US Election 2016, part II

[Wrath of Dagon]

No question about it, she's said as much.

[Meshugger]

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-it-comes-to-trump-a-republican-treasury-secretary-says-choose-country-over-party/2016/06/24/c7bdba34-3942-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

 

Henry Paulson, Republican, former chief executive of Goldman Sachs and former US secretary of the Treasury supports Hillary Clinton. Why? because Trump refuses to touch Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

 

I have no further comment.

 Okay I must apologize to you. I always assumed you were a Trump supporter and you wouldn't post a negative Trump article 

 

But this is a very powerful and thought provoking perspective and  offers insights about Trump that should concern every American on this forum

 

I only know of WOD  who is definitely voting Trump but I would  really appreciate if any Trump forum supporters would read this and still decide to vote for Trump ?

 

 

On the contrary it was to higlight that the traditional left-right paradigm is evaporating and the globalist-nationalist is emerging.

[BruceVC]

No question about it, she's said as much.

So GD was right, I have learnt something new about US politics again on these forums

 

And this is relevant to me because sometimes I have to explain certain  things about the US  to people who have a very negative view of the US  because your political narrative is basically misunderstood 

[BruceVC]

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-it-comes-to-trump-a-republican-treasury-secretary-says-choose-country-over-party/2016/06/24/c7bdba34-3942-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

 

Henry Paulson, Republican, former chief executive of Goldman Sachs and former US secretary of the Treasury supports Hillary Clinton. Why? because Trump refuses to touch Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

 

I have no further comment.

 Okay I must apologize to you. I always assumed you were a Trump supporter and you wouldn't post a negative Trump article 

 

But this is a very powerful and thought provoking perspective and  offers insights about Trump that should concern every American on this forum

 

I only know of WOD  who is definitely voting Trump but I would  really appreciate if any Trump forum supporters would read this and still decide to vote for Trump ?

 

 

On the contrary it was to higlight that the traditional left-right paradigm is evaporating and the globalist-nationalist is emerging.

 

oh....because it paints Trump in a very bad light....did you not read the whole article ?

[Namutree]

DNC shoots down Sanders' agenda for the platform

 

Apparently Cornel West didn't take it too well. Hopefully we'll see Sanders jump ship from the Democratic Party, I know a significant amount of his supporters will.

One of the neat benefits of a Trump victory is that not only would we get a better president than Hillary; we'll get a reformed and better democratic party. So in a way, a Trump victory is even a victory for non-SJW democrats. 

 

If Hillary wins the democratic party will double-down on all of it's shady BS.

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-it-comes-to-trump-a-republican-treasury-secretary-says-choose-country-over-party/2016/06/24/c7bdba34-3942-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

 

Henry Paulson, Republican, former chief executive of Goldman Sachs and former US secretary of the Treasury supports Hillary Clinton. Why? because Trump refuses to touch Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

 

I have no further comment.

 Okay I must apologize to you. I always assumed you were a Trump supporter and you wouldn't post a negative Trump article 

 

But this is a very powerful and thought provoking perspective and  offers insights about Trump that should concern every American on this forum

 

I only know of WOD  who is definitely voting Trump but I would  really appreciate if any Trump forum supporters would read this and still decide to vote for Trump ?

 

 

On the contrary it was to higlight that the traditional left-right paradigm is evaporating and the globalist-nationalist is emerging.

 

oh....because it paints Trump in a very bad light....did you not read the whole article ?

 

 

Only if one considers Paulson's opinion anything worthwhile.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-it-comes-to-trump-a-republican-treasury-secretary-says-choose-country-over-party/2016/06/24/c7bdba34-3942-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

 

Henry Paulson, Republican, former chief executive of Goldman Sachs and former US secretary of the Treasury supports Hillary Clinton. Why? because Trump refuses to touch Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

 

I have no further comment.

 Okay I must apologize to you. I always assumed you were a Trump supporter and you wouldn't post a negative Trump article 

 

But this is a very powerful and thought provoking perspective and  offers insights about Trump that should concern every American on this forum

 

I only know of WOD  who is definitely voting Trump but I would  really appreciate if any Trump forum supporters would read this and still decide to vote for Trump ?

