Aw c'mon Field! You know who's gonna win! The repubs is Trump and the dems is,is...the bernman xD, which means that trump will be president cos Bernmans too old! And plus, presidents really shouldn't wear Depends hehehe...so get ready for some casinos babayyy! xD
I'm with you PR, Bernie is going to get the nomination because I think Hillary is toast that's in large part to being a woman. I also think that means that a are thug will be the next President, it's just too bad Biden was too grief stricken to run. But if he could put something together before the Clinton lynching(I know, wishful thinking), that might save the day for the Dems in November.
I think in the end that the Dems will go with Hillary. Even though it will be a pragmatic, nose-holding move for the people at the leftward end of the party, and even though Hillary doesn't really excite anyone, I suspect she'll be viewed as the safer bet for the general election than Bernie, ultimately.
It's a harder call for the GOP side. In any normal election year, I'd have sworn they'd ultimately coalesce around a pro-greed, pro-war, establishment-type conservative, which this year appears to be Rubio. That's what typically happens. But this isn't a normal year at all. Trump was 3 points behind Cruz in Iowa, which is an extremely favorable (religiously right-wing) state for Cruz, and Trump's still absolutely creaming all the rest of them in national GOP polling.
So this may well be the year Republicans go full retard. I have come around to the belief that they really may shoot themselves in the nads and nominate Trump. Three cheers for bigotry! And then the general election will be a landslide for Hillary, boosting Democrats all the way down the ticket as an added bonus, as sane people rush to the polls to keep Trump out.
Hillary will win on the Democratic side. She has it locked up. Sanders is only a threat to her among affluent white progressives and college students. Working class whites, blacks, centrists, Democratic leaning independents, every other Democratic constituancy, including super delegates, belong to her.
Rubio will be the Republican nominee. Kardashian's supporters just don't participate at the levels polled. Take away about 20% of his polling and you're close to his actual level of support. Cruz doesn't wear well. Just as his college roomate told us months ago, the more you see of him the less you like him. Rubio is a natural. Smart, talented, excellent speaker (at least the first 6 times that you hear him repeat the same things word for word) and is becoming the establishment consensus of the establishment wing of the very establishment oriented Republican Party-especially it's money men.
Agree with Whitey's conspiracy, both races are locked up, Rubio has won the Repubs and Hilary the Dems. Rubio for all the reasons WC said, and Hilary because you cannot win the Democratic nomination without the African American vote, and Bernie is nowhere with that constituency.
I think Bernie knows all that course, he campaigns on because he wants to change the narrative - but it's a doomed effort. HC is if anything, even more conservative than Obama.
I am seeing John Kasich eventually taking the lead on the GOP side. For the democrats, Bernie Sanders. His message resonates across all ages and races (except maybe the billionaires?) and his integrity is a constant. His spouse is a social worker, while Hillary's is a sociopath. When it comes down to the wire, America just doesn't trust her.
It's a sad day for elections. When all of the candidates are tainted by scandal,and with the spectre of corruption hanging like a cloud over their heads threatening to rain down on them.
So as I read here I guess it's coming down to the lesser of several evils? xD Sad, sad. Aaah for the days of Camelot "Don't let it be forgot, that once there was a spot, for one brief shining moment, that was known as Camelot" (Quote Jackqueline Kennedy Bouvier)
Actually you can jump and yell and scream while pulling out your hair at the same time and gnashing your teeth! But the fact remains that like it or not, Trump is the only one without so many dubious past political dealings! So far anyway...and the only one promising Camelot! (Sorta :)
Maybe that's part of his appeal? Dunno...just asking...
Donald J. Trump lost Iowa because Canadians invaded Iowa to help their guy when. Donald J. Trump will win the Republican race and beat poor Hillary because Americans know Donald J. Trump will help them and make American great again. And besides, presidential elections are not decided by a coin toss.
"It's a sad day for elections. When all of the candidates are tainted by scandal,and with the spectre of corruption hanging like a cloud over their heads threatening to rain down on them."
Scandal? Not so much. Hillary's email "scandal" is a tempest in a teapot. Republicans are trying to make something out of nothing there. The only guy with any really serious scandalous baggage is Chris Christie, and I really don't see him as a contender, in any event. I expect he'll be dropping out of the race quite soon.
Corruption, on the other hand ... hell yes. But that's par for the course in our political system. Running for office requires groveling to a load of filthy rich people in return for campaign funding. Legalized corruption is the order of the day. And you're right, while most of Donald Trump's appeal is predicated on flag-waving patriotism and white grievance, there is a small part that is based on his claim to be free of the influence of "special interests" because, as a billionaire, he can afford to self-finance his campaign.
