his message is forefront at the convention while bowing out gracefully and working to unite the party.

The fear of many is that he's not in this for compromise, that he's going to stay in through the party, never sit down and work things out with HTC and the DNC, and walk out after Philadelphia as a defacto third party liberal candidate, even if he doesn't run.

The consequences og which will be, to quote an asshole, uuuuuge.