 

 

On the contrary it was to higlight that the traditional left-right paradigm is evaporating and the globalist-nationalist is emerging.

 

oh....because it paints Trump in a very bad light....did you not read the whole article ?

 

 

Only if one considers Paulson's opinion anything worthwhile.

 

Of course most people would and  he is  a very respected banker and was Secretary of the Treasury

 

So the relevant question is  "  why wouldnt you respect him and what he says "  

[Meshugger]

[Wrath of Dagon]

Only if one considers Paulson's opinion anything worthwhile.

Of course, he brought us the 2008 financial crash and recession, what's not to like?

 

Immigrants no longer have to pledge to defend America to become citizens: http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/06/27/tancredo-oath-to-defend-america-optional-because-it-could-reduce-muslim-immigration/

[Wrath of Dagon]

The smartest man in the Trump campaign: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/stephen-miller-donald-trump-2016-policy-adviser-jeff-sessions-213992

[Valsuelm]

I genuinely believe no one is supporting Trump for any reason he can take credit for. They are not "for" him, they are against Hillary.

 

You would be wrong, and I suggest expanding your horizons to include more people of different mindsets, so you are not wrong about such things in the future.

 

There's a lot of folks who support Trump for a variety of reasons. Those are the ones that have been on his bandwagon for many or more months. The 'voting for Trump so we don't get Hillary crowd' hasn't yet factored in all that much. A good many, if not most of the folks in that crowd are still dazed and confused of sorts. They haven't yet come to terms with the idea that they will need to vote Trump if they don't want Hillary Clinton in office. Almost every Bernie supporter I know, as well as even many diehard lifetime red voters are in this crowd.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Valsuelm]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-it-comes-to-trump-a-republican-treasury-secretary-says-choose-country-over-party/2016/06/24/c7bdba34-3942-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

 

Henry Paulson, Republican, former chief executive of Goldman Sachs and former US secretary of the Treasury supports Hillary Clinton. Why? because Trump refuses to touch Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

 

I have no further comment.

 

Paulson should be in jail, for a long long long long time.....

 

The guy is the purest form of scum. His endorsement of anyone or anything should raise any astute person's eyebrows and cause them to concernedly question. If the guy said I should eat my favorite ice cream that I've been eating for years, I'd have second thoughts about ever doing it again.

[Leferd]

 

 

http://us.cnn.com/2016/06/26/politics/hillary-clinton-leads-donald-trump-polls/index.html

 

A bit of good news for Clinton supporters , its at least predictable and I prefer that considering the BREXIT initial shock

I dislike just using one or two polls to make an argument, but FiveThirtyEight grades WashingtonPost/ABC News as an A+ pollster. There's something to that.

 

Looking at the big picture, Clinton has had a steady, and sometimes huge lead in the aggregate over Trump since the start of the campaign season.

 

 

It's getting closer to final bell and Clinton's been more than capable of absorbing Trump's haymakers.

It's all media propaganda. When the Libertarians and the Greens are included in the polls, Hilzilla and Trump are tied: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/us/politics/donald-trump-slips-further-behind-hillary-clinton-in-new-polls.html?_r=2

You mean this?

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

 

As of right now, Clinton's still up 5.6% in the aggregate in a four way with Trump, Johnson, and Stein.

[Guard Dog]

 

I genuinely believe no one is supporting Trump for any reason he can take credit for. They are not "for" him, they are against Hillary.

 

You would be wrong, and I suggest expanding your horizons to include more people of different mindsets, so you are not wrong about such things in the future.

 

There's a lot of folks who support Trump for a variety of reasons. Those are the ones that have been on his bandwagon for many or more months. The 'voting for Trump so we don't get Hillary crowd' hasn't yet factored in all that much. A good many, if not most of the folks in that crowd are still dazed and confused of sorts. They haven't yet come to terms with the idea that they will need to vote Trump if they don't want Hillary Clinton in office. Almost every Bernie supporter I know, as well as even many diehard lifetime red voters are in this crowd.