This claim, however, is utterly ridiculous if you think even a little bit hard about it.
First, it's untrue because he isn't totally self-financing -- he's raised plenty of cash from other rich people. He hasn't only spent his own money, not by a long shot.
Second, it's untrue because Trump himself IS a special interest. Even if he weren't raising cash from other rich people, he is a rich person himself, and has never, ever in his life shown the slightest interest in anyone beyond himself and his class of fellow greedy bastards. A Trump presidency would be a government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy. No backroom bribery is necessary to induce him to support plutocratic policies -- he already does support them!
This about as smart as buying a hungry lion to defend you from a pack of hyenas. Pro: The hyenas leave you alone. Con: The lion eats you.
Ok I get it now. I don't think 'The Left Has No Clothes' is an actual conservative poster. I think it's a parody account by a left-leaning person with a slightly odd sense of humour.
I think he (or she) is sending up far-Right views.
Whomever is the Democratic nominee, my guess right now is Bernie (too much baggage for Hildog), will win the WH. The electoral map doesn't look good for the gop, the Latino vote will be the key and the gop candidates tripping over themselves trying to out tough the other on immigration isn't helping. The Dem nominee will probaby choose a Latino running mate, maybe a Castro brother, and the deal will be sealed. All isn't lost on the gop side because they will have another autopsy and discover the same things they did the last two Presidential elections and finally truly become a party that embraces diversity, albeit grudginly. The young Bush in Florida will lead this new gop out of the ashes because he has the political DNA and is half Mexican.
BTW, we don't need the trolls because everyone knows what they're going to say....blah blah blah...plantation...blah blah blah...democrat masters...blah blah blah.
Yīshēng said... I'm with you PR, Bernie is going to get the nomination because I think Hillary is toast that's in large part to being a woman --
And of course a serial lying criminal who grossly mishandled classified documents and used one of the highest offices in the land to personally profit. Oh and she started an illegal war in Libya and got an ambassador killed.
Those appear to be her two biggest accomplishments. Got anything else?
She has a 40 year career of tawdry and nauseating scandals. If you want a woman to be President, why does it have to be the worst woman in the country?
Conservative republican here. I'll vote for Bernie over Rubio, because Bernie is better on immigration. I don't agree with his policies, but at least there is a chance he will put the interests of American citizens ahead of the desires of the globalist elite.
Hillary is the very embodiment of what is wrong with American politics. She is both as corrupt and as incompetent as any candidate for President we have seen. Rubio is a mannequin, ventriloquist dummy, ken doll, and sock puppet of the globalist oligarchy. He’s not smart but nice looking and good at memorizing his talking points. He is the perfect republican answer to Obama, with both advancing the globalist agenda at breakneck speed. (George Soros is 85/86 after all). Yes we are doomed if either wins.
The Ministry of Truth said... "This about as smart as buying a hungry lion to defend you from a pack of hyenas. Pro: The hyenas leave you alone. Con: The lion eats you."
I'm so fucking sick of these hyenas, as long as they get theirs first, I'll be happy.
If there's still a USA in existence in November, I'll vote for Bernie. I don't care if he's older than dirt, I'd rather look at him every day compared to the other choice/choices. I'm tired of the little penguin in a pants suit. Nodding, flapping arms, bloviating. Ahhhh, America!!!!!
Scandal? Not so much. Hillary's email "scandal" is a tempest in a teapot. Republicans are trying to make something out of nothing there.
9:15 AM ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I wasn't referring to the e mail thing,although it's bad enough what with everything so muddled with that situation, I think it's just not clear enough to be brushed off so lightly, unfortunately.
I was thinking more about what is said about her husband in regard to the distasteful matter of the industrial prison complex and how he was the author of that. And again, I'm not very versed in that matter either, just what I've read here and there,which has shocked me greatly 'cos I for one always liked him, and I never would have thought...so I'm thinking if I feel that way how many others are also? Even though it may have been her husband and not her,it still stains ya know...
But from where I'm sitting it actually doesn't look good for any of them on the both sides. But that's just my uneducated opinion so...It'll be fun to watch and see what develops anyway. I just hope the islands won't be too negatively affected,'cos we're about to sink...glub...glub...glub...
Whitey's Conspiracy said... Hillary will win on the Democratic side. She has it locked up.
