US Election 2016, part III

[Pidesco]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/13/ahead-of-gop-convention-cleveland-officials-affirm-protesters-may-carry-guns/

Ahead of GOP Convention, Cleveland Officials Affirm Protesters May Carry Guns 

But water guns, toy guns, knives, aerosol cans, rope, tennis balls are barred

 

[Guard Dog]

Is everyone missing how Trump takes every opportunity to say revolting xenophobic, extremist crap? Unless a video comes out of Clinton clubbing baby seals while screaming "I love gun control" at the top of her lungs and stealing food directly from the mouths of starving babies, Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

The Republican Party drove itself into a horrible corner, that depends on the votes of the aging white men demographic to win anything. They'll have to do a complete about-face if they want to stay relevant in the future. If the election goes as badly for Trump as it currently seems like, perhaps Republicans will get a grip and start doing something to change their insane outlook. Or perhaps they'll double down on the crazy again. If they do, FSM help America.

 

Perhaps if the Republican party collapses, a non insane conservative party option will appear to take its place, somehow. After seeing that Samantha Bee video on the Libertarian convention, I don't think the Libertarians will be that option.

 

The US has a two party system by design, by the way. As long as you don't move away from first-past-the-post (impossible, I think), voting for a third party will always be a waste.

Well the LP used to be a fringe with a capital "F" group. It still has a lot of 40 year old adolescents in it. But in the 80s & 90s we had a Republican and Democrat parties that were two different and relatively sane groups. Throw out Trump for a moment. He is an aberration. Suppose Jeb Bush was the nominee. Could you even make a list of meaningful differences between him and Hillary Clinton? Now the Dems & Repubs are practically the same thing from an aspect of governing positions. And this despite all the sniping they do at each other. So now there is a real need for a "third way". Well, staring a political party is hard. It's expensive. It's better to join one that already exists and already has an infrastructure. The Libertarian Party has that. It's been around since 1971 and is only recently beginning to have any electoral success to speak of. So it's only now beginning to become a viable thing. In 2004 there were 1300+ Libertarians in elected office around the country. In 2014 there were 3300+. It was just a party in the literal sense in the 80's and 90's when there was no real need or demand for a 3rd option. Now there IS a need and it's time for it to "grow up" and become what the founder David Nolan envisioned when he was horrified at the machiavellian big governments of Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon.

 

We don't need to win the Presidency. All we need to move forward is just 5% of the vote and to see at least one or two libertarians win congressional seats. Then maybe a few more and a few more. 10 Libertarian representatives in Congress forms a caucus. That means things they do, positions they take will make news because suddenly there are enough to swing a vote one way or the other. And we need to continue seeing LP candidates get elected at the state level. This is already well underway.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Guard Dog

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Perhaps if the Republican party collapses, a non insane conservative party option will appear to take its place, somehow.

It's going to be the Democrats. The Republicans screwed themselves years ago aligning with the family values folk and it's biting them in the ass hard. A lot of businesses are going to support democrats, and a lot already do, because they'll act in their interests without pissing off the growing swathes of people. So we'll see more democrats like Cory Booker(who had Ivanka Trump and her husband run a fundraiser for him) while the last of the Bernie Sanders die out.

[Pidesco]

 

Is everyone missing how Trump takes every opportunity to say revolting xenophobic, extremist crap? Unless a video comes out of Clinton clubbing baby seals while screaming "I love gun control" at the top of her lungs and stealing food directly from the mouths of starving babies, Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

The Republican Party drove itself into a horrible corner, that depends on the votes of the aging white men demographic to win anything. They'll have to do a complete about-face if they want to stay relevant in the future. If the election goes as badly for Trump as it currently seems like, perhaps Republicans will get a grip and start doing something to change their insane outlook. Or perhaps they'll double down on the crazy again. If they do, FSM help America.

 

Perhaps if the Republican party collapses, a non insane conservative party option will appear to take its place, somehow. After seeing that Samantha Bee video on the Libertarian convention, I don't think the Libertarians will be that option.

 

The US has a two party system by design, by the way. As long as you don't move away from first-past-the-post (impossible, I think), voting for a third party will always be a waste.

