The General American Politics Thread

[Patticus]

On 2/14/2016 at 0:35 AM, Blacklightning said:

I dunno about you guys, but I haven't been paying a whole lot of attention to the run up to the election. This is the first, maybe second video I've watched on it at all, and I just wanted to say it feels so cathartic to see Trump booed by a live audience. I think I really needed that in my week. XD

As cathartic as it is, Trump was the only one not lying through his teeth or pandering to the establishment.

 

Bernie and Hillary are tied in Nevada, according to polling (although polling in Nevada is notoriously unreliable, apparently):

Quote

According to Real Clear Politics, Clinton started off with a 46-point lead in the state. Two months ago a Gravis poll showed Clinton was leading by a comfortable 23-point margin in the state. A new poll by Target Point shows the two candidates are now virtually tied 45-45 percent, meaning there could be another very close caucus on hand.

http://reverbpress.com/politics/battlegrounds/bernie-sanders-surges-nevada-hillary-clinton-already-lowering-expectations/

It still don't expect him to win South Carolina though, and Super Tuesday's probably going to be a Hillaryfest too...

[Kuzu]

I don't think they'll help Clinton push too far ahead of Sanders, he's still got the young people on his side.

[MugiMikey]

5 hours ago, Cee said:

My problem with Bernie is how everyone depicts him as a fucking angel and for similar reasons young voters preferred Barack Obama.

You hit the nail on the head right there. Back when Bernie announced he was running, I didn't look too much into the details of it all but I liked what I heard. Shortly afterwards, I started to think about the possible consequences of what he wants to do, and it made me jump ship. I think Bernie is a nice guy with good intentions, but I don't exactly agree with everything he says. The way I see it, liberal & (especially) social media is portraying him as the perfect candidate for this election. They treat you like something is wrong with you if you don't support Bernie. I've seen people who genuinely do their research and I understand why Bernie is perfect for them, but most of the time it's just sheeple that base their opinions on what they see on social media.

For example, where I'm from it's best to keep your mouth shut if you don't support Bernie because you will lose friends. I almost lost a friend (who was not into politics prior to last fall) because of a debate he insisted on having and he knew nothing about Bernie... other than he wants to make college free and make the rich pay even more in taxes. All of his "sources" were Facebook memes and what he heard at his art college. It was awful.

[Patticus]

I'm not going to defend Sanders on every point you guys raise, I mean you've got some good points (some of his supporters can get nasty, which is sad), and I'm hoping to see them addressed by him over the coming months. Also, I really don't like his foreign policy team, half of which (listed on his campaign website) consists of a lot of people who either have never spoken to him, or have only in the briefest or least official sense, and cannot be considered the advisers the campaign portrays them as. If he looks like a serious contender after Super Tuesday, I'd hope that that situation might be resolved.

However, I've done some homework, taken the I Side With test etc, and found that most of my views do align with Sanders', with many also aligning with Hillary (though I have reservations about both). I like the guy and I like what he stands for, and even if he isn't destined to win, I hope he continues to keep hammering away at Clinton. He can at least push her to the left on some of the more important issues, and if he can snag 40%-ish of the delegates going into the convention (unheard of in recent Democratic convention history), he could change the party and America for decades to come even without becoming president - just as happened in 1948 to the Democrats.
 

16 hours ago, Cee said:

1. He's an outsider. He's not an outsider. He's been a politician for 40 years. I just don't think he's an elite. He's about as outsider as Sen. Lindsay Graham was.

He's not a political outsider, but he is a Democratic one, having spent the vast majority of his political life outside of either of the major parties.

16 hours ago, Cee said:

1. Marriage equality. Another smoke and mirrors. One of Hillary Clinton's greatest drawbacks is her firm standing for marriage equality (even though she voted against legislation to ban gay marriage years before) came in 2013. Bernie's came in.. 2009? Wait, hasn't everyone been saying he's always supported it? Oh.. he thought it was cool to have states decide until then? Right, okay.

Sanders wasn't the first to propose an end to DOMA, he didn't speak out publicly about supporting gay marriage until 2009, but he has been generally in favor of LGBTQ equality for some considerable time.

 

Quote

In 1983, as mayor of Burlington, he signed a Gay Pride Day proclamation calling it a civil rights issue. He was one of just 67 members in the House of Representatives to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act, a politically tough decision he prides himself on and points to as a key progressive bona fide. Sanders opposed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in 1993, another President Bill Clinton-era policy, and supported civil unions in Vermont in 2000.

http://time.com/4089946/bernie-sanders-gay-marriage/

His early opposition to anti-LGBT legislation was at the time stated as being due to his support of states rights, though, plus he didn't speak out for marriage equality until years after his mayoral successor and other colleagues did - the Time article goes into some detail on these points. His record and his evolving beliefs are obviously quite a lot more complicated than his campaign would have us believe (which is likely down to having to simplify a complex thing for debates and sound bites), but I think that that's probably the case for many American politicians anyway.