I think you are off on the Dem side. None of the leaks would happen w/o WH knowledge – stakes are too high and Obama manages the left far more than he does the country. Obama is waiting for the optimal time to purge Clinton & co. Possibly after the Bern wins NH.
Rubio is the GOP plan to package Dubya like Obama – they are always behind in fashion and with the cool kids. This is the Bern’s true opening and the only plausible path for the left, as if will have a free hand to tap into the mood of anger /outsider. Rubio will blather about how optimistic he is and spend his TV time on vague platitudes on Liberty and the Horatio Alger myth. He will say what a great country this is that someone of his background will have a chance to be Prez. Once again GOP plays the patsy for the corporate class, and Obama smells like a rose for destroying the Clintons. GOP talking heads whine about how unfair media coverage is and how little credit they are getting for their historic nominee. Dems call Rubio a race traitor and the Hispanic lobby backs them up. The Bern recruits fake Indian and they channel the anger into a political revolution.
The SJWs, in full Stalin mode, aren’t going to let the country rest just b/c Obama has to vacate. Conservatives will believe it is all posturing and then be shocked that a piece of parchment doesn’t develop into a sentient being and put a stop to it. That’s where the fun really begins…
"I was thinking more about what is said about her husband in regard to the distasteful matter of the industrial prison complex and how he was the author of that. And again, I'm not very versed in that matter either, just what I've read here and there,which has shocked me greatly 'cos I for one always liked him, and I never would have thought...so I'm thinking if I feel that way how many others are also? Even though it may have been her husband and not her,it still stains ya know..."
Ah, well. I wouldn't call that a "scandal" in traditional terms. I'd call that bad policy.
There are two questions I tend to ask myself about the Clintons:
1) Were all of Bill's painful compromises with right-wingers in the '90s (NAFTA, financial deregulation, welfare reform, harsh anti-crime policies) necessary, given the political climate? I'm sure the Clintons would argue that they were. They'd say that Bill did the best that could have been achieved for the times, and an actual Republican would've been worse. That point is open for active debate.
2) Would a Hillary presidency be a repeat of Bill's, with a host of right-wing policies enacted along with some weaksauce left-wing measures that are supposed to ameliorate the damage (but largely don't)? Like you said, she is a different person, not a clone of her husband, and the political center of gravity has changed, so she swears up and down that she'd govern differently. But that doesn't mean everyone trusts her on this, which is why Bernie Sanders is in the race.
Of course, this is all probably moot. I think she'll probably be the Dem nominee, and the Republican candidate will unquestionably be someone horrifying, so I'll be forced to pull the lever for Hillary to keep out a loony.
"And you're right, while most of Donald Trump's appeal is predicated on flag-waving patriotism and white grievance, there is a small part that is based on his claim to be free of the influence of "special interests" because, as a billionaire, he can afford to self-finance his campaign."
The candidates run for election by donors, with voting just a linear expression of earlier won dollars. Imagine if the electoral college were decoupled entirely from the popular vote. Candidates would have no cause to consider even pissing on the plebes. They would grovel their appeals directly to the few true decision makers. And in ancient antiquity, this was precisely the process. Way back in the time of BT, Before Trump.
And here is a cartoon illustrating the absurdity of Trump posing as a valiant corruption fighter and champion of the common man who can't be bought by the special interests.
Somehow, the extreme illogicality of voting for an evil tycoon to protect you from other evil tycoons has escaped the sort of people who attend Trump's rallies. Then again, they are not exactly what I'd call deep thinkers.
It took a couple of years, but a Freedom of Information Request finally got the documents that prove the Obama Administration lied when it claimed it could not prioritize spending during a shutdown to avoid a default.
During the fights about the debt ceiling -- in 2011 and 2013 -- people who wanted to reduce spending noted, correctly, that a simple expiration of a government funding would not, in fact, trigger an immediate default on government debt.
The Obama Administration claimed it would, because they were trying to scare people to just give into them. (It worked.)
People like Veronica De Rugy said that that was preposterous, that the government had a fair amount of money (even with a spending shutdown) and could prioritize its payments to make sure the debt was paid off, to avoid that bad outcome.
Again, the Obama Administration lied and said that was impossible.
Not only was it possible-- they planned for it and wargamed it.
Well, as it turns out, documents subpoenaed by the House Financial Services Committee reveal that during the 2013 debt ceiling debate, "the Obama Administration is not only capable of prioritizing payments in case the nation's borrowing authority is not raised, it has run 'tabletop exercises' to prepare for such a contingency -- contradicting earlier public statements from Treasury officials."
