2016 USA Presidential Elections

Interestingly I received this e-mail from the Bernie Sanders campaign. Note who isn't mentioned.

Our campaign has always been about a grassroots movement of Americans standing up and saying: "Enough is enough. This country and our government belong to all of us, not just a handful of billionaires."

I just finished speaking at the Democratic National Convention, where I addressed the historic nature of our grassroots movement and what's next for our political revolution.

I hope that I made you proud. I know that Jane and I are very proud of you.

Our work will continue in the form of a new group called Our Revolution. The goal of this organization will be no different from the goal of our campaign: we must transform American politics to make our political and economic systems once again responsive to the needs of working families.

We cannot do this alone. All of us must be a part of Our Revolution.

Join Our Revolution and help continue our critical work to create a government which represents all of us, and not just the 1 percent ? a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice. Add your name here.

When we started this campaign a little more than a year ago, the media and the political establishment considered us to be a "fringe" campaign. Well, we're not fringe anymore.

Thanks to your tireless work and generous contributions, we won 23 primaries and caucuses with more than 13 million votes, all of which led to the 1900 delegates we have on the floor this week at the Democratic convention.

What we have done together is absolutely unprecedented, but there is so much more to do. It starts with defeating Donald Trump in November, and then continuing to fight for every single one of our issues in order to transform America.

We are going to fight to make sure that the most progressive platform in the history of the Democratic Party becomes law. This means working for a $15 federal minimum wage, fighting for a national fracking ban, and so many more progressive priorities.

The political revolution needs you in order to make all this happen and more.

Add your name to say that you will join Our Revolution and be part of the fight for our progressive vision for America.

Thank you for being a part of the continued political revolution.

In solidarity,

Bernie Sanders
Click to expand...
 
TC said:
I heard an interesting rumor earlier. Apparently the Russians are behind the leaked emails . . .
Click to expand...

Interesting how this rumor gets a thousand times the attention in mainstream outlets as the content of the leaked emails. I haven't seen this much feigned disinterest (not to mention attempted social media suppression) in media corruption/collusion since the beginning of Gamergate.
 
kunedog said:
Interesting how this rumor gets a thousand times the attention in mainstream outlets as the content of the leaked emails. I haven't seen this much feigned disinterest (not to mention attempted social media suppression) in media corruption/collusion since the beginning of Gamergate.
Click to expand...
It's not really that surprising. There is always a desperate attempt to shift the focus onto something else, trying to make someone else look like the bad guy. Like all the outrage about the "lock her up!" chants at the RNC last week. Is it really that outrageous that people want those who break the law, regardless of fame or fortune, to be held accountable? There seemed to be more consternation about Melania's (speech writers) plagiarism than anything Hillary has done.
 
TC said:
It's not really that surprising. There is always a desperate attempt to shift the focus onto something else, trying to make someone else look like the bad guy. Like all the outrage about the "lock her up!" chants at the RNC last week. Is it really that outrageous that people want those who break the law, regardless of fame or fortune, to be held accountable? There seemed to be more consternation about Melania's (speech writers) plagiarism than anything Hillary has done.
Click to expand...

Politico reported that "lock her up!" was also chanted by Bernie supports at the DNC.
 
kunedog said:
#MLKockblockedJR


BLM's stance regarding "I Have a Dream" remains consistent:

Click to expand...

Critical Race Theory is incompatible with Martin Luther King's philosophy (Derrick Bell came up with it as an antithesis to MLK). You can't have

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today!

I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
Click to expand...

when you believe that white people can't participate in rallies, and that you need black safe spaces. Inter sectionalism is a hate ideology that works to divide people and build animosity among these groups.

- - - Updated - - -

I am not too concerned with inter sectionalism in the long term as it is self-destructive. Unfortunately, it is a collectivist ideology, and as Louis Fischer pointed out in his essay from The God That Failed, it is easy for a communist to become a fascist since the ideologies both share the general view point of class conflict. I fear where these collectivists will go once inter sectionlism fails them.
 
argatoga said:
I am not too concerned with inter sectionalism in the long term as it is self-destructive. Unfortunately, it is a collectivist ideology, and as Louis Fischer pointed out in his essay from The God That Failed, it is easy for a communist to become a fascist since the ideologies both share the general view point of class conflict. I fear where these collectivists will go once inter sectionlism fails them.
Click to expand...

