US Elections 2016

[Gorth]

Start of previous thread

End of previous thread

 

Edit: Continuing...

 

 

 

Russian economy might be a wreck, but they managed to modernize their armed forces to be a real threat (and the nukes of course), and their foreign policy is at least partially working as witnessed by Assad's new found success and the fear Russia is inspiring in Eastern Europe.

I think you have misunderstood something about the situation in Eastern Europe here. None of the nations in Eastern Europe is any military threat to Russia, and so there is no need to intimidate anyone.

 

This is really strange logic. The country that's not a threat is exactly the country that's easiest to intimidate. Putin is known to shed bitter tears over the loss of the Soviet Empire.

If Russian foreign policy was really working, they would have an Eastern Europe with increasingly pro-Russian opinions and Russian trade ties so deep that sanctions would be impossible to put in place.

That would require a miracle, not a foreign policy.

 

Edit: Let the conspiracy theories begin: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/14/conspiracy-theories-surround-justice-scalias-death/

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Buy Capital signed by Carly Fiorina and proceeds will go to the Sanders campaign

 

As to the conspiracy

Its the micks. Always the micks

 

[Meshugger]

So letting the betting begin! South Carolina and Nevada is this week, isn't it? What does your local bookie say?

[Elerond]

So letting the betting begin! South Carolina and Nevada is this week, isn't it? What does your local bookie say?

 

Dem Nevada: Tie, coin flip win predicted for Clinton

Rep Nevada: Trump clear winner

South Carolina: Trump and Clinton win with big margin.

[Meshugger]

 

So letting the betting begin! South Carolina and Nevada is this week, isn't it? What does your local bookie say?

 

Dem Nevada: Tie, coin flip win predicted for Clinton

Rep Nevada: Trump clear winner

South Carolina: Trump and Clinton win with big margin.

 

 

Thanks.

 

In other news:

 

[Leferd]

So letting the betting begin! South Carolina and Nevada is this week, isn't it? What does your local bookie say?

Somehow I feel this may have been directed at me. Federal U.S. laws prohibit sanctioned gambling on U.S. Elections.

 

That however doesn't stop the Hibernians. Paddy Power's latest...

 

US Presidential Election:

Hillary Clinton: Evens

Donald Trump: 7/2

Bernie Sanders: 7/1

Marco Rubio: 8/1

Ted Cruz: 12/1

Jeb Bush: 14/1

John Kasich: 40/1

Ben Carson: 200/1

 

Democratic Nomination:

Clinton: 1/4

Sanders: 10/3

 

Republican Nomination:

Trump: 6/5

Rubio: 3/1

Bush: 5/1

Cruz: 5/1

Kasich: 20/1

Carson: 150/1

 

Nevada Democratic Caucus:

Clinton: 4/7

Sanders: 5/4

 

South Carolina Republican Primary:

Trump: 1/14!!!!

Cruz: 7/1

Rubio: 14/1

Bush: 18/1

Kasich: 50/1

Carson: 100/1

 

Bonus -SCOTUS Nominee:

Sri Srinvasan: 5/2

Paul Watford: 11/4

Merrill Garland: 10/3

Adalberto J Jordan: 5/1

Patricia Ann Millett: 5/1

Jane Kelly: 8/1

Kamala D Harris: 12/1

 

I only know Srinvasan (DC Circuit Court of Appeals) and Harris (California Attorney General) but surprisingly didn't see longshot odds for Bill Clinton or Barack Obama (steps down as POTUS and Biden then nominates him).

Edited February 15, 2016 by Leferd

[Leferd]

Nate Silver's model on 538. These are percentage chances of winning.

 

South Carolina GOP

Trump 70%

Rubio 14%

Cruz 8%

 

Nevada Caucuses DEM

Clinton 50%

Sanders 50%

 

South Carolina DEM

Clinton >99%

Sanders <1%

 

Nevada Caucuses GOP (polling averages only)

Trump 31.4%

Cruz 19.2%

Rubio 10.9%

Carson 7.8%

Bush 4.9%

Edited February 15, 2016 by Leferd

[Wrath of Dagon]

CBS poll before the latest debate had Trump at 42% in SC, but the fight between Trump and Cruz has turned vicious, and Trump is now attacking the RNC again. We'll have to see how that affects the vote.

[Leferd]

For what it's worth, Nate Silver grades CBS polls as a solid B with a 4.8% simple average error rate.