Well the LP used to be a fringe with a capital "F" group. It still has a lot of 40 year old adolescents in it. But in the 80s & 90s we had a Republican and Democrat parties that were two different and relatively sane groups. Throw out Trump for a moment. He is an aberration. Suppose Jeb Bush was the nominee. Could you even make a list of meaningful differences between him and Hillary Clinton? Now the Dems & Repubs are practically the same thing from an aspect of governing positions. And this despite all the sniping they do at each other. So now there is a real need for a "third way". Well, staring a political party is hard. It's expensive. It's better to join one that already exists and already has an infrastructure. The Libertarian Party has that. It's been around since 1971 and is only recently beginning to have any electoral success to speak of. So it's only now beginning to become a viable thing. In 2004 there were 1300+ Libertarians in elected office around the country. In 2014 there were 3300+. It was just a party in the literal sense in the 80's and 90's when there was no real need or demand for a 3rd option. Now there IS a need and it's time for it to "grow up" and become what the founder David Nolan envisioned when he was horrified at the machiavellian big governments of Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon.

 

We don't need to win the Presidency. All we need to move forward is just 5% of the vote and to see at least one or two libertarians win congressional seats. Then maybe a few more and a few more. 10 Libertarian representatives in Congress forms a caucus. That means things they do, positions they take will make news because suddenly there are enough to swing a vote one way or the other. And we need to continue seeing LP candidates get elected at the state level. This is already well underway.

 

 

Jeb Bush crashed from the Republican Primary faster than you could say "oh, wait, he's gone." Trump is an insane aberration but, in the context of the Republican party's evolution and the rise of the Tea Party, he's not that weird. Cruz, his biggest rival in the end, was kind of worse than Trump. That insane surgeon guy said horrible crap as well. Kasich was not terrible I guess, but I have to wonder how much of that came from standing next to stupid. Rubio was emptier than Eastwood's chair.

 

All this to say that, unfortunately, Trump is not a tumor unfortunately growing on the side of the Republican Party structure.  He's a direct consequence of their overarching strategy, and depends directly on the core Republican base that the party has been cultivating for over 40 years.

 

 

 

Perhaps if the Republican party collapses, a non insane conservative party option will appear to take its place, somehow.

It's going to be the Democrats. The Republicans screwed themselves years ago aligning with the family values folk and it's biting them in the ass hard. A lot of businesses are going to support democrats, and a lot already do, because they'll act in their interests without pissing off the growing swathes of people. So we'll see more democrats like Cory Booker(who had Ivanka Trump and her husband run a fundraiser for him) while the last of the Bernie Sanders die out.

 

 

If it's the Democrats, I'd guess that a Party to the left of the Democrats would have to rise out of nowhere. I'm curious to see what a party to the left of the Democrats with a chance of winning elections would look like.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

At this point I'd say the most likely outcome, barring a huge economic crash, is that the democrats get an effective monopoly with a few minor wins for opposition parties for maybe two decades. They won't step on banker toes or cause too many waves for their funders and we'll see the media spin how progressive America is for electing rich women, rich non-whites, and rich folk of various sexuality.

[redneckdevil]

Trump u would have the fbi and the AG doing their job at least, to me it says a lot when the "police" we have for the politicians won't do anything to the party who pays their bills.

So for a mostly demo senate, I'd rather have a rep president and a rep run senate I'd rather have a demo president.

With Hillary, she would have a most demo senate and it goes without saying the FBI and Attorny General letting her get away with anything.

IMHO Hillary is getting Rdy to get in a position of really Total power. Demo rate or republican, either one that's a scary position for USA to me. That's too much power for anyone, not the least someone who is "incompentant".

[Wrath of Dagon]

Everybody is freaking out about Ginsburg's comments, and the chance that we will get another one of her on the SC.  But she is 83 years old, so I'd try to keep that in mind.  The odds are more likely we'll get two moderates to replace Scalia and Ginsburg in the long run, because even with a liberal President, you've got a conservative congress.

Congress as a whole has nothing to do with it, it's the Senate that confirms nominees. And if Hilzilla wins, Dems are very likely to take the Senate. In fact that's pretty likely regardless. Not to mention it's been a very long time since a Dem president has appointed anyone but an out and out liberal to SC.

 

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/13/ahead-of-gop-convention-cleveland-officials-affirm-protesters-may-carry-guns/

Ahead of GOP Convention, Cleveland Officials Affirm Protesters May Carry Guns 

But water guns, toy guns, knives, aerosol cans, rope, tennis balls are barred

I believe you're required to have a license to carry a gun in Ohio.

[kgambit]

 

Everybody is freaking out about Ginsburg's comments, and the chance that we will get another one of her on the SC.  But she is 83 years old, so I'd try to keep that in mind.  The odds are more likely we'll get two moderates to replace Scalia and Ginsburg in the long run, because even with a liberal President, you've got a conservative congress.

