US Presidential Election 2016

Post by **Omega** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 3:49 am

Trump won big time. Should get at least 89 delegates I'm sure Cruz is searching with his establishment pals for a way to steal them.

Sanders did well but I really wanted him to beat Hillary , thing is she only wins 29 more delegates than he gets. He's still in the race, except for the d**n super delegates.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Kristatos** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:21 am

It was a pretty hectic day yesterday, otherwise I'd have posted the news story about 600,000 registered Democrats disappearing from the voter rolls in Brooklyn (where, by an amazing coincidence, Bernie just happens to enjoy hometown advantage). Anyway, here's a pretty map of precincts won by Bernie (buff) and Hillary (blue):

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 2:56 pm

It's 120,000 Brooklyn voters that "disappeared" by magic

Hillary had her contacts do it most likely in Brooklyn

The map shows only NYC and Nassau and Suffolk counties and Westchester won it for her. She lost everywhere else.

Post by **Kristatos** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 8:31 pm

bjmdds wrote:It's 120,000 Brooklyn voters that "disappeared" by magic Hillary had her contacts do it most likely in Brooklyn The map shows only NYC and Nassau and Suffolk counties and Westchester won it for her. She lost everywhere else.

I think I added an extra zero to the original figure, but it has since doubled: http://usuncut.com/politics/nyc-mayor-r ... ter-purge/

Post by **bjmdds** » Thu Apr 21, 2016 8:43 pm

Big O, look at Pennsylvania's ridiculous ballot

You vote for President AND delegates BUT, you have NO clue who the delegates are for, and there are 54 that get elected.......a freaking joke

http://www.chesco.org/DocumentCenter/View/32940

Post by **Omega** » Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:18 am

I think with the new polls the never trump people are becoming maybe trump and never Hillary. Still guys are out there coming up with painfully contrived math to say trump isn't really a head, if you add up all the percentages more voted against trump than for him. Whatever

take a candidate of choice, say Cruze it's 80% voted against him if you use that reasoning.

These creeps wish they had super delegates, I think they realize now even stealing a few like Cruze is doing is never going to be enough to stop trump.

And I don't get how they defend these rigged voter less elections where from all reports its a kangaroo court, lot of people who came to represent trump or Cruze being pushed aside, tricked and ignored to put party supporters in.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Kristatos** » Sat Apr 23, 2016 8:42 am

Many of the party grandees hate Cruz almost as much as they hate Trump. They'd install Kasich as the nominee if they thought they could get away with it.

Post by **Omega** » Sat Apr 23, 2016 2:43 pm

Kristatos wrote:Many of the party grandees hate Cruz almost as much as they hate Trump. They'd install Kasich as the nominee if they thought they could get away with it.

I think both parties are scared because the house rules used to keep the odds in the favor of the house are exposed.

I don't know who is using who, Cruz or the establishment. Cruz thinks he'll steal the nomination from the someone with 6 million more votes and nobody will care because it's in the rules? The establishment is just as crazy but desperate enough to try it, I do believe they'd throw Cruz under the bus first chance.

What I don't understand is why if democrats believe trump is going to lose the general election do they care and are helping with #nevertrump
.
Btw that hashtag is why so many are pissed in CO about the stealing delegates.

Strange thing all the attacks now on trump may inoculate him from the attacks in the fall.

The success of sanders and trump is almost unpredictable but it shows IMO most people are sick of being ruled by elected officials. Sanders and trump are populists who do not think they are above the people who vote for them, I don't think I can say that about any of the other candidates.

The rise of populism was predictable, Obama was a populist candidate more or less. He promised many of the same things, just he was a safe choice because he was establishment approved. Trump and sanders are third party candidates but they learned they don't have a chance unless running with under a national label, so they are hijacking the brand. And the people who thought we were ready for jeb! And Hillary! Are shocked.

Post by **Kristatos** » Sat Apr 23, 2016 4:37 pm

BJ, you know I don't often agree with you when it comes to politics, but I think you have hit the nail on the head here. Deep down, I think the Dem establishment knows that Hillary is the worst possible candidate to run against Trump. As I'm sure I've said before, this is a change election, and Hillary is not a change candidate. But like the Mafia, they are ruled by a twisted code of loyalty which means more to them than anything, even winning. Their donor class loves Hillary, because she represents a sort of anodyne liberalism that allows them to feel virtuous without requiring any sacrifice on their part. Hillary supporters tend to be the sort of people who regard an all-female Ghostbusters movie as a great leap forward for women, but paying their cleaners a living wage as tantamount to Stalinism.
(Edit: oops, sorry Omega, I thought that last post was by BJ for some reason).

Post by **Omega** » Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:44 am

I don't think bj is that far from me on this except I would vote sanders if it's Cruz as the alternative.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **Omega** » Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:47 am

Looks like trump is going to win big. Btw how can they call states with less than 5% in .

Sander is very close to Clinton, wouldn't be surprised if it was rigged by a few hundred votes in her favor.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post by **bjmdds** » Thu Apr 28, 2016 8:41 pm

A new poll out today from Rasmussen Reports shows that the parties' two frontrunners are tied among likely voters at 38 percent, but 24 percent would like to opt out of the presidential race. Further breaking down that 1-in-4 figure, pollsters found that 16 percent would vote for some other candidate if they were forced to choose between Trump and Clinton. Another 6 percent would stay home and 2 percent remain undecided.