There is, however, a lot of merit to the examination of class conflict and its relationship to race. I highly recommend the most recent book by Nancy Isenberg, White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America. Starting from colonial times and going through our various presidents, she examines how class distinctions were upheld through explicit and often implicit segregation of the lower classes. And so, the main focus is on class politics, race being just one of the tools to justify segregation, among with eugenics and breeding practices. As long as poor whites were convinced that they were slightly better than blacks, they became oblivious to their own problems and their inability to move up in society. Isenberg also stresses how a certain pride developed around being white trash, a hillbilly, or other similar terms, and even discusses how certain Presidents (Andrew Jackson, LBJ, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton) appealed to their white trash roots to gain voters, but more often than not betrayed their interests while in office.

Sorry, this was a long-winded plug and a tangent.
 
Lev, I know you hate Clinton and you dislike Trump, this new story puts us in quite a pickle.

Trump's Plea for Russia to Hack the U.S. Government
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-hack-classified-american-information/493244/

Just when it starts to seem that Donald Trump can?t surprise the jaded American media anymore, the Republican nominee manages to go just a little bit further.

During a press conference Wednesday morning that was bizarre even by Trump?s standards, he praised torture, said the Geneva Conventions were obsolete, contradicted his earlier position on a federal minimum wage, and told a reporter to ?be quiet.?

But the strangest comments, easily, came when Trump was asked about allegations that Russian hackers had broken into the email of the Democratic National Convention?as well as further suggestions that Vladimir Putin?s regime might be trying to aid Trump, who has praised him at length. Trump cast doubt on Russia?s culpability, then said he hoped they had hacked Hillary Clinton?s messages while she was secretary of state.

?By the way, if they hacked, they probably have her 33,000 emails,? he said. ?I hope they do. They probably have her 33,000 emails that she lost and deleted. Because you?d see some beauties there.? A few minutes later, he returned to the idea, speaking directly to the Kremlin: ?I will tell you this: Russia, if you?re listening, I hope you?re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.?

It was a stunning moment: a presidential nominee calling on a foreign power not only to hack his opponent and release what they found publicly, but hoping the Russians had stolen the emails of a top American official, perhaps including classified information.

Following Trump?s thread on Russia was practically impossible. On one hand, he portrayed the act of hacking into Democratic emails as ?a total sign of disrespect,? yet in the next breath he pleaded with foreign powers to do just that. He said he was ?not going to tell Putin what to do.? He also insisted, ?I have nothing to do with Putin. I don?t know anything about him, other than he will respect me.?

Trump previously claimed a friendship with the Russian president. ?I got to know him very well because we were both on 60 Minutes, we were stablemates,? he said. That was later revealed as a lie: Although both men were on the same episode of the show, they had never met.

Trump has given conflicting signals about his connections to Russia elsewhere, too. On Tuesday, a spokeswoman told Newsweek that he had no business with the country. In 2008, however, Donald Trump Jr. said that ?Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets ? We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia,? as The Washington Post reported.

Trump struck a balance Wednesday, insisting that Putin was a strong leader but tempering his praise. In one of the odder moments, Trump charged Putin with racism and then immediately said he hoped Putin would like him.

?Putin has said things over the last year that are really bad things, okay. He mentioned the ?n? word one time. I was shocked to hear him. You know what the ?n? word is, right? Total lack of respect for President Obama. Number one, he doesn?t like him. Number two, he doesn?t respect him. I think he?s going to respect your president if I?m elected, and I hope he likes me.?

He has less affection for France, where Islamist terrorists killed a priest on Tuesday. ?I wouldn?t go to France,? Trump said. ?I wouldn?t go to France, because France is no longer France.?

What if Clinton or Obama had wished that a foreign power had hacked a political opponent?s emails?