To me, it's not something to worry much about. He could have done more, said more, sure, but it's not as if he's been absent either.

[Candescence]

Bernie isn't perfect by any means, but he's principled, knows what his main focus is (whereas Clinton is all over the place in terms of trying to find things that stick, which is a bad sign) and has gone out of this way to ensure that his campaign isn't influenced by special interests through political donations. He may veer a bit closely towards being too focused on economic issues, but that's because he genuinely believes that various economic issues are the root of all sorts of other problems, and that solving those problems makes the symptoms much easier to fix.

Sure, I'll take Clinton over anyone in the GOP, but I really do believe Bernie has more potential to do good for the US. And barring an absolute disaster, I really think he can easily defeat any of the GOP candidates, who range from being utterly repulsive to the general population (Trump, Cruz, Rubio) to being laughably bland and uninspiring (Jeb).

[Patticus]

If Hillary finds herself alone on the campaign trail after March, we'll probably see her campaign's messaging become a good deal clearer as she hones her presidential campaign messaging. She'll have to work her ass off to draw in the kind of youth support Sanders enjoys, though, and with all the money he's raking in, he has staying power well beyond good primary results.

We might have two open conventions this year, and if Trump and Sanders score highly enough there, both parties could be completely reshaped going forward. We're moving into uncharted waters, and it's incredibly exciting.

[Tornado]

I sure am glad Ted Cruz is around. Without him I wouldn't have ever known that a slightly left leaning Supreme Court has the judicial power to allow UNLIMITED ABORTIONS.

[Patticus]

That puts me in mind of this old Simpsons clip:

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!

Ted Cruz is a frightening man, but he's keeping Jeb and Rubio in check, so I'm okay with his presence. For now, anyway.

[Candescence]

Here's my biggest problem with Clinton: I don't trust her to keep her election commitments. She's deeply tied to big business money, she lacks focus on issues and tries to throw new things at the wall in hopes that they will stick, and she's very much a weathervane on tons of issues, all of which together is an extremely bad thing for a politician. Sanders, I can trust to actually stick to his guns, congressional opposition be damned, but Hillary? I'd rather take her over anyone in the GOP by a country mile, but I absolutely do not trust her until she actually acts on her promises instead of falling back into being a blue dog democrat, which is not what voters want from the Democrats.

And the problem with electing someone who says one thing but does another is that you risk voters getting pissed off and voting for the other party. That's a huge part of why, down here, Tony Abbot lost his prime ministership after just a little less than two years after being forced out of office by his own party, because his numerous broken promises, among other things, threatened a landslide defeat at the next election.

[Patticus]

About Hillary's election commitments: To my mind she has, at least in the debates, been wording many of her statements on various issues in pretty vague terms; vague enough to allow her to easily slip out of keeping any commitments that she might appear to make. You know, commitments perhaps made in the heat of a debate, pandering to a certain crowd. Those commitments in her central policy platform I would not expect to see broken, however - the problem many have with them is that they don't go far enough.

Now, I don't doubt that she has been forced leftward in a very real sense by Sanders' surprisingly effective campaign, to the point that she'll have to attend to some of her vague semi-approvals of his policies once in office, just in order to be a viable second term president. I just have that same feeling you do - that she'll back out of anything that's not in her campaign platform, and go easy on some points within it.

She won't be a bad president, but she won't be all we want from the next Democrat either.

[Candescence]

Clinton wins Nevada, though with a much closer margin than she did in 2008.

Jeb is out of the race. And then there were five.

[Patticus]

Democrats in Nevada: With 91.3% reporting in, Hillary wins with 52.6%, with Bernie following hot on her well worn heels at 47.4%.

Thoughts: Hillary Clinton's campaign has been working Nevada for just under a year now. Sanders is the relative latecomer, his campaign only arriving last October, and given the diversity of the state as a whole, Hillary was always expected to do well here. The state was dubbed her "Western Firewall" against Sanders' success, and this caucus was to be the true test of how well she could hold onto minorities, and how well Sanders could rob her of them.

