2016 US Presidential Election Pt. IV - Page 45 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-05-2016, 05:07 PM   #881
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
Now we see the email thing being absolute political hitjob. Not only did they admit it being a political hitjob, but we know she didn't break any set rules, laws, or stray from precedence of Sec of States before her.
Since when is the FBI a political organization or the government confirming a week ago that there were over twenty e-mails classified as Top Secret in the most recent batch? There's zero politics behind it, but it's convenient for Clinton to say that there happens to be (although she can't blame the Republicans on this one so she chalks it up to an agency dispute).

Benghazi? Sure, that's absolute nonsense. But Clinton's e-mail situation still isn't resolved in the slightest and she continually changes her story once new facts emerge and prove the previous story wrong.
__________________

BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:12 PM   #882
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregoropa View Post
I can buy that
Also, at this point in the 2008 campaign (just before the NH primary which was in early January), Barack Obama trailed Clinton by 22 points according to the RCP average. Post-New Hampshire, he trailed Clinton by around 6 points (as Sanders does in that recent poll). He then trailed her by about 10 points up until right before Super Tuesday.

As of right now, Sanders is averaging about 13 points behind Clinton with Super Tuesday being a month away and potential boosts from New Hampshire and possibly Nevada wins still to come.
__________________

BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:13 PM   #883
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,858
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Progressives don't vote for the Iraq War.

Progressives don't wait to support gay rights and the blocking of the Tar Sands pipeline and TPP until it's politically popular to do so.

Progressives don't say they support universal health care without trying to obtain universal health care.

Progressives aren't war hawks.

Progressives don't call themselves moderates if they're in a swing state or queue up a fake Southern accent if they're in the lower half of the country.

Progressives don't say they're anti-Citizens United, yet have a Super PAC.

Progressives don't say they'll reform Wall Street without immediately attempting to break up the banks.


People don't consider Clinton authentic because of her constantly fluctuating opinions on the issues to whatever suits her. She has never actually been a liberal candidate in the slightest. Nor can we really trust her to deliver on progressive policies when her husband signed NAFTA, the repeal of Glass-Steagall and drastically cut welfare.

Finally, her "liberal group" endorsements are mostly hot air. Planned Parenthood for example. That was a top-down endorsement from the leader of PP who happens to have worked for the Clintons in the 90s and whose daughter is working on the Clinton campaign. If you investigate further as a lot of left-leaning sites did, you'll find that most of the organizations that have endorsed Clinton have come from the top-down rather than a vote and they're almost always headed by someone with extremely close Clinton connections.

Clinton's core support system happens to be people voting nearly out of name recognition and/or fear that Bernie is unelectable. That's it. Most of them are old, uninformed and scared that one of these Republican clowns could actually win (no chance). There is nothing that any true liberal gets out of a Clinton Presidency that Sanders couldn't do better. And again, she will NOT get shit done either with a Republican congress. Unless of course she plans to sign conservative legislation like her husband did in the second half of his Presidency.



So you're saying she's a PINO.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:16 PM   #884
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
his voting for deregulation of credit default swaps
You are aware that Sanders voted for something along those lines just that one time, correct? And you are aware that Bill Clinton signed that bill into law, no?
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:19 PM   #885
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
So you're saying she's a PINO.
Never been a progressive or liberal by any liberal's standard. Ask anybody on the far left and they'll say the Clintons are moderates and they'll have told you the same thing from the 90s through today. She's only now trying to define herself as one so she can win the damn primary as she never took up that term to describe herself up until recently.

Bernie hasn't shifted the definition of the term. It's just that the definition would never cover the Clintons in the slightest. And yes, most Democratic members of congress can't be described as progressives as they are far too entrenched with the special interests and corporations that fund their campaigns. Not all of them, mind you, but certainly most of those in the Senate can't be described as liberal because of that.

And Sanders is hardly anything new in feeling the need to run against a corporatist Democratic party...I'm sure the names Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich will ring bells around here.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:21 PM   #886
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,380
Local Time: 06:19 AM
This thread desperately needs Uncle Joe to jump in.