For an ordinary candidate, that would been extraordinary enough of a press conference. But Trump was barely getting started. NBC?s Katy Tur asked him point-blank whether he believed the Geneva Conventions were out of date.

?I think everything?s out of date. We have a whole new world,? Trump said. He then reaffirmed his support for torture, even though there?s no evidence it?s an effective intelligence-gathering tool. ?I am a person that believes in enhanced interrogation, yes. And, by the way, it works.?

He launched into a tirade against Clinton?s running mate, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia. But Trump repeatedly accused Kaine of trying to raise taxes while governor of New Jersey. He was eventually corrected; it was unclear what caused the slip, although some reporters noted the similarity between Kaine?s name and former Governor Tom Kean (whose name is pronounced ?cane?) of New Jersey.

Trump?s flip-flop on his relationship with Putin was not the only reversal. In May, Trump said he wanted to abolish the federal minimum wage. On Wednesday, he gave a somewhat confusing answer, saying, ?I would like to raise it to at least $10,? yet also suggesting that perhaps states rather than the federal government should do that.

Just for good measure, Trump threw in a shot at Obama, who is scheduled to speak at the Democratic National Convention Wednesday evening. ?I think President Obama has been the most ignorant president in our history,? he said. ?When he became president, he didn?t know a thing. And honestly, today he knows less.?

By the end, Wednesday?s press conference made Trump?s weird speech on Friday seem positively quotidian. These sorts of outbursts are the kinds of things that are disqualifying for most candidates. It?s hard to imagine what would happen if Clinton or Mitt Romney or Obama had publicly wished that a foreign power had hacked a political opponent?s emails?especially a cabinet secretary. But Trump?s supporters have been unbothered so far. As Trump gleefully pointed out during the press conference, several recent polls show him leading Clinton. Who knows what inspired Trump to spout off on Wednesday, though. With the DNC in full swing, perhaps he just couldn?t bear to surrender attention to the Democrats any longer.
Click to expand...

I get that people are upset about Clinton mishandling the emails, but Trump is actively advocating for our enemies to hack us and release classified information into the public. I get it - Clinton screwed up. Trump actively wishes and calls for an enemy attack on our security and to find out our secrets!
 
Last edited:
I've been listening to that all day on the radio. It seems that I'm the only one that took his comment as "I'm pretty sure Russia has those emails already and if so then they should release them so Clinton won't become POTUS". It doesn't sound to me like he is asking Russia to start hacking into secret US emails. Again, I appear to be the only one with this point of view, so take it with a grain of salt.

The rest of his comments are typical Trump bravado. It's not very presidential but it's nothing new either.
 
TC said:
It's not really that surprising. There is always a desperate attempt to shift the focus onto something else, trying to make someone else look like the bad guy.
Click to expand...
Or maybe it's because it's been clear since the start of the primary that the DNC, or at least several high profile folks working there, were in the tank for Clinton.

Balance that against growing evidence of tacit Russian support for the fucking Republican nominee and it's not too hard to see what the more important story is.

TC said:
Is it really that outrageous that people want those who break the law, regardless of fame or fortune, to be held accountable?
Click to expand...
Not at all. I'm sure those chants about locking up Hillary were then directed at Trump. Then Christie. And Scott Walker. And ... you get the idea.
 
_HighVoltage_ said:
Lev, I know you hate Clinton and you dislike Trump, this new story puts us in quite a pickle.

Trump's Plea for Russia to Hack the U.S. Government
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-hack-classified-american-information/493244/



I get that people are upset about Clinton mishandling the emails, but Trump is actively advocating for our enemies to hack us and release classified information into the public. I get it - Clinton screwed up. Trump actively wishes and calls for an enemy attack on our security and to find out our secrets!
Click to expand...

I think there is a difference between the Russians hacking Hillary's personal email server, which shouldn't have any classified information or state secrets (unless many laws were broken) and hacking government servers that are owned, operated, and protected by people with IQ's over 50.

tigger said:
Or maybe it's because it's been clear since the start of the primary that the DNC, or at least several high profile folks working there, were in the tank for Clinton.