Sanders has introduced a novel campaign strategy - responding directly and succinctly. In doing so he has raised the stakes. No doubt Clinton has the experience and intellect to be president, her plan for regulating financial institutions has been endorsed by respected economists such as Paul Krugman. But rather than laying her cards on the debate stage, she reverts to self-indulgent sleep-inducing politesse. No doubt Clinton is favored by the establishment and as such Sanders has an uphill battle. But is Clinton the best candidate to beat down the Big Red Machine? Keep in mind that one of the few things where most of us on both sides agree is that the country is on the wrong track. We obviously disagree on who is to blame for that, but no candidate radiates status quo more than Clinton. No doubt the town hall format is more conducive to Clinton than the debate format. And no doubt the vapid right wing candidate will attempt to frame it in terms of personal attacks. Unlike Sanders who has shown a strong enough personality to control the conversation and put it back on track, Clinton has shown no such aptitude or appetite. Keeping in mind the Reagan / Carter debate that was the turning point in that election, this is an important consideration, fairly or unfairly.
She has worked to pass the Children's Health Insurance Program as first lady, as secretary of state negotiated the START treaty with Russia to reduce the number of nuclear weapons, laid the groundwork for the Iran nuclear agreement, worked to end the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in Gaza, but her most important accomplishment is not being a right winger.
"Take our country back" is racist dog whistle speak for take our country back from the blacks and Mexicans. The racists are outraged that Obama is president. That's why the Tea Party formed. That's why racists are bolder and angrier. Probably every step forward has a backlash, whether it was integrating the military, eating in the same restaurants, or acceptance interracial marriages, etc. They think the blacks have taken over because Obama is president. And he won because illegal aliens voted for him. Racism is Obama's fault. They aren't racist. They just don't like blacks or Mexicans.But I gotta go. It's time for Sean Klannity.
I don't care much who wins. If's it's the Orange-headed whateverthehellitis, I'm not going to be very happy about that. The country will still struggle along with it's hatred, murder, insanity.
I'm going to be crying like a baby when the Obama's leave office. I loved that family, Bo and Sunny. I loved the peace, love and soul of the Whites House, they provided, to ME!!
This is open thread night.
ReplyDeleteHillary.
She already won the important coin toss portion of the nomination.
What else does the dumbocrat party need?
If I was betting I would put my money on Hillary and Rubio as the nominees for President.
ReplyDeleteAw c'mon Field! You know who's gonna win! The repubs is Trump and the dems is,is...the bernman xD, which means that trump will be president cos Bernmans too old! And plus, presidents really shouldn't wear Depends hehehe...so get ready for some casinos babayyy! xD
ReplyDeleteI'm with you PR, Bernie is going to get the nomination because I think Hillary is toast that's in large part to being a woman.
ReplyDeleteI also think that means that a are thug will be the next President, it's just too bad Biden was too grief stricken to run. But if he could put something together before the Clinton lynching(I know, wishful thinking), that might save the day for the Dems in November.
That should read a Rethug will be the next president, lol darn autocorrect!!!
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIs it still voter fraud when dumbocrats steal votes from another dumbocrat?
Clinton voter fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4578575/clinton-voter-fraud-polk-county-iowa-caucus
Watch the video and ask yourself, how can I blame the rethugs.
I think in the end that the Dems will go with Hillary. Even though it will be a pragmatic, nose-holding move for the people at the leftward end of the party, and even though Hillary doesn't really excite anyone, I suspect she'll be viewed as the safer bet for the general election than Bernie, ultimately.
ReplyDeleteIt's a harder call for the GOP side. In any normal election year, I'd have sworn they'd ultimately coalesce around a pro-greed, pro-war, establishment-type conservative, which this year appears to be Rubio. That's what typically happens. But this isn't a normal year at all. Trump was 3 points behind Cruz in Iowa, which is an extremely favorable (religiously right-wing) state for Cruz, and Trump's still absolutely creaming all the rest of them in national GOP polling.
So this may well be the year Republicans go full retard. I have come around to the belief that they really may shoot themselves in the nads and nominate Trump. Three cheers for bigotry! And then the general election will be a landslide for Hillary, boosting Democrats all the way down the ticket as an added bonus, as sane people rush to the polls to keep Trump out.
Bernie and Rubio.
ReplyDeleteBernie is the Democrats dream candidate. Rubio is the hope for the Republicans.