So yes, Hillary won, congratulations on a well fought campaign and all that, but the results were probably a lot closer than her campaign would like - just 5.2% in it, which gives him some momentum as we head toward Super Tuesday. Even so though, going forward into South Carolina next week, I don't think Hillary is worrying at all - she stands to win that state easily, particularly as she dominated with African American voters in Nevada.

Super Tuesday comes soon after that, which will see her win more states, and him also, but on the whole things are looking good for her again after a worrying few weeks. Her challenge now will be to try to woo back disaffected minority voters, and to try reclaiming the swathes of young and female voters long since lost to Sanders.

Sanders' challenge at this point is going to be to woo more minority voters while securing his leads in the majority white states he's going to need as we move closer to the convention. I personally can't see him winning the nomination, America's electorate demographics are just not the right makeup for that right now, but if he can get a high enough percentage of delegates, he won't need to. Via the Minority Report, provided his delegate count is sufficiently large, we could conceivably relive the 1948 convention, with Sanders reshaping the party and country for generations to come.


Republicans in South Carolina: With 82% reporting in, Trump wins it with 33%, Rubio trails in second with 22%, with Cruz following closely at 21%. Bringing up the rear were Bush at 8% - causing him to drop out of the race, as previously mentioned - Kasich at 7%, and Carson at a lowly 6%.

Thoughts: The only reason why Trump has done so well is that his competition - primarily Cruz and Rubio, but also partly Jeb - have been splitting the traditional/evangelical votes. Once Cruz or Rubio drops out, which seems unlikely this side of March, we might see Trump getting a veritable whipping as the sole non-Trumpian survivor sees the traditional base rallying behind him.
 

Edit: Allegations of foul play are being leveled at the Clinton campaign.

Quote

 

Hillary Clinton’s campaign is attempting to trick Bernie Sanders supporters in Nevada into voting for Clinton by disguising themselves as nurses affiliated with the National Nurses United union (NNU), which has thrown its support behind Sanders.

NNU executive director RoseAnn DeMoro caught Clinton staffers red-handed changing from blue Hillary Clinton campaign shirts into red shirts of the same shade as the red shirts NNU members are wearing, in an apparent attempt to confuse voters:

 

The shirts Hillary’s campaign workers are wearing are nearly identical to the shirts NNU nurses wear on the campaign trail with Bernie:
 

The t-shirt dupe was reported just after precincts opened for today’s Nevada caucus, which may very well shape the entire trajectory of the remaining Democratic primaries and caucuses. The stakes for Bernie Sanders couldn’t be higher, as a win in a state like Nevada, with prominent Latino representation, would prove his viability with voters of color.

This is just the latest in a series of questionable tactics the Hillary Clinton campaign has engaged in during the week leading up to the Nevada caucus. Earlier this week, ABC News confirmed an instance of push polling, which, as Las Vegas-based author Nolan Dalla pointed out in a recent viral blog post, comes straight from the Karl Rove playbook of dirty campaign tricks. A push poll is when someone masquerading as an independent pollster calls a voter leaning toward the opposing candidate, and asks them a series of questions meant to cast doubt on the opposing candidate. While this in itself seems harmless, Dalla explained the insidious nature of push polling:

Quote

What makes this so reprehensible is that many voters will not be able to discern truth from fiction.  They will conclude the “poll” feeling they were important enough to receive a phone call mistakenly believing they were asked fair questions and then were left with lingering doubts about the viability of Bernie Sanders as a presidential candidate.

Bernie Sanders supporters on Reddit are documenting any and all instances of fraudulent behavior and dirty tricks in Nevada, and are encouraging caucus-goers to document and report any suspicious behavior in [url=https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/46pzhb/to_all_nevada_caucus_goers_report_in_the/]this thread

http://usuncut.com/politics/clintons-campaign-just-got-busted-impersonating-union-nurses-in-nevada/

This doesn't look good, particularly given the likelihood of Clinton winning the nomination. The GOP will use these incidents as proof of their "rampant voter fraud" narrative, and will be able to legitimately pin it on the Clinton campaign.

[TailsTellsTales]

I kind of lost interest in election since it appears Sanders not going to win. He was the first presidential candidate in my life that I actually wanted to vote "for" instead of picking the best of the worst. Oh well it looks like President Trump will win. At least he is not bought. Clinton however I feel is bought by wall street ie super pac.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

I may not know that much about American politics but I do want to say that it would be nice to see a woman become president. It would be very uplifting for women all across the country and maybe changes will be done to ensure we are systematically equal. 