 

I should clarify. I was not referring to voters in general. I really meant the members of the WoT forum who were supporting Trump. You are correct in that I would be wrong to assume no one supports him on his merits. He's only gotten more Republican primary votes than... well anyone I can remember.

[Enoch]

 

It's all media propaganda. When the Libertarians and the Greens are included in the polls, Hilzilla and Trump are tied: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/us/politics/donald-trump-slips-further-behind-hillary-clinton-in-new-polls.html?_r=2

You mean this?

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

 

As of right now, Clinton's still up 5.6% in the aggregate in a four way with Trump, Johnson, and Stein.

 

 

3rd party folks also consistently underperform polling-- particularly polling this early.  People are not frequently motivated enough to show up on election day just to cast a protest vote. 

[Guard Dog]

 

 

It's all media propaganda. When the Libertarians and the Greens are included in the polls, Hilzilla and Trump are tied: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/us/politics/donald-trump-slips-further-behind-hillary-clinton-in-new-polls.html?_r=2

You mean this?

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

 

As of right now, Clinton's still up 5.6% in the aggregate in a four way with Trump, Johnson, and Stein.

 

 

3rd party folks also consistently underperform polling-- particularly polling this early.  People are not frequently motivated enough to show up on election day just to cast a protest vote. 

 

Well there is more at stake than just the President. In fact given the choice is between Clinton and Trump the congressional elections are particularly important this year. Plus there is the State legislature, State offices, County offices even my own boss is up for re-election. I realize these don't get the attention they deserve and that is a shame because they are important. I'm casting my vote for Gary Johnson this year because I have large and completely irreconcilable differences with both Clinton & Trump but there is a lot more motivation to get me to the poll than just a protest vote.

[Enoch]

Sure, true believers in the movement that a 3rd-party candidate represents are going to show up, but folks like you are not exactly numerous.  And, yes, it's a truism that local elections have more impact on the day-to-day lives of most citizens, but, in practice, there is still a pretty huge bump in turnout during Presidential election years.  Most of those people are showing up to make sure that their guy/gal ends up in the White House (or, more likely this year, to ensure that the other guy/gal doesn't get within spitting distance of the place).  If that's their goal, they're not voting for Johnson or Stein.

[Guard Dog]

Sure, true believers in the movement that a 3rd-party candidate represents are going to show up, but folks like you are not exactly numerous.  And, yes, it's a truism that local elections have more impact on the day-to-day lives of most citizens, but, in practice, there is still a pretty huge bump in turnout during Presidential election years.  Most of those people are showing up to make sure that their guy/gal ends up in the White House (or, more likely this year, to ensure that the other guy/gal doesn't get within spitting distance of the place).  If that's their goal, they're not voting for Johnson or Stein.

My biggest hope as far as a the LP is concerned is to just do better this time than last. Getting 70 minutes of exposure on CNN was a big deal last week. It's a pity they did not make better use of it. I think a viable Green & LP party challenging the Elephants & Jackasses for real congressional seats will be a good thing and at least the LP i on the ballot in all states on a regular basis now. But as far as negative voting I'm afraid that sums up every presidential vote I've ever cast save two. I didn't like Dole but I didn't hate Clinton so I voted for Harry Brown that year. I didn't care for George W Bush but I absolutely HATED Al Gore so that was a negative vote. I dislike Kerry and Bush equally so I voted LP that year too. The next two were against Obama who, at first at least, scared the bejesus out of me. Not because of his melanin percentage or that he might be a "closet Muslim".  It because he was (and still is) and ideologue, a "true believer" in the almighty power of the State. You are a lawyer and a highly educated man Enoch, can you honestly tell me some of his actions don't make you very uncomfortable? The worst of which being using a non existent executive authority to change laws passed by congress and signed by him long after the fact? If a President can do that, what can't they do?

 

Hillary Clinton is a sour, foul tempered and basically dishonest individual that seems to look down her nose at everyone not named Hillary Clinton. She is not someone I'd want to spend any time around. That said she is politically pragmatic and a quintessential "machine politician". She probably would not be the worst President we've ever had. If it wasn't for the fact that she would give us another Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Court I would be a bit more indifferent to her. Trump just woke up one day and decided he wanted to be President. What bothers me is he's promising to do things a President can't do and people are cheering him on for it. Which means he will probably do them anyway. As Obama has demonstrated if a President does something bad and gets away with it, it's now as accepted as being OK. That is dangerous. Very, very dangerous. 