Hillary will win on the Democratic side. She has it locked up. Sanders is only a threat to her among affluent white progressives and college students. Working class whites, blacks, centrists, Democratic leaning independents, every other Democratic constituancy, including super delegates, belong to her.
ReplyDeleteRubio will be the Republican nominee. Kardashian's supporters just don't participate at the levels polled. Take away about 20% of his polling and you're close to his actual level of support. Cruz doesn't wear well. Just as his college roomate told us months ago, the more you see of him the less you like him. Rubio is a natural. Smart, talented, excellent speaker (at least the first 6 times that you hear him repeat the same things word for word) and is becoming the establishment consensus of the establishment wing of the very establishment oriented Republican Party-especially it's money men.
Agree with Whitey's conspiracy, both races are locked up, Rubio has won the Repubs and Hilary the Dems. Rubio for all the reasons WC said, and Hilary because you cannot win the Democratic nomination without the African American vote, and Bernie is nowhere with that constituency.
ReplyDeleteI think Bernie knows all that course, he campaigns on because he wants to change the narrative - but it's a doomed effort. HC is if anything, even more conservative than Obama.
I'm going with Bernie and Carson. Why not?
ReplyDeleteI am seeing John Kasich eventually taking the lead on the GOP side. For the democrats, Bernie Sanders. His message resonates across all ages and races (except maybe the billionaires?) and his integrity is a constant. His spouse is a social worker, while Hillary's is a sociopath. When it comes down to the wire, America just doesn't trust her.
ReplyDeleteGreat comments! Where are our usual crazy trolls?
ReplyDeleteOh well, it's early.😀
It's a sad day for elections. When all of the candidates are tainted by scandal,and with the spectre of corruption hanging like a cloud over their heads threatening to rain down on them.
ReplyDeleteSo as I read here I guess it's coming down to the lesser of several evils? xD Sad, sad. Aaah for the days of Camelot "Don't let it be forgot, that once there was a spot, for one brief shining moment, that was known as Camelot" (Quote Jackqueline Kennedy Bouvier)
Actually you can jump and yell and scream while pulling out your hair at the same time and gnashing your teeth! But the fact remains that like it or not, Trump is the only one without so many dubious past political dealings! So far anyway...and the only one promising Camelot! (Sorta :)
Maybe that's part of his appeal? Dunno...just asking...
Donald J. Trump lost Iowa because Canadians invaded Iowa to help their guy when. Donald J. Trump will win the Republican race and beat poor Hillary because Americans know Donald J. Trump will help them and make American great again. And besides, presidential elections are not decided by a coin toss.
ReplyDelete"It's a sad day for elections. When all of the candidates are tainted by scandal,and with the spectre of corruption hanging like a cloud over their heads threatening to rain down on them."
ReplyDeleteScandal? Not so much. Hillary's email "scandal" is a tempest in a teapot. Republicans are trying to make something out of nothing there. The only guy with any really serious scandalous baggage is Chris Christie, and I really don't see him as a contender, in any event. I expect he'll be dropping out of the race quite soon.
Corruption, on the other hand ... hell yes. But that's par for the course in our political system. Running for office requires groveling to a load of filthy rich people in return for campaign funding. Legalized corruption is the order of the day. And you're right, while most of Donald Trump's appeal is predicated on flag-waving patriotism and white grievance, there is a small part that is based on his claim to be free of the influence of "special interests" because, as a billionaire, he can afford to self-finance his campaign.
This claim, however, is utterly ridiculous if you think even a little bit hard about it.
First, it's untrue because he isn't totally self-financing -- he's raised plenty of cash from other rich people. He hasn't only spent his own money, not by a long shot.
Second, it's untrue because Trump himself IS a special interest. Even if he weren't raising cash from other rich people, he is a rich person himself, and has never, ever in his life shown the slightest interest in anyone beyond himself and his class of fellow greedy bastards. A Trump presidency would be a government of the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy. No backroom bribery is necessary to induce him to support plutocratic policies -- he already does support them!
This about as smart as buying a hungry lion to defend you from a pack of hyenas. Pro: The hyenas leave you alone. Con: The lion eats you.
Ok I get it now. I don't think 'The Left Has No Clothes' is an actual conservative poster. I think it's a parody account by a left-leaning person with a slightly odd sense of humour.
ReplyDeleteI think he (or she) is sending up far-Right views.