Balance that against growing evidence of tacit Russian support for the fucking Republican nominee and it's not too hard to see what the more important story is.
Click to expand...
So we have real actual wrong doing and conspiracy theories that Trump is going to sell America to the Russians or something. I honestly think you guys give Trump too much credit. If he becomes President, I imagine it'll take him 4 years just to get the White House stocked with toilet paper, from all the stonewalling and red tape from the complete lack of support he'll receive from the rest of our government. Very few people genuinely want him in the oval office.

tigger said:
Not at all. I'm sure those chants about locking up Hillary were then directed at Trump. Then Christie. And Scott Walker. And ... you get the idea.
Click to expand...
Fine by me, chuck them all in federal "pound-me-in-the-ass" prison. Good riddance. But it sounds like the chants and boos against Hillary have been even worse at the DNC. I didn't think it possible, but they are even more divided than the right.
 
Last edited:
_HighVoltage_ said:
I get that people are upset about Clinton mishandling the emails, but Trump is actively advocating for our enemies to hack us and release classified information into the public. I get it - Clinton screwed up. Trump actively wishes and calls for an enemy attack on our security and to find out our secrets!
Click to expand...

He's keeping an embarassing Clinton scandal in the news, simple as that. If she were a Republican, they would have NEVER stopped talking about it, and even now they're desperate for an excuse to ignore or distract from the email leaks showing that the primaries were railroaded towards Clinton all along, the booed convention speakers, and the Sanders supporters walking out. NONE of that is getting the mainstream news attention it should be, nor (more to the point) the attention it would be getting if a tenth of it had happened at the RNC.

Most of the press is completely in the bag for Hillary, and I can't tell what's sadder: that they have to be tricked into talking about the blatant flaws and misdeeds of their chosen candidate, or that tricking them is so easy.


LeVeL said:
I've been listening to that all day on the radio. It seems that I'm the only one that took his comment as "I'm pretty sure Russia has those emails already and if so then they should release them so Clinton won't become POTUS". It doesn't sound to me like he is asking Russia to start hacking into secret US emails.
Click to expand...

No shit. He specifically said that if Russia (or anyone else) had the emails, they should give them to the FBI.

Do I need to point out the obvious fact that her insecure server is now safely offline and under adult supervision and therefore impossible to hack, even if Putin himself were to (intentionally or not) wrongly interpret Trump's statement as a direct order, and (for some reason) decide to follow it?

EDIT:
Oh, and I find it interesting that now the Clinton camp views somebody accessing those 30,000 deleted emails as "espionage" or a threat to "national security." I mean, according to their previous statements, those deleted (i.e. hidden from the FBI) emails contained only "personal" and "private" info, but definitely nothing classified. Right?

 
Last edited:
kunedog said:
Oh, and I find it interesting that now the Clinton camp views somebody accessing those 30,000 deleted emails as "espionage" or a threat to "national security." I mean, according to their previous statements, those deleted (i.e. hidden from the FBI) emails contained only "personal" and "private" info, but definitely nothing classified. Right?
Click to expand...
They are up in arms about a misinterpreted comment by Trump about Hillary's personal emails but they are brushing aside the fact that she broke several laws, exposed Top Secret documents, committed perjury, and ran a rigged presidential campaign. Hillary supporters are fantastically dumb. The funniest part is that this all helps the Trump campaign because he uses it all as evidence that the system is broken.
 
The system is broken, otherwise Trump would have been out of it a long time ago.
 
The system shows that its broken by allowing clowns like Trump to stand in the first place. He will fuck your country so hard in the ass, it will make Brexit look like a picnic.
 
Are the Clintons the Real Housing-Crash Villains?

Let?s revisit this piece of financial history, before Hillary rewrites it.

We are going to reveal the grand secret to getting rich by investing. It?s a simple formula that has worked for Warren Buffett, Carl Icahn, and all the great investment gurus over the years. Ready?

Buy low, sell high.

It turns out that Donald Trump has been very, very good at buying low and selling high, which helps account for his amazing business success.