[Meshugger]

Obama stepping down as president to nominate himself as justice in the supreme court would be the funniest bet to make. Speaking as an outsider of America of course.

Edited February 15, 2016 by Meshugger

[Zoraptor]

Oh god yes. The butthurt would be eternal.

 

Might be a way to get Biden back into the Presidential race as well, if they need a bail out option due to Clinton cratering.

[ShadySands]

Surprised to see no Loretta Lynch on the SCOTUS list since my Facebook and news feed are blowing up about it

[Leferd]

Surprised to see no Loretta Lynch on the SCOTUS list since my Facebook and news feed are blowing up about it

Well Lynch is the current Attorney General, and would have to step down...leaving the post vacated and her original confirmation process was a long, knock down drag out war. Srinvasan on the other hand, received a 96-0 Senate vote on his appointment to the Circuit Court.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Obama stepping down as president to nominate himself as justice in the supreme court would be the funniest bet to make. Speaking as an outsider of America of course.

I don't think he would step down but if Hillary wins the general, which is the most likely option assuming no major upsets or scandal, a repeat of Taft could happen. If it does, we would see an enormous amount of butthurt that would make putting another corporate shill on the SC worth it.

[Gromnir]

"Thanks for the musings. I was curious since the media has made such a hoopla about his comments in various cases (like throwing pot-shots to congress being too incompetent to even create any new laws) so i wondered about his competence as a justice of the supreme court from non-lay man's point of view."

 

competence o' Scalia has been questioned by few folks who know law.  *chuckle* 'but as the failed attempt to get judge bork confirmed revealed to Gromnir's generation, competence has not been the determinative factor when it comes to judging the Justices. even amongst lawyers, it is common to label a Justice as conservative or liberal in spite o' the fact that many o' the Justices is largely apolitical creatures.  is few humble Justices. the Justices is certain o' their own intellectual greatness and they have lifetime tenures.  Justices such as Scalia tend to follow their legal philosophies w/o much concern for liberal v. conservative.  as a (con)texualist, Scalia were frequent viewed as being conservative by the media, which is understandable.  review old laws and then suggest that the meaning o' those laws has not changed since the time that the privileged white men wrote those laws?  (warning: am oversimplifying more than a little.) sounds a bit conservative, no?  see flaws in legal reasoning o' roe v. wade. question the legal basis for affirmative action. support arizona immigration laws. etc.  given Scalia's LEGAL philosophy, it were no surprise that he criticized roe v. wade, but doing so is deemed as misogynist or worse by more than a few political commentators.

 

also, we would suggest that Scalia's (and all fed judges and Justices for that matter) were disappointed with the manner in which legislatures draft those laws which would inevitable come up for judicial review.  btw, am intentional using inevitable.  Scalia were much more vocal 'bout his disappointment with legislative draftings than others on the Court, but this is more enoch's area, so perhaps he can lend insights. is all too common that laws is passed by legislative bodies that is fully aware that that the law will need be... fixed.  legislatures pass incomplete or broken laws cognizant o' the fact that executive and judiciary is gonna need work out the details necessary to make the law work in practice.  Justices and judges is 'posed to interpret the laws.  at what point does Justices and judges exceed their Constitutional authority when they attempt to save incomplete and broken laws?  Scalia were offended by Congressional reliance on Judicial activism to save bad laws. 

 

Scalia were competent and consistent.  is not a particularly sexy epitaph, but ain't that what we should expect from a Justice?  we respected and admired Scalia even when we disagreed with him.  

 

as an aside, J. Rehnquist were always our prime example o' a dangerous Justice.  no Justice active during our lifetime has received as much Gromnir vitriol as did Rehnquist.  Scalia and Rehnquist were both "conservative" Justices and frequent they voted the same.  even so, they occupied diametric opposed positions on our personal scale o' Justice approval.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

Obama stepping down as president to nominate himself as justice in the supreme court would be the funniest bet to make. Speaking as an outsider of America of course.

 

Oh god yes. The butthurt would be eternal.

 

Might be a way to get Biden back into the Presidential race as well, if they need a bail out option due to Clinton cratering.

Actually if they want to slip Biden back in the thing to do would be to nominate Hillary Clinton. She is a lawyer. If she is losing the Primary it saves her and provides an alternative to Bernie.

 

It would be a farce of course but it IS possible.