Congress as a whole has nothing to do with it, it's the Senate that confirms nominees. And if Hilzilla wins, Dems are very likely to take the Senate. In fact that's pretty likely regardless. Not to mention it's been a very long time since a Dem president has appointed anyone but an out and out liberal to SC.

 

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/07/13/ahead-of-gop-convention-cleveland-officials-affirm-protesters-may-carry-guns/

Ahead of GOP Convention, Cleveland Officials Affirm Protesters May Carry Guns 

But water guns, toy guns, knives, aerosol cans, rope, tennis balls are barred

I believe you're required to have a license to carry a gun in Ohio.

 

 

Ohio is a traditional open carry state.  I think a license is only required for concealed carry.    

[Rosbjerg]

Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

I fear we're all underestimating the rapidly growing discontent of the western middle class with the status quo.. To the point that I fear both Trump and Le Pen have a very real chance to win in their respective elections.

[Meshugger]

Hahahaha

 

https://www.facebook.com/DonaldTrump/videos/vb.153080620724/10157309144940725/?type=2&theater

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

I fear we're all underestimating the rapidly growing discontent of the western middle class with the status quo.. To the point that I fear both Trump and Le Pen have a very real chance to win in their respective elections.

 

 

Yep. It could easily swing like Brexit did.

[redneckdevil]

Hahahaha

 

https://www.facebook.com/DonaldTrump/videos/vb.153080620724/10157309144940725/?type=2&theater

Lmfao!!! That's savage

[Pidesco]

 

Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

I fear we're all underestimating the rapidly growing discontent of the western middle class with the status quo.. To the point that I fear both Trump and Le Pen have a very real chance to win in their respective elections.

 

 

 

Immediately after the Brexit vote I thought that there was that risk, but Trump seems to be intent on staying within his primary talking points, which appeal to the Republican base and almost literally no one else in the US. His VP pick appears to be dire, and has already been lambasted even before it has been officially announced.

[Namutree]

Is everyone missing how Trump takes every opportunity to say revolting xenophobic, extremist crap? 

Revolting to whom?

 

On those issues such as illegal immigration and the temporary muslim ban the majority of Americans agree with him. Considering that Islamic attacks are getting more common I can only imagine this is going to increase in the coming months as well.

 

Unless a video comes out of Clinton clubbing baby seals while screaming "I love gun control" at the top of her lungs and stealing food directly from the mouths of starving babies, Trump isn't going to win in November.

Every time an Islamist commits a terrorist attack in the west Trump wins a little bit among the public. If they commit enough of them he'll win, and there's nothing Hillary can do about that. 

 

 

They'll have to do a complete about-face if they want to stay relevant in the future. If the election goes as badly for Trump as it currently seems like, perhaps Republicans will get a grip and start doing something to change their insane outlook.

 

For now at least that's not a problem. As for the future, they absolutely must embrace the libertarians on social issues. They could save themselves if they're the ones to end the drug war, and if they stop fighting homosexuality. The SJW-left's Islamist pandering has put gays into play.

[Pidesco]

 

Is everyone missing how Trump takes every opportunity to say revolting xenophobic, extremist crap?

Revolting to whom?

 

 

 

“I would bring back waterboarding and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding."

 

"If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?"

 

“When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

 

“Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, right? He was a bad guy. Really bad guy,” Trump begins. “But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn’t read them the rights, they didn’t talk. They were a terrorists - it was over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism.”

 

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families”

 

 

 

Fun stuff.

[Namutree]

 

 

Is everyone missing how Trump takes every opportunity to say revolting xenophobic, extremist crap?

Revolting to whom?

 

 

 

“I would bring back waterboarding and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding."

 

"If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?"

 

“When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

 

“Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, right? He was a bad guy. Really bad guy,” Trump begins. “But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn’t read them the rights, they didn’t talk. They were a terrorists - it was over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism.”

 

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families”

 

 

 

Fun stuff.

 

That's fine and dandy that YOU don't like it, but we're talking about an election in the US. So again, revolting to who?

 

Evangelicals? Aside from the Hillary can't satisfy Bill remark, they don't care. While they do care about the Hillary can't satisfy Bill remark; they don't care nearly enough not to vote for him when the prospect of Hillary as president is haunting their nightmares. 

 

Nationalists? They just don't give a crap. He's against TPP and wants the invaders out. He can say whatever he wants so long as it isn't anti-American.

 

Social Liberals? They weren't going to vote republican anyway, and they're not thrilled with Hillary. Most won't even show up to vote come November. Trump is crap, Hillary is crap. Why bother? That will be there excuse, mark my words.

