DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
why do you seem to think every politician is always a cunthair away from federal charges?
2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII
- Thread starter LuckyNumber7
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
why do you seem to think every politician is always a cunthair away from federal charges?
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Yes
But Irvine seems to be having selective memories this time around.
Oregoropa
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Haha. It doesn't even have to be HRC to cause a kerfluffle. Huma or Chelsea could be indicted. The whole narrative has yet to play itself out. Comey and scores of others could resign in protest over Lynch blocking any requests. On the next episode of 'As the Election Turns'
DaveC
Blue Crack Addict
and while we're at it let's dig up nixon's skeleton and indict him, too
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Is this what Breitbart is telling you now? That Chelsea is getting indicated?
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
OP
OP
LuckyNumber7
Blue Crack Addict
Oregoropa
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I've heard it in the wind of the right-side airwaves blogosphere. Chances are they will likely go for Huma. I own predictit.org penny stocks in Biden and Warren being the D-Nominee. I expect it to be HRC all the way. But when the speculation hits at some point and those numbers bump up, I'll sell off at at 300% profit, before things settle back down.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Nixon got a blanket pardon from Ford
It would not surprise me if Obama gives one to crooked Hillary
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
She was closer throughout 2008 than Sanders has ever been or will ever be.
Sanders might win the general. But at this time in 2008 no one had ever heard of Jeremiah Wright. Or William Ayers.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Right. Because Sanders built an early lead in the caucus states and once again Hillary is playing catch up because history is repeating itself.
Yup. There are always skeletons, both faux outrage and real, that come out in the general election.
At this time we know basically everything about Clinton. We know very little about Bernie.
Curious to see what comes out about Trump that hasn't been used by the GOP
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Bluer White
New Yorker
Hope springs eternal.
Oregoropa
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Only if you watched-listened to Hannity
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Actually, it should be interesting. There's been whisperings on certain right wing websites. Nothing would matter to his base; he is not conservative, he is not Christian, and at one time or another he is everything they railed against in 2008. They like that he's white and hates the right people, this will not change. BUT in the general election it will be huge; his moral skeletons will spook off all the "christian" right folks that aren't in his corner, and the right skeleton if it exists would destroy what's left of his independent "crossover".
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Bernie is right!
The super delegates should be released..
That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.
It was all fine and dandy till now. Never seen so much whining....except from Trump
Bernie is a super delegate too. Maybe he should step down or not vote since they are all establishment
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Bernie is a super delegate too. Maybe he should step down or not vote since they are all establishment
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
deep
Blue Crack Addict
A tainted candidate, a shame the Dems didn't let Biden run.
BigMacPhisto
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2002
- Messages
- 6,351
That's just not true whatsoever. Bernie was known as the amendment king for attaching things he believed in to various bills before they were passed. Yes, his record is about the same as Clinton's in terms of getting major legislation they introduced passed...which would appear to be ineffective at first glance. But you have to remember that Republicans controlled the House for almost the entire time that Sanders was in there and the only time there's been truly complete party control while Sanders was in the Senate was from 2009 to the time that Scott Brown was elected. Sanders and Clinton being stonewalled by the Republican party doesn't really say much about the quality of their own agendas and it's certainly unfair to call Sanders a "fraud" when Clinton has been even less effective while a member of Congress.
And again, this thread stills has a lot of posters with a warped view of "compromise"...look, I know what you mean and we're pretty much all in agreement on that, but there's two sorts of compromise. The first is agreeing to get things done for the good of government...letting justices be nominated, passing a budget, etc. That's the kind of compromise that hasn't even existed lately thanks to Republican intransigence.
But when it comes to major bills, you are never, ever, ever, ever going to get the Republicans to agree on health care changes (of which they want none), abortion rights (of which they want none) and climate change (of which they don't believe). It's never going to happen unless that party suddenly changes its tune. Sanders isn't "my way or the highway" on this as he'd be willing to take any step in the right direction as was Clinton. Problem is, the GOP won't budge an inch. This sort of "compromise" discussion posted in here relentlessly is concerning something illusory that will never happen. Clinton is going to be just as useless as Sanders would be in this regard, and if Republicans keep up their tactics in delaying the essential functioning of government, Sanders or Clinton would be faced with the exact same situation that Obama has suffered through.
Last edited:
BigMacPhisto
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2002
- Messages
- 6,351
Yep. If only for this one issue alone, he should stick out to the convention. Drop the super delegates for good, Clinton automatically wins the nomination and we can get on with our lives knowing the Democratic primary results will now entirely depend on the voters.
deep
Blue Crack Addict
I also think she gets the nomination with primary voters. It just looks illegit if super delegates put her over, and adds fuel to the fire of insider fixing it.
BigMacPhisto
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2002
- Messages
- 6,351
I'd argue the exact opposite. Sanders has been an elected political figure for far longer. He has held consistent positions for decades unlike Clinton. He doesn't have millions of dollars in speaking fees and hundreds of millions of dollars in a global fund along with thousands of contacts around the world with which he's had closed door meetings.
And I'm not trying to throw together some Clinton conspiracy theories here. I'm just saying that Sanders has been the same guy for decades while Clinton has tons of involvement in things that aren't remotely transparent including her State department work.
Had Sanders been the nominee, I think there's nothing in his personal or political past that Republicans really could have used against the guy. It would have just been a lot of smear tactics and calling him a Socialist a lot. Whether or not you think Clinton is shady, it's certainly extremely easy to paint her as such.
BigMacPhisto
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2002
- Messages
- 6,351
She's the legitimate nominee if she has a pledged delegate majority though. I mean, that's enough to say she won the voters because it entails that she did in fact with with the voters.
I think the big cart-before-the-horse problem with Sanders campaigners was all of that calling of the super delegates and such. It's completely a non-issue until the minute Sanders earns the undisputed pledge delegate majority, then we're left with a situation where roughly 300 Democratic big wigs could tilt it all to Clinton. Instead, we had tons of young people calling up these Super Delegates (most of whom could really give two shits about what the voters in their area support given that they all tripped over each other to announce their Clinton endorsements, even when their states overwhelmingly voted for Sanders) and essentially whining about something that was going to have no effect on the outcome of all of this given that Sanders was trailing by 200-300 delegates at the time.
BigMacPhisto
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2002
- Messages
- 6,351
I recall plenty of whining in 2008 from a campaign that went so far as to use race baiting tactics...
deep
Blue Crack Addict
How can you not smile at this.?
deep
Blue Crack Addict
Glenn Beck: Fast 1 day for God to help U.S.
The Lord has been petitioned
we will see what he decides
I think I know his answer
The Lord has been petitioned
we will see what he decides
I think I know his answer
Fuck Ted Cruz.
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
I've never seen so much whining about super delegates before, especially since the end result would remain unchanged.
But because it's Clinton this year...
Yeah.
But because it's Clinton this year...
Yeah.
I'll eat a steak instead.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
To be fair, she is a woman. It's difficult for many men -- especially older men -- to accept the legitimacy of a more powerful and accomplished woman. They often act as if she isn't there, and try to go above her head or behind her back and never afford her the courtesy and respect she'd be given if she were a man in her position.
And if she pushes back, if she were to respond aggressively as any man would in her position, well, what a bitch. Just like that man hater Lena Dunham.
- Status
Similar threads