[Leferd]

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's statement on Scalia:

 

Toward the end of the opera Scalia/Ginsburg, tenor Scalia and soprano Ginsburg sing a duet: “We are different, we are one,” different in our interpretation of written texts, one in our reverence for the Constitution and the institution we serve. From our years together at the D.C. Circuit, we were best buddies. We disagreed now and then, but when I wrote for the Court and received a Scalia dissent, the opinion ultimately released was notably better than my initial circulation. Justice Scalia nailed all the weak spots—the “applesauce” and “argle bargle”—and gave me just what I needed to strengthen the majority opinion. He was a jurist of captivating brilliance and wit, with a rare talent to make even the most sober judge laugh. The press referred to his “energetic fervor,” “astringent intellect,” “peppery prose,” “acumen,” and “affability,” all apt descriptions. He was eminently quotable, his pungent opinions so clearly stated that his words never slipped from the reader’s grasp. 

 

Justice Scalia once described as the peak of his days on the bench an evening at the Opera Ball when he joined two Washington National Opera tenors at the piano for a medley of songs. He called it the famous Three Tenors performance. He was, indeed, a magnificent performer. It was my great good fortune to have known him as working colleague and treasured friend.

 

Justice Ginsburg and Justice Scalia, despite being at polar opposites on decisions with political implications, were the best of friends --often vacationing together.

[Volourn]

 Too bad many people cna't do that including me but I'm evil so I hate everyone so that's okay.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Someone please explain to me how Biden can still get in when the deadline to be on most primary ballots is long past. A massive write-in campaign?

[Gromnir]

biden?  am suspecting that many in the democratic party is gonna wanna hide biden away someplace dark and quiet until after a new Justice has been appointed. the infamous Biden Report, and the resulting Borking, is largely forgotten by most Americans.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124294934268945409

 

given the almost unique juxtaposition o' personages and events being made once again relevant by Scalia's death and empty seat, am gonna be surprised if we do not hear Bork mentioned frequent in the coming months... and biden's role in the borking is deserving o' attention.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, the borking was when I first lost my youthful idealism and faith in the American system of governance. Don't think anyone cares anymore though, just going to be another partisan argument.

[Gromnir]

just as an aside, we don't actual believe that biden were more responsible for the borkings than dozens o' others... though am suspecting that Clarence Thomas might disagree. the media were also more than a bit complicit in the systemic scurrility directed at bork.  regardless, such stuff needs examination with benefit o' objective hindsight.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Raithe]

[Guard Dog]

McConnell has already screwed this up. Although the Democrats have been hell bent against election year appointments in the past (let's face it politicians are all hypocrites; for it when it suits, against it when it suits). Obama does have a duty to nominate a justice if he wants to. And of course he wants to. Whomever he picks will be an absolute disaster for liberty and Constitutional protections against the whims of the government. You cannot stop him from doing it. But the Senate can stop any nomination he makes from ever being confirmed. And they should and will but for God's sweet sake shut the f--k about it. If you are going to torpedo the nomination DO IT. But for do it quietly. It can die in committee and never see a full vote. McConnell goes out there and makes a big f-----g deal about it and now it's a media firestorm. If he kept his idiot mouth shut the media would be distracted by the election and this could have been tied this thing up with minimal attention. He can prevent a recess appointment by just not going into recess. The SCOTUS already slapped Obama down once over that.

 

McConnell is like a poker player shouting out "I got a Flush" before the river card is played.  

[Rostere]

McConnell has already screwed this up. Although the Democrats have been hell bent against election year appointments in the past (let's face it politicians are all hypocrites; for it when it suits, against it when it suits). Obama does have a duty to nominate a justice if he wants to. And of course he wants to. Whomever he picks will be an absolute disaster for liberty and Constitutional protections against the whims of the government. You cannot stop him from doing it. But the Senate can stop any nomination he makes from ever being confirmed. And they should and will but for God's sweet sake shut the f--k about it. If you are going to torpedo the nomination DO IT. But for do it quietly. It can die in committee and never see a full vote. McConnell goes out there and makes a big f-----g deal about it and now it's a media firestorm. If he kept his idiot mouth shut the media would be distracted by the election and this could have been tied this thing up with minimal attention. He can prevent a recess appointment by just not going into recess. The SCOTUS already slapped Obama down once over that.

 

McConnell is like a poker player shouting out "I got a Flush" before the river card is played.  

 

The mere fact that these sort of things can happen is just a byproduct of the American system, which requires bipartisan cooperation at times like this. When the parties are not willing to cooperate, the system shuts down. This is the system you created, and it works as expected. I fail to see what all the fuss is about. Who is surprised by this situation?