Post by **Kristatos** » Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:47 pm

Well, this is a first: a US presidential candidate just followed me on Twitter. Admittedly a candidate who has about as much chance of becoming president as I do, but still....

I should add that this wasn't entirely out of the blue. Dr Azarvan and I have a few mutual friends on social media and Facebook groups in common.

Post by **Goldeneye** » Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:49 pm

Kristatos wrote:Well, this is a first: a US presidential candidate just followed me on Twitter. Admittedly a candidate who has about as much chance of becoming president as I do, but still....

I should add that this wasn't entirely out of the blue. Dr Azarvan and I have a few mutual friends on social media and Facebook groups in common.

So are you in the running for Secretary of Education?

In this election year I wouldn't rule out anybody winning. I thought it was going to be Trump following you, seems like the kind of thing he'd do.

I'm really starting to lean toward a different more representative system for the United States, the two party system is falling down. It was no great shakes to begin with.

Post by **Kristatos** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 9:03 pm

I doubt I'd be on Trump's or Hillary's radar, or even Jill Stein's or Gary Johnson's. But there are literally thousands of these minor parties. Unfortunately, Dr Azarvan had to pull out, as the university where he teaches told him that he would have to take an unpaid leave of absence in order to campaign, and as the sole breadwinner for a family of five, he couldn't afford to do that. That's what happens when regular folks, as opposed to career politicians, try to run for President.

Post by **bjmdds** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 2:20 pm

A Democratic member of the House Armed Services Committee compared Jewish Israeli settlers to termites on Monday while speaking at an event sponsored by an anti-Israel organization that supports boycotts of the Jewish state.

Rep. Hank Johnson, D- Ga., launched into a tirade against Israel and its policies toward the Palestinians, comparing Jewish people who live in disputed territories to “termites” that destroy homes. Johnson, who in 2010 voiced his fears that Guam would tip over and capsize if too many people resided on the island, said that “Jewish people” routinely steal land and property from Palestinians.

Post by **Goldeneye** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 8:11 pm

Kristatos wrote:I doubt I'd be on Trump's or Hillary's radar, or even Jill Stein's or Gary Johnson's. But there are literally thousands of these minor parties. Unfortunately, Dr Azarvan had to pull out, as the university where he teaches told him that he would have to take an unpaid leave of absence in order to campaign, and as the sole breadwinner for a family of five, he couldn't afford to do that. That's what happens when regular folks, as opposed to career politicians, try to run for President.

Anybody who travels for eight months campaigning does not have a regular job they need to pay the bills. Maybe why we are constantly inundated with senators vying for the top job. Nobody cares if they show up for work!

But I am tired of the two party system. Something more democratic would be a nice change of pace. The two parties are so entrenched nobody can get anything done without them.

Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:27 pm

Goldeneye wrote:
Kristatos wrote:I doubt I'd be on Trump's or Hillary's radar, or even Jill Stein's or Gary Johnson's. But there are literally thousands of these minor parties. Unfortunately, Dr Azarvan had to pull out, as the university where he teaches told him that he would have to take an unpaid leave of absence in order to campaign, and as the sole breadwinner for a family of five, he couldn't afford to do that. That's what happens when regular folks, as opposed to career politicians, try to run for President.
Anybody who travels for eight months campaigning does not have a regular job they need to pay the bills. Maybe why we are constantly inundated with senators vying for the top job. Nobody cares if they show up for work!

But I am tired of the two party system. Something more democratic would be a nice change of pace. The two parties are so entrenched nobody can get anything done without them.

It's similar in most places with two big parties - one right on left - dominating things. Although in the UK we have the Scottish National Party who have taken over in Scotland.

Post by **Kristatos** » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:34 pm

Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry wrote:
Goldeneye wrote:
Kristatos wrote:I doubt I'd be on Trump's or Hillary's radar, or even Jill Stein's or Gary Johnson's. But there are literally thousands of these minor parties. Unfortunately, Dr Azarvan had to pull out, as the university where he teaches told him that he would have to take an unpaid leave of absence in order to campaign, and as the sole breadwinner for a family of five, he couldn't afford to do that. That's what happens when regular folks, as opposed to career politicians, try to run for President.
Anybody who travels for eight months campaigning does not have a regular job they need to pay the bills. Maybe why we are constantly inundated with senators vying for the top job. Nobody cares if they show up for work!

But I am tired of the two party system. Something more democratic would be a nice change of pace. The two parties are so entrenched nobody can get anything done without them.
It's similar in most places with two big parties - one right on left - dominating things. Although in the UK we have the Scottish National Party who have taken over in Scotland.

We pretty much have 5-party politics even in England, with the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems, UKIP and the Greens all having representation in Parliament. Add to that Plaid Cymru and the SNP, with Mebyon Kernow having some success at the local level, and we have a much more varied political landscape, even with a first past the post voting system. It would probably be even more so if we had proportional representation.

Post by **bjmdds** » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:57 pm

If TV ratings are any indication, Hillary Clinton’s acceptance speech apparently didn’t interest Americans as much as it interested establishment media, which lauded it as a historic moment. According to unofficial early figures, the Republicans bested the Democrats on convention Day 4, with Donald Trump’s acceptance speech in Cleveland July 21 drawing about 30.2 million viewers compared to Clinton’s 27.8 million Thursday night. The figures are from NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News Channel and MSNBC. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, appeared to reflect the overall national mood when he was caught on camera with his eyes closed during the acceptance speech, and speculation quickly spread on social media that he had fallen asleep.

Classic Bond Forum