Whomever is the Democratic nominee, my guess right now is Bernie (too much baggage for Hildog), will win the WH. The electoral map doesn't look good for the gop, the Latino vote will be the key and the gop candidates tripping over themselves trying to out tough the other on immigration isn't helping. The Dem nominee will probaby choose a Latino running mate, maybe a Castro brother, and the deal will be sealed. All isn't lost on the gop side because they will have another autopsy and discover the same things they did the last two Presidential elections and finally truly become a party that embraces diversity, albeit grudginly. The young Bush in Florida will lead this new gop out of the ashes because he has the political DNA and is half Mexican.
ReplyDeleteBTW, we don't need the trolls because everyone knows what they're going to say....blah blah blah...plantation...blah blah blah...democrat masters...blah blah blah.
Yīshēng said...
ReplyDeleteI'm with you PR, Bernie is going to get the nomination because I think Hillary is toast that's in large part to being a woman
--
And of course a serial lying criminal who grossly mishandled classified documents and used one of the highest offices in the land to personally profit. Oh and she started an illegal war in Libya and got an ambassador killed.
Those appear to be her two biggest accomplishments. Got anything else?
She has a 40 year career of tawdry and nauseating scandals. If you want a woman to be President, why does it have to be the worst woman in the country?
"the Latino vote will be the key"
ReplyDeleteNo it won't.
This year it will be the working class white vote and once again the black vote.
The Hispanic vote is next to meaningless:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/
Conservative republican here. I'll vote for Bernie over Rubio, because Bernie is better on immigration. I don't agree with his policies, but at least there is a chance he will put the interests of American citizens ahead of the desires of the globalist elite.
ReplyDeleteHillary is the very embodiment of what is wrong with American politics. She is both as corrupt and as incompetent as any candidate for President we have seen. Rubio is a mannequin, ventriloquist dummy, ken doll, and sock puppet of the globalist oligarchy. He’s not smart but nice looking and good at memorizing his talking points. He is the perfect republican answer to Obama, with both advancing the globalist agenda at breakneck speed. (George Soros is 85/86 after all). Yes we are doomed if either wins.
The Ministry of Truth said...
ReplyDelete"This about as smart as buying a hungry lion to defend you from a pack of hyenas. Pro: The hyenas leave you alone. Con: The lion eats you."
I'm so fucking sick of these hyenas, as long as they get theirs first, I'll be happy.
I'll take my chances with the lion.
If there's still a USA in existence in November, I'll vote for Bernie. I don't care if he's older than dirt, I'd rather look at him every day compared to the other choice/choices. I'm tired of the little penguin in a pants suit. Nodding, flapping arms, bloviating. Ahhhh, America!!!!!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous The Ministry of Truth said...
ReplyDeleteScandal? Not so much. Hillary's email "scandal" is a tempest in a teapot. Republicans are trying to make something out of nothing there.
9:15 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I wasn't referring to the e mail thing,although it's bad enough what with everything so muddled with that situation, I think it's just not clear enough to be brushed off so lightly, unfortunately.
I was thinking more about what is said about her husband in regard to the distasteful matter of the industrial prison complex and how he was the author of that. And again, I'm not very versed in that matter either, just what I've read here and there,which has shocked me greatly 'cos I for one always liked him, and I never would have thought...so I'm thinking if I feel that way how many others are also? Even though it may have been her husband and not her,it still stains ya know...
But from where I'm sitting it actually doesn't look good for any of them on the both sides. But that's just my uneducated opinion so...It'll be fun to watch and see what develops anyway. I just hope the islands won't be too negatively affected,'cos we're about to sink...glub...glub...glub...
Whitey's Conspiracy said...
ReplyDeleteHillary will win on the Democratic side. She has it locked up.
I think you are off on the Dem side. None of the leaks would happen w/o WH knowledge – stakes are too high and Obama manages the left far more than he does the country. Obama is waiting for the optimal time to purge Clinton & co. Possibly after the Bern wins NH.
Rubio is the GOP plan to package Dubya like Obama – they are always behind in fashion and with the cool kids. This is the Bern’s true opening and the only plausible path for the left, as if will have a free hand to tap into the mood of anger /outsider. Rubio will blather about how optimistic he is and spend his TV time on vague platitudes on Liberty and the Horatio Alger myth. He will say what a great country this is that someone of his background will have a chance to be Prez. Once again GOP plays the patsy for the corporate class, and Obama smells like a rose for destroying the Clintons. GOP talking heads whine about how unfair media coverage is and how little credit they are getting for their historic nominee. Dems call Rubio a race traitor and the Hispanic lobby backs them up. The Bern recruits fake Indian and they channel the anger into a political revolution.