Bluer White is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:21 PM   #887
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
That is absolute nonsense about gay people. She has by far the strongest support of any candidate from the gay community. Are they all just being duped? I don't think so.
Well, they are being duped since Clinton didn't come out in favor of gay marriage until it was about to be legalized nationwide...plenty on the left have supported it for years and even decades. Once the public polling finally reached above 50% in favor of same sex marriage, that's when Clinton decided it would be beneficial to come out in support.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:22 PM   #888
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,858
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Your posts underscore the fundamental circularity of the political spectrum for me.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:36 PM   #889
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Well, this is kind of a big deal...latest Quinnipiac poll has Sanders behind Clinton by only 6 points...they began conducting that poll before the Iowa caucus.



The last national poll from that same firm? December 21st with Clinton holding a 31 point advantage.



Again, I have to ask why so may people think Bernie's chances are improbable when he continues to close the gap with Clinton. If he could gain 25 points on her in about a month, then what's 6 more by Super Tuesday a month from now?

I think he excites young voters, but will they come out?
Some Dems will just stay home because they know 90% of his platform is impossible and his age scares them.

But I think the biggest factor against him is the other side, last time they had a huge turnout against someone they framed as a socialist, what will they do when he actually is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Progressives don't vote for the Iraq War.

Progressives don't wait to support gay rights and the blocking of the Tar Sands pipeline and TPP until it's politically popular to do so.

Progressives don't say they support universal health care without trying to obtain universal health care.

Progressives aren't war hawks.

Progressives don't call themselves moderates if they're in a swing state or queue up a fake Southern accent if they're in the lower half of the country.

Progressives don't say they're anti-Citizens United, yet have a Super PAC.

Progressives don't say they'll reform Wall Street without immediately attempting to break up the banks.


People don't consider Clinton authentic because of her constantly fluctuating opinions on the issues to whatever suits her. She has never actually been a liberal candidate in the slightest. Nor can we really trust her to deliver on progressive policies when her husband signed NAFTA, the repeal of Glass-Steagall and drastically cut welfare.

Finally, her "liberal group" endorsements are mostly hot air. Planned Parenthood for example. That was a top-down endorsement from the leader of PP who happens to have worked for the Clintons in the 90s and whose daughter is working on the Clinton campaign. If you investigate further as a lot of left-leaning sites did, you'll find that most of the organizations that have endorsed Clinton have come from the top-down rather than a vote and they're almost always headed by someone with extremely close Clinton connections.

Clinton's core support system happens to be people voting out of name recognition and/or fear that Bernie is unelectable. That's it. Most of them are old, uninformed and scared that one of these Republican clowns could actually win (no chance). There is nothing that any true liberal gets out of a Clinton Presidency that Sanders couldn't do better. And again, she will NOT get shit done either with a Republican congress. Unless of course she plans to sign conservative legislation like her husband did in the second half of his Presidency.

This is probably true, but I guess the question is does one go with pragmatism and get things done or idealism and get very little done?

Does the libertarian keep voting libertarian knowing they're giving their vote to the other side, or do they compromise and vote for the one closest to their ideals that may have a chance?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:39 PM   #890
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,985
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hewson View Post
Are you missing something here Irvine? Or just messing with LN7?

I think he's been hitting the nail on the head about my view on women the whole time. Simply put, I'm not a fan.
LuckyNumber7 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:43 PM   #891
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
You won't get anything done with pragmatism in this case. Clinton will have a Republican House, so she won't be able to pass leftist legislation. It's that simple and it's the same problem Obama has faced throughout his Presidency...

So, if you're screwed either way, why not have Bernie in there who will take things further to the left in terms of executive orders, court appointments, etc? Makes sense to me.

Also, Sanders' plan to have millions marching in the streets demanding, say, a minimum wage increase is at least an attempt to try and persuade Republican legislators. Clinton will just throw up her hands, blame the GOP and then move on to accomplishing nothing.

And, again, I don't trust Clinton to not sell out the social welfare net just to say she accomplished something in her Presidency...Bill did this with welfare reform and I can just imagine the Wall Street funded Mrs. Clinton deciding to agree with Republicans to raise the age for Social Security, for example.