But now Hillary Clinton seems to think it?s a crime. Campaigning in California last week she wailed that Trump ?actually said he was hoping for the crash that caused hard-working families in California and across America to lose their homes, all because he thought he could take advantage of it to make some money for himself.?

So she?s assailing Trump for being a good businessman ? something she would know almost nothing about because she?s never actually run a business (though she did miraculously turn $1,000 into $1 million in the cattle-futures market).

Hillary?s new TV ads say Trump predicted the real-estate crash in 2006 (good call) and then bought real estate at low prices when the housing crash that few others foresaw arrived in 2008. Many builders went out of business during the crash, but Trump read the market perfectly.

What is so hypocritical about this Clinton attack is that it wasn?t Trump, but Hillary, her husband, and many of her biggest supporters who were the real culprits. Before Hillary is able to rewrite this history, let?s look at the many ways the Clintons and their cronies contributed to the housing implosion and Great Recession.

The seeds of the mortgage meltdown were planted during Bill Clinton?s presidency. Under his HUD secretary Andrew Cuomo, Community Reinvestment Act regulators gave banks higher ratings for home loans made in ?credit-deprived? areas. Banks were effectively rewarded for throwing out sound underwriting standards and writing loans to those who were at high risk of defaulting. If banks didn?t comply with these rules, regulators reined in their ability to expand lending and deposits.

These new HUD rules lowered down payments from the traditional 20 percent to 3 percent by 1995 and to 0 percent by 2000. What?s more, within Bill Clinton?s push to issue home loans to lower-income borrowers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made it common practice to virtually end credit documentation, low credit scores were disregarded, and income and job histories were thrown aside.

Under Bill Clinton, the phrase ?subprime? became commonplace. What an understatement.

Next, the Clinton administration?s rules ordered taxpayer-backed Fannie and Freddie to expand their quotas of risky loans from 30 percent of portfolio to 50 percent as part of a big push to expand home ownership. Fannie and Freddie were securitizing these home loans and offering 100 percent taxpayer guarantees of repayment. So now taxpayers were on the hook for these risky, low-down-payment loans.

Tragically, when prices fell, lower-income folks who could not afford these mortgages under normal credit standards suffered massive foreclosures and personal bankruptcies. Many will never get credit again. It?s a perfect example of liberals using government allegedly to help the poor, while the consequences are disastrous for the poor.

Ultra-easy money from the Fed also played a key role in the mortgage breakdown. Rates were held too low for too long between 2002 and 2005. This created asset-price bubbles in housing, commodities, gold, and oil. And when the Fed finally tightened, prices collapsed. So did mortgage collateral (homes) and mortgage bonds that depended on the collateral. Most bond packages were resold to Fannie and Freddie, based on the fantastical idea that home prices would never fall. The Fannie and Freddie bailout, by the way, cost the taxpayers $187 billion.

Making this story worse, senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama voted to filibuster a Republican effort to roll back Fannie and Freddie. In addition, while Hillary was propping up these entities, she was taking contributions from their foundations.

Here is how a Washington Times investigative report concluded: ?Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae?s political action committee and individuals linked to the companies donated $75,500 to Mrs. Clinton?s senatorial campaign.? On top of that, the embattled Clinton Foundation received a $50,000 contribution from Freddie Mac, according to the Times.

There was plenty of blame to go around among both political parties and the horde of housing lobbyists who helped set up this real estate house of cards. It?s a sordid story. And the Fannie/Freddie chapter is still not solved. It now includes profit-sweeping from shareholders to the government, thereby ending any chance to sell the mortgage agencies back to the private sector.

As for Hillary?s attempt to blame Donald Trump for this mess, it is utterly absurd. Buying low and selling high is not against the law. In fact, Trump?s investment acumen may serve America well in the not too distant future.
Click to expand...
 
ahpadt said:
The system shows that its broken by allowing clowns like Trump to stand in the first place. He will fuck your country so hard in the ass, it will make Brexit look like a picnic.
Click to expand...

The corrupt sosciopath Hillary Clinton is far worse.
I wonder where the writers of "House of Cards" got their inspiration..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top