The SJWs, in full Stalin mode, aren’t going to let the country rest just b/c Obama has to vacate. Conservatives will believe it is all posturing and then be shocked that a piece of parchment doesn’t develop into a sentient being and put a stop to it. That’s where the fun really begins…
Iowa Dem vote:
ReplyDeleteAmong women under age 30:
Sanders 84%, Clinton 14%
Women age 30-44:
Sanders 53%, Clinton 42%
ReplyDeleteEven Van Jones speaking on CNN understands how un-electable Bernie is.
"79,000 Year-Old, Muppet-Looking Socialist"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua00urvwp6k
Of course the white liberals on the TPM youtube channel aren't taking it too well.
He's black he shouldn't be mocking
Van Jones is owned by Clinton Inc.
ReplyDelete"I was thinking more about what is said about her husband in regard to the distasteful matter of the industrial prison complex and how he was the author of that. And again, I'm not very versed in that matter either, just what I've read here and there,which has shocked me greatly 'cos I for one always liked him, and I never would have thought...so I'm thinking if I feel that way how many others are also? Even though it may have been her husband and not her,it still stains ya know..."
ReplyDeleteAh, well. I wouldn't call that a "scandal" in traditional terms. I'd call that bad policy.
There are two questions I tend to ask myself about the Clintons:
1) Were all of Bill's painful compromises with right-wingers in the '90s (NAFTA, financial deregulation, welfare reform, harsh anti-crime policies) necessary, given the political climate? I'm sure the Clintons would argue that they were. They'd say that Bill did the best that could have been achieved for the times, and an actual Republican would've been worse. That point is open for active debate.
2) Would a Hillary presidency be a repeat of Bill's, with a host of right-wing policies enacted along with some weaksauce left-wing measures that are supposed to ameliorate the damage (but largely don't)? Like you said, she is a different person, not a clone of her husband, and the political center of gravity has changed, so she swears up and down that she'd govern differently. But that doesn't mean everyone trusts her on this, which is why Bernie Sanders is in the race.
Of course, this is all probably moot. I think she'll probably be the Dem nominee, and the Republican candidate will unquestionably be someone horrifying, so I'll be forced to pull the lever for Hillary to keep out a loony.
"the Republican candidate will unquestionably be someone horrifying"
ReplyDeleteYou are such a faggot.
"And you're right, while most of Donald Trump's appeal is predicated on flag-waving patriotism and white grievance, there is a small part that is based on his claim to be free of the influence of "special interests" because, as a billionaire, he can afford to self-finance his campaign."
ReplyDeleteThe candidates run for election by donors, with voting just a linear expression of earlier won dollars. Imagine if the electoral college were decoupled entirely from the popular vote. Candidates would have no cause to consider even pissing on the plebes. They would grovel their appeals directly to the few true decision makers. And in ancient antiquity, this was precisely the process. Way back in the time of BT, Before Trump.
Say what you will about Trump, he is his own man.
So jelly roll, did you ask permission to plagiarise the Kakistocracy blog?
ReplyDeleteOr are you Porter himself? I suspect not, given the rather lame last line you added to what you stole.
https://kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/05/yo-ye-pharoahs-let-us-walk/
"So jelly roll, did you ask permission to plagiarise the Kakistocracy blog?"
ReplyDeleteYou are such a faggot.
Both Mike Huckabee and Rand Paul have quit the race. Dropping like flies now, aren't they?
ReplyDeleteAnd here is a cartoon illustrating the absurdity of Trump posing as a valiant corruption fighter and champion of the common man who can't be bought by the special interests.
ReplyDeleteSomehow, the extreme illogicality of voting for an evil tycoon to protect you from other evil tycoons has escaped the sort of people who attend Trump's rallies. Then again, they are not exactly what I'd call deep thinkers.
The left love them some cartoons. Like they think it means something or something.
ReplyDeleteRed States Outnumber Blue for First Time in Gallup Tracking
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gallup.com/poll/188969/red-states-outnumber-blue-first-time-gallup-tracking.aspx
This along with historic Republican wins at state and local levels Republicans have enjoyed for the past 8 years.
Thanks Obama. We couldn't have done it without you
With 2/3 the electoral votes.
DeleteWith 2/3 the electoral votes.
Delete"...who you think will win the republican and democratic primaries and why."
ReplyDeleteWall Street wins!