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

 

http://us.cnn.com/2016/06/26/politics/hillary-clinton-leads-donald-trump-polls/index.html

 

A bit of good news for Clinton supporters , its at least predictable and I prefer that considering the BREXIT initial shock

I dislike just using one or two polls to make an argument, but FiveThirtyEight grades WashingtonPost/ABC News as an A+ pollster. There's something to that.

 

Looking at the big picture, Clinton has had a steady, and sometimes huge lead in the aggregate over Trump since the start of the campaign season.

 

 

It's getting closer to final bell and Clinton's been more than capable of absorbing Trump's haymakers.

 

It's all media propaganda. When the Libertarians and the Greens are included in the polls, Hilzilla and Trump are tied: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/27/us/politics/donald-trump-slips-further-behind-hillary-clinton-in-new-polls.html?_r=2

 

You mean this?

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

 

As of right now, Clinton's still up 5.6% in the aggregate in a four way with Trump, Johnson, and Stein.

 

Sorry, I should've read that article more carefully. It only said they were tied in the WSJ/NBC poll.

 

As far as third parties underperforming, that's certainly true. But a lot of other things will change between now and election also, the campaign hasn't even officially started yet.

[Enoch]

 You are a lawyer and a highly educated man Enoch, can you honestly tell me some of his actions don't make you very uncomfortable? The worst of which being using a non existent executive authority to change laws passed by congress and signed by him long after the fact? If a President can do that, what can't they do?

 

This skirts dangerously close to my day job, so I'll just say that I'm inherently suspicious of most executive branch authority.  The administration has lots of smart lawyers who can always make an at-least-somewhat-credible case for their actions falling within legal limits.  Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don't-- depends on the details.  That said, the dysfunction of the Congress hasn't given the executive many other options over the past couple presidencies. And many of their more legally tenuous offerings are better understood as political gambits (e.g., "I'm going to do this because it'll make my opponents look bad when they complain about it, sue, or reverse it via legislation.") than they are pushing the limits on executive authority.  

[Guard Dog]

If a President is frustrated by Congressional intransigence I'd tell them tough luck. Congress is what Congress is.Use the bully pulpit to call them out if you want. But their refusal or even inability to act is NOT an open invitation to usurp their responsibilities. Could you imagine if a President shuffled their feet nominating a candidate for the SC so the Senate decided to do it for him/her? That wouldn't fly. 

[Guard Dog]

http://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2363

 

Latest Quinnipiac has this circus in a dead heat. Make of that what you will, we are a hell of a long way from the point where polls matter. But I do love this quote:

 

 

"This is where we are. Voters find themselves in the middle of a mean-spirited, scorched earth campaign between two candidates they don't like. And they don't think either candidate would be a good president."

 

In other news Gary Johnson seems to be stuck at 8% and he'll have to do better to be invited to the debates. But after his performance on CNN, perhaps it's for the best. 

[Wrath of Dagon]

Third parties will never be viable until the election system is changed, which is unlikely as it's not in the interests of the two major parties.

[BruceVC]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/conventional-wisdom-was-firing-his-campaign-manager-a-turning-point-for-trump/

 

 

Guys here is an interesting link that a forum member sent me through PM , not sure if  this has been posted before 

[Guard Dog]

Everything I'm reading makes it sound like Elizabeth Warren is going to be Hillary's choice for VP. I think that would be a terrible idea. First of all she is a Senator from Massachusetts, a state Hillary will win no matter what. So no help there. Second she is Hillary's mirror image. She would be better served by using this pick to throw a bone to the Bernie Sanders populist crowd. Not Sanders himself, that would be a terrible idea. Someone like Jeff Merkley (Senator from Oregon) or Tulsi Gabbard (US Rep HI AND an Army Vet) would be solid choices. 

 

Just my $.02