[Patticus]

On 2/23/2016 at 7:19 PM, TailsTellsTales said:

I kind of lost interest in election since it appears Sanders not going to win. He was the first presidential candidate in my life that I actually wanted to vote "for" instead of picking the best of the worst. Oh well it looks like President Trump will win. At least he is not bought. Clinton however I feel is bought by wall street ie super pac.

That's what I fear a Hillary win will do to the youth of the nation, which hasn't been so excited about a candidate since Obama in 2008. The Democrats need an excited, energized voting youth to carry several swing states, and I worry that it just won't happen this time.

Worse still for Sanders, many of the primaries over the next couple of weeks happen on Spring Break, which means many young voters won't be around when his campaign needs them the most. They'll be off partying in Cancun or Florida, or binge watching Netflix on their parents' couches.

That said though, he has managed to astound the nation's political scene by creating the biggest grass roots funding machine the country has ever known - beating even Obama '08. He has the ability to fight Hillary all the way up to the convention - and that's going to be amazing to watch, even if he doesn't win. Hillary just needs a means of generating that same level of hype.

EDIT: Apparently, voter registration led to Nevada's GOP caucus becoming a total shitstorm. I've heard reports of people double voting for Donald Trump, and there are pictures floating around of supposedly neutral ballot workers wearing his goddamn hats and shirts.
 

http://www.redstate.com/dan_mclaughlin/2016/02/23/nevada-gop-caucus-looks-like-voter-fraud-bonanza/

This is about to get real ugly.

Edit Again:

French National Front founder Jean-Marie Le Pen has endorsed Trump:

"If I was American I'd vote for Donald Trump… May God bless him!" Le Pen said on Twitter on Saturday.

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160228/1035502858/jean-marie-le-pen-endorses-trump.html#ixzz41VDkGHki

Donald Trump: Not racist, but #1 with racists.


Diagnosis: Bernie

Legendary actor Dick Van Dyke just endorsed Democratic Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders.

Why is this important? Well for a couple reasons. For one Van Dyke is 90 years old and because he has been around and in the entertainment industry for 70 plus years he has seen his fair share of corruption and chicanery inside and outside of the industry, and maybe more importantly this is the first presidential candidate Van Dyke has felt passionately enough about to publicly endorse in almost 50 years.

Another important message that can be seen as a positive for the Sanders campaign is that this runs counter to the theory that Sanders is a millennial candidate who only appeals to the young and has nothing to offer the over 60 crowd. With the endorsement of Van Dyke, many older voters may take a second look at Sanders.

In a video released this past week Van Dyke said,

In Bernie Sanders I see a man saying that the emperor has no clothes, while everyone around him insists they see clothes. Whether or not he makes it to the White House, I hope and pray that everyone hears the alarm he is sounding now, it may be the last voice we ever hear.

A grim warning coming from such a beloved actor, known almost exclusively for his slapstick comedy. With Sanders’ popularity growing and as he slowly breaks free of the self-applied label of “Democratic Socialist” that has turned off so many older voters, Van Dyke’s endorsement may just be the legitimacy Sanders needs.

http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/politics/comedy-legend-dick-van-dyke-publicly-endorses-his-first-candidate-in-50-years/

Well, that's just supercalifragilisticexpialidemocraticsocialism.

Edited February 29, 2016 by Patticus

[Kevin]

In regards to Domald Trump, John Oliver did a great take down of him on Last Week Tonight.

Right now I'm viewing Trump's momentum with nervous laughter. I say this because I first I thought his campaign was a complete joke and thought he's would t win in a million years. But now that America is seriously toying with a candidate who've said things that would normally end any politicians political careers, I hope that even if he wins in nomination, he won't win the general election.

[Tailikku]

#MakeDonaldDrumpfAgain

[SenEDDtor Missile]

21 hours ago, Aoi said:

When I watched that John Oliver sketch, I actually started crying. How could level headed Americans vote for someone who has a battle strategy of, "Go kill the innocent children and mothers of the terrorists. Then they'll pay attention"? Obviously in countries where children or women have no power too and to threaten slaughtering them for what the men of their family ascribe to?

It's deplorable. I can't believe it's happening in my lifetime. 

It's easy/easier to do horrible things or agree with horrible things when one has probably dehumanized those women and children. Us vs Them at the core of it.

[Tornado]

Man, Romney sure is more handsome than Trump. 

[shdowhunt60]

Anybody watching the Fox News Republican Debate, it's glorious. Everyone, including the moderators, is savagely ripping Trump a new one.

[Patticus]

35 minutes ago, shdowhunt60 said:

Anybody watching the Fox News Republican Debate, it's glorious. Everyone, including the moderators, is savagely ripping Trump a new one.