 

Internet culture warriors? The left ones will not bother to vote come November cuz' they won't get to virtue signal. The right ones find it more lulzy than revolting.

 

Libertarians? I guess a few of them (see Guard Dog), but they don't really matter, and none of them will vote Hillary.

[Meshugger]

 

 

Is everyone missing how Trump takes every opportunity to say revolting xenophobic, extremist crap?

Revolting to whom?

 

 

 

“I would bring back waterboarding and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding."

 

"If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?"

 

“When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

 

“Saddam Hussein was a bad guy, right? He was a bad guy. Really bad guy,” Trump begins. “But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn’t read them the rights, they didn’t talk. They were a terrorists - it was over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism.”

 

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families”

 

 

 

Fun stuff.

 

 

In a culture of Oikophobia where the intelligentia consists of xenophiliacs preaching Patroiocide, beggars cannot be choosers.

[Guard Dog]

Looks like Mike Pence, the governor of Indiana will be Trump's VP pick. It's a safe pick. He's a middle of the road Republican with appeals to some groups Trump is weak in. He won't grab headlines or embarrass the ticket but not much name recognition beyond the Midwest. 

[redneckdevil]

I'm hoping for trey gowdy as his VP pick.

[Namutree]

Looks like Mike Pence, the governor of Indiana will be Trump's VP pick. It's a safe pick. He's a middle of the road Republican with appeals to some groups Trump is weak in. He won't grab headlines or embarrass the ticket but not much name recognition beyond the Midwest. 

As long as it's not Newt.

 

For me that would be a deal breaker. I would sooner let Hillary destroy the country than see that man get near the presidency. At least with Hillary America could die with some dignity. 

Edited July 15, 2016 by Namutree

[Guard Dog]

Agreed. Speaking as an objective observer, Newt Gingrich would have been a fatal error. He is a very intelligent man and he knows how to get his way in Congress. He's on a first name basis with all the power players in Washington. But he has a history of doing cold hearted and unsavory things to family and associates. Most of his dirty laundry is old news but it would be dusted off and hung out again if he were the running mate. Some voters hay not have heard it yet. Like Hillary and Trump himself he is not a likeable man that people are going to trust. 

 

Plus he wrote a series of novels that examined what the country would be like if the South would have won the Civil War. By itself it is an interesting exercise in historical fiction. But in today's political climate with racial tensions elevated a lot would be made of it. 

[BruceVC]

 

 

Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

I fear we're all underestimating the rapidly growing discontent of the western middle class with the status quo.. To the point that I fear both Trump and Le Pen have a very real chance to win in their respective elections.

 

 

 

Immediately after the Brexit vote I thought that there was that risk, but Trump seems to be intent on staying within his primary talking points, which appeal to the Republican base and almost literally no one else in the US. His VP pick appears to be dire, and has already been lambasted even before it has been officially announced.

 

Guys Hilary Clinton is going to win the Presidential race in November, I thought this was something we had all begrudgingly or kind of agreed on?

 

Why are we even doubting this?

[Guard Dog]

 

 

 

Trump isn't going to win in November.

 

I fear we're all underestimating the rapidly growing discontent of the western middle class with the status quo.. To the point that I fear both Trump and Le Pen have a very real chance to win in their respective elections.

 

 

 

Immediately after the Brexit vote I thought that there was that risk, but Trump seems to be intent on staying within his primary talking points, which appeal to the Republican base and almost literally no one else in the US. His VP pick appears to be dire, and has already been lambasted even before it has been officially announced.

 

Guys Hilary Clinton is going to win the Presidential race in November, I thought this was something we had all begrudgingly or kind of agreed on?

 

Why are we even doubting this?

 

Well she is now trailing in the major polls by 5+ points. Once again we haven't even had the conventions yet so make of that  what you will. But a Clinton victory is anything but assured. November is an eternity away in the sense of election time. The third parties are gaining steam, Clinton hasn't selected a VP yet and that is an opportunity to help or hurt herself. There is still a very long way to go and the outcome is far from certain for anyone.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Guys Hilary Clinton is going to win the Presidential race in November, I thought this was something we had all begrudgingly or kind of agreed on?

 

Why are we even doubting this?

Better stock up on Kleenex for all the crying you're going to do Bruce. I won't predict who'll win, but I'll predict a blow out. Edited July 15, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Guard Dog]

I must admit... a Trump victory would make this forum a very interesting place for a few weeks!