And then there's foreign policy...Clinton voted for the Iraq War. 'Nuff said.

And again, Clinton voted for the Iraq War. It burned her eight years ago and I hope it burns her again. Thousands of American lives lost with plenty of Democrats voting for the catastrophe because it was the politically opportunistic thing to do at the time. Nothing can ever erase that disregard for morality.



Also, the article I was referring to earlier was in error. In fact, that Quinnipiac poll actually has Sanders down by only 2 points according to both the poll itself and everywhere else it's been plastered (news articles, FiveThirtyEight, etc.)...that truly is remarkable and it also shows that the general public really doesn't start paying attention until the primaries are actually under way.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:45 PM   #892
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,858
Local Time: 06:19 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Pt. IV

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
I think he's been hitting the nail on the head about my view on women the whole time. Simply put, I'm not a fan.


You know, you can always disagree with me on anything, including whatever tone or assumptions you think are implicit in my posts. I think I'm fairly reasonable to debate with. No need to be evasive.

To my knowledge, you've never come out on this forum, nor do you draw from personal experience as a source for your political stances (as I do).
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 05:48 PM   #893
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,351
Local Time: 05:19 AM
Also, that same touted Quinnipiac poll had more national matchups...

Sanders beats Trump by 10 points, Ted Cruz by four and ties Marco Rubio.

Clinton beats Trump by 5 points, ties Ted Cruz and loses to Rubio by 7 points.


And net favorability nationwide? Trump is at negative 25, Clinton at negative 17 while Sanders and Rubio have positive points at 9 and 14 respectively. I really think Rubio as the nominee is someone to worry about and there is an off-chance that Latinos flock to his cause which could really tip the balance.


It's just like 2008 all over again where Clinton tried to say she was more electable yet every poll showed Obama doing better in head-to-head matchups. Sanders absolutely kills with independents who don't belong to either party (they made up a huge share of his Iowa "tie" and are making up a huge chunk of his NH polling support). People trust the guy and that matters a lot.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 06:25 PM   #894
Blue Crack Addict
 
Vlad n U 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 28,384
Local Time: 07:49 PM
A question, what do Hillary fans/supporters make of her admiration for Henry Kissinger?

(Even if I was even mildly sympathetic to Hillary, that would have been more than enough for me to oppose her.)
Vlad n U 2 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 07:23 PM   #895
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,826
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
You know, you can always disagree with me on anything, including whatever tone or assumptions you think are implicit in my posts. I think I'm fairly reasonable to debate with. No need to be evasive.

To my knowledge, you've never come out on this forum, nor do you draw from personal experience as a source for your political stances (as I do).
If I am aware of it, I think you just haven't paid close enough attention.
I only venture into the dedicated thread when there's some big news/discussion like the Indiana stuff last year and I've known for quite some time.
Hewson is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 07:27 PM   #896
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,826
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Clinton loses to Rubio by 7 points.


.
More and more I get the sense that this is where we're heading.
Hewson is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 07:30 PM   #897
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,858
Local Time: 06:19 AM
I guess I missed it.

Though I don't know how relevant to the discussion at hand it actually is. Gays can disagree on the credibility of the "evolution" of democrats on LGBT issues. It seems that the issue was more with me and whatever my perceived posting style is rather than with HRC.

Perhaps it's because I do feel like I'm a solo voice in here that my posts come off more sweeping than intended.

That also doesn't make me incorrect.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 07:33 PM   #898
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,826
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Perhaps it's because I do feel like I'm a solo voice in here that my posts come off more sweeping than intended.

.
I think that was his main point, not necessarily who was right or wrong.

Anyway lets get back to discussing how punchable Ted Cruz' face is.
Hewson is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 07:41 PM   #899
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,858
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hewson View Post
I think that was his main point, not necessarily who was right or wrong.



Anyway lets get back to discussing how punchable Ted Cruz' face is.


Gay or not, my small disagreements still stand.

I also think that characterizing my posts as speaking for all gay people, everywhere, is entirely unfair.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-05-2016, 08:34 PM   #900
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,380
Local Time: 06:19 AM
Identity politics

Identity division
__________________

Bluer White is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×