Why? Neanderopeons aren't too bright.
Santorum just quit as well. Anyone else want to throw in the towel?
ReplyDeleteThanks Obama. We couldn't have done it without you
ReplyDelete-----------------
That's true, that damn ni**er brought out the bigots.
"Santorum just quit as well. Anyone else want to throw in the towel?"
ReplyDeletePlease dear god let it be Carly Fiorina. She is the single most annoying person on the planet and I'm including Sarah Palin. Not to mention dishonest.
Bernie just quit.
ReplyDeleteI meant Martin O'Malley. Which one is the old jew?
ReplyDeleteIt took a couple of years, but a Freedom of Information Request finally got the documents that prove the Obama Administration lied when it claimed it could not prioritize spending during a shutdown to avoid a default.
ReplyDeleteDuring the fights about the debt ceiling -- in 2011 and 2013 -- people who wanted to reduce spending noted, correctly, that a simple expiration of a government funding would not, in fact, trigger an immediate default on government debt.
The Obama Administration claimed it would, because they were trying to scare people to just give into them. (It worked.)
People like Veronica De Rugy said that that was preposterous, that the government had a fair amount of money (even with a spending shutdown) and could prioritize its payments to make sure the debt was paid off, to avoid that bad outcome.
Again, the Obama Administration lied and said that was impossible.
Not only was it possible-- they planned for it and wargamed it.
Well, as it turns out, documents subpoenaed by the House Financial Services Committee reveal that during the 2013 debt ceiling debate, "the Obama Administration is not only capable of prioritizing payments in case the nation's borrowing authority is not raised, it has run 'tabletop exercises' to prepare for such a contingency -- contradicting earlier public statements from Treasury officials."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/430620/2013-debt-ceiling-debate-white-house-misled-americans
Sanders has introduced a novel campaign strategy - responding directly and succinctly. In doing so he has raised the stakes. No doubt Clinton has the experience and intellect to be president, her plan for regulating financial institutions has been endorsed by respected economists such as Paul Krugman. But rather than laying her cards on the debate stage, she reverts to self-indulgent sleep-inducing politesse. No doubt Clinton is favored by the establishment and as such Sanders has an uphill battle. But is Clinton the best candidate to beat down the Big Red Machine? Keep in mind that one of the few things where most of us on both sides agree is that the country is on the wrong track. We obviously disagree on who is to blame for that, but no candidate radiates status quo more than Clinton. No doubt the town hall format is more conducive to Clinton than the debate format. And no doubt the vapid right wing candidate will attempt to frame it in terms of personal attacks. Unlike Sanders who has shown a strong enough personality to control the conversation and put it back on track, Clinton has shown no such aptitude or appetite. Keeping in mind the Reagan / Carter debate that was the turning point in that election, this is an important consideration, fairly or unfairly.
ReplyDelete"No doubt Clinton has the experience and intellect to be president,"
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly has she accomplished in her 40 years in public life?
"http://www.nationalreview.com"
ReplyDelete*sees source of link and walks away*
*Slinks away, knowing his beliefs depend on lies.
ReplyDelete@ doubter 9:49 PM -
ReplyDeleteShe has worked to pass the Children's Health Insurance Program as first lady, as secretary of state negotiated the START treaty with Russia to reduce the number of nuclear weapons, laid the groundwork for the Iran nuclear agreement, worked to end the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in Gaza, but her most important accomplishment is not being a right winger.
Those all sound pretty much like failures to me, or at least fairly meager contributions.
ReplyDeleteIn forty years, that's it? How does that merit consideration for the highest job in the land?
Better than any right winger
ReplyDelete"Take our country back" is racist dog whistle speak for take our country back from the blacks and Mexicans. The racists are outraged that Obama is president. That's why the Tea Party formed. That's why racists are bolder and angrier. Probably every step forward has a backlash, whether it was integrating the military, eating in the same restaurants, or acceptance interracial marriages, etc. They think the blacks have taken over because Obama is president. And he won because illegal aliens voted for him. Racism is Obama's fault. They aren't racist. They just don't like blacks or Mexicans.But I gotta go. It's time for Sean Klannity.
ReplyDeleteI don't care much who wins. If's it's the Orange-headed whateverthehellitis, I'm not going to be very happy about that. The country will still struggle along with it's hatred, murder, insanity.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to be crying like a baby when the Obama's leave office. I loved that family, Bo and Sunny. I loved the peace, love and soul of the Whites House, they provided, to ME!!