He's been threatening to go independent again today, thanks to the recent attacks by the establishment. If he does, and Bloomberg remains out of the race, then the GOP's chances this November are smaller than "Lil Marco."

Oh and that penis size shit... purile, so purile. Entertaining as fuck, mind you.

[Patticus]

53 minutes ago, SpikySprinter said:

Hillary is the most toxic, evil person in American politics. She has gotten dissenters assassinated. She has gotten people killed in Benghazi. She has silenced the many victims of Bill Clinton's disgusting 1980s sexual abuse incidents. And now she's a felon. Democrats, do not nominate this thing. 

I've heard others referring to this assassination thing, but I've never seen any proof. Got any? I mean, such a huge allegation (which is sure to come up given that she's the presumptive nominee at the moment) must have some serious evidence backing it up, and so far my Googling only seems to be coming up with conspiracy websites.

As for Benghazi, she committed no wrongdoing, and that's what the GOP-lead congressional investigations bear out. I mean, if anyone has a motive for throwing the book at her, it's a congressional GOP investigatory committee... And if she gets shit for that, where's the shit for Dubya and the 66 lives lost in attacks on embassies during his tenure, the potentially hundreds of soldiers' bodies burned in secret without familial consent?

I can't comment on Bill's sex life during the 1980s, but that's also sure to be delved into some more once the nominees have been formally chosen.

No, Clinton isn't a felon until or unless she is convicted of a crime. Now, you can argue that she broke laws regarding this or that, which may lead to an indictment, but until then-classified material is found, not just retroactively-classified material, she's not a felon.


I'd argue that the most toxic, evil thing in American politics is money.

[Treacher]

On 3/4/2016 at 1:27 AM, SpikySprinter said:

Addressing all of those is just something that I don't have the energy to do anymore. I was just giving my two cents on where I'm at, which is basically "anyone but Hillary." 

I will say this, because it's the most important point and the only one it takes for me to wish her a complete political failure: A number of people, including prominent feminists such as Lena Dunham, have expressed disgust and/or disappointment at the evidence that she's been covering Bill's ass not just on infidelities, but sexual abuse. Groping and rape, specifically. Hillary has done next to nothing to counter these claims, and when she tried to pin Trump for sexism, he hit back by reminding people about those allegations. And she said nothing and just let the feud die. 

This is very similar behavior to that which Cosby displayed a year ago. 

Is this one of the things you're referring to?:

https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/684822324227379200

https://twitter.com/dylanmatt/status/684843555551096833

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/668597149291184128

If this is truly legit, she could very well face a rocky road ahead of her in the race for the presidency. No doubt people are going to go mad with accusations flying everywhere the sooner we get to Election Day, and it will be quite the show how the candidates will respond once they're hammered with them.

[Nepenthe]

I'm not sure Lena Dunham is the best source for sexual assault claims when she's been in trouble for making these same accusations on rocky grounds...and did sexual acts on her sister when they were kids and doesn't seem all that ashamed for it.

But this is regardless of the fact that I would rather have someone in office who may or may not he involved in sordid affairs than anyone from the party blatantly and provably courting the amount of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and petty obstructionism they always do. Even with Hilary at the head of the party right now, anyone who would vote for a Republican- especially Trump- at this stage in the party's life obviously does not give a fuck about the quality of life of anyone who isn't a minority.

[Patticus]

Just to get it out of the way: Trump has again wiped the floor with Cruz et al in Idaho, Michigan and Mississippi.

On the Democratic side. Clinton won Mississippi with ease, as was expected, but Sanders may be about to re-write the story of these primaries again in the north!

http://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/michigan

With 80.7% of the votes counted, Sanders is leading in Michigan at 50.3% to Clinton's 47.7% (just 29,000 votes separate the two). If that holds (which it may very well not) it would be a huge upset.

Win or lose though, for a recently unknown democratic socialist Senator from Vermont to do battle with a political heavyweight of Clinton's caliber and last so long is an achievement deserving of great admiration too.

Edit: With 84.9% counted, Sanders' lead has narrowed to 49.9% to Clinton's 48.1% - 17,000 votes now separate them. I guess the more heavily African American counties must be getting counted now. What a nail biter! I'll be gutted if he loses, as it may color the rest of the month.

Edit: 88.1% counted, Sanders is up to 50.4% to Clinton's 47.7%. Fucking hell this is tense!

Final Edit: With over 90% of the votes counted, Sanders is still looking like the winner - the AP has called it for him, in fact - but it's very close.

Somehow though, even if he wins, their delegate counts will be tied at 63 apiece.