You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 03, 2016, 08:15:26 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates [Poll updated!]  (Read 40265 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline eBadger

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #300 on: October 14, 2015, 11:23:12 AM »
Hilary used a private email address throughout her tenure instead of a government address.  She was supposed to turn over the server records upon leaving, but it took her two years to do so.

And after doing so there was evidence of an email that wasn't submitted.  So now 'OMG she's keeping things secret'. 

But no, there's no evidence that she did anything wrong in the emails, she hasn't been charged with anything (just ordered to surrender them, and frankly I wouldn't hand over a bunch of classified information without requiring a court order first either) and the investigation has been a witch hunt.  It's not exactly watergate material. 

Overall, it has the feel of the Clinton 1.0's "I didn't inhale" shenanigans.  It's a thing, a mistake was made, but I agree with Sanders - the point has been made, let's deal with actual issues. 
« Last Edit: October 14, 2015, 11:24:15 AM by eBadger »

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #301 on: October 14, 2015, 11:25:38 AM »
Depends on how you look at it. I am just going by memory here, and my memory tends to be like Swiss cheese (full of holes), but as I recall it there is a rule that government business has to be done on government emails and servers. So she broke a government rule.

That's number one. Number two is that it makes retrieving information a lot harder. Say, someone wants/needs to figure out what emails HC sent during her time in office (for example as an answer to a Freedom of Information Act request). The informati0on what she sent to whom is not stored on any government server. Her answer to that was saying that all her office emails reached someone in the government and she assumed that the emails would be stored there, but to get that information you can't just search through her "sent items". You'd have to search the width and length of the whole darn government to check if someone has maybe received an email by Mrs. Clinton. Imagine trying to piece your bank records together by having to search the whole world for records of payments received by you, instead of just looking at the transfers you initiated.

Okay, so there is that. It still feels really minor, but it's the minor things that add up to major problems and why we have said rules in the first place.

But overall yeah....I'm with Bernie on this one, this is ridiculous. If Hillary actually has serious skeletons in her closet, drag them out - looking at you, Fox News, supposed media bastion of the far right. Let's get some real dirty politics up and going in this joint, make this race entertaining.

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #302 on: October 14, 2015, 11:49:01 AM »
But overall yeah....I'm with Bernie on this one, this is ridiculous. If Hillary actually has serious skeletons in her closet, drag them out - looking at you, Fox News, supposed media bastion of the far right. Let's get some real dirty politics up and going in this joint, make this race entertaining.
Couldn't agree more with you and Bernie. Let's give it a rest, really. Let's wait till... say the summer of 2016 before we dig it out again? Talking about it right now is kinda like arguing about the color of the shoebox Hillary keeps her flip flops in.

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #303 on: October 14, 2015, 01:05:09 PM »
Couldn't agree more with you and Bernie. Let's give it a rest, really. Let's wait till... say the summer of 2016 before we dig it out again? Talking about it right now is kinda like arguing about the color of the shoebox Hillary keeps her flip flops in.

See, now that is a crucial issue! Is her shoebox red, white, and blue? If not, does that show she is insufficiently patriotic to be our leader?

Online Mithlomwen

  • ~ E's resident kilt inspector ~ ~ Atropos ~
  • Goddess
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Location: Somewhere between the dark and the light...
  • Gender: Female
  • ~ Thunder only happens when it's raining.... ~
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #304 on: October 14, 2015, 04:18:42 PM »
Ran across this quote from Mike Huckabee regarding the Democratic debate via his Facebook page

Quote
Political correctness has run amok in this country! Last night during the ‪#‎DemDebate‬ I said, "I trust Bernie Sanders with my tax dollars like I trust a North Korean chef with my Labrador." Now the liberal media is attacking me. Leave it to liberals to ignore injustices and atrocities of a totalitarian nation on human beings and put more importance on a nation's diet which includes grass clippings and canines.

Facts: North Koreans eat dog and Bernie Sanders wants to spend 18 trillion dollars of your money. What's so hard to understand? Poor liberals, no sense of humor and no sense of reality.

....I have no words. 

Also....

Every online voting-app poll that I saw had Sanders ahead by a landslide.  I think the lowest score I saw on him was a 74%.  And yet all the headlines are saying Hillary 'won'.  Sometimes even on the same site that has the poll up.

But apparently Sanders had the highest spike in Internet searches during the first half of the debate.  :D

I found this article that was kind of interesting. 
« Last Edit: October 14, 2015, 04:34:24 PM by Mithlomwen »

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #305 on: October 14, 2015, 04:41:37 PM »
I found this article that was kind of interesting.

I like how he says determining who "won a debate" is subjective and then goes on to declare Bernie objectively the winner.  XD


Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #306 on: October 14, 2015, 04:43:48 PM »
Though at least he explained his reasoning for doing so - he considers the matter to be a subjective one, but if you have to choose a winner, he considers the only objective method of doing so to be polls (which Bernie did win, overwhelmingly).

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #307 on: October 14, 2015, 04:51:26 PM »
Oh sure.  It's a good article.  That bit just amused me. 

But then again, 3.0 amuses me.

I guess I'm easily amused.  ;D


Offline ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #308 on: October 14, 2015, 04:54:39 PM »
The article does question why the media continues to try and write off Sanders, at the end.  It's not necessarily a good one, but I have heard a theory as to why that is.  I think it's safe to say that Clinton 2.0 is less interested in shaking things up than Bernie is.  She'll change things, but not necessarily the overhaul that Sanders is talking about.  That probably extends to places like campaign finance, where conglomerates that have a media outlet (like FOX or MSNBC or so on) are able to spend tons of cash to get the person they want elected. 

Larry Lessig is a guy trying to run through the Democrat platform on one major issue - overturn Citizens United and clean up the corruption from money from big name donors.  While this may be shooting at shadows, more than a few people have noticed that after Lessig managed to get some traction with voters on that, his name stopped appearing in polls for 'who'd you vote for' - disappearances that kept him from participating in the debate because he failed to get the necessary percentages.  Of course, your average voter is only going to vote for the people you stick in front of them.

It's weak tea to me, and reeks of conspiracy to control elections, but it is something that's out there.

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #309 on: October 14, 2015, 05:06:02 PM »
It's actually a little weird because from the small amount of research I've done, Bush Senior and Dubya were not very similar at all as presidents - at the very least, George Sr. had a better reputation when he left. So calling Jeb 3.0 feels a little out of place, since Dubya wasn't a very good 2.0.

I nominate we start calling Jeb Tripleya instead, because he is trying to follow in his brother's footsteps more than his father's.

Offline eBadger

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #310 on: October 14, 2015, 05:18:39 PM »
Re: winning the debate: when you're ahead 18 points, you don't need to be the best debater, you just need to not screw up. 

Hilz fell a couple points back, maybe, but didn't give Berns the huge boost he needs.  She didn't come off as a complete idiot, or totally cold, or stammer about scandal or get in a fistfight.  She walked off the stage still in the lead, which was her goal, so overall there's a solid case that she won. 

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #311 on: October 14, 2015, 05:33:21 PM »
I call him 3.0 not so much because he's following 2.0's footsteps, but because he is the third Bush seeking to be President.

I don't like seeing one family strive to (and successfully) gain that much political power.  To me, it feels horribly wrong.  It reinforces my sense that the privileged few will stack the deck in their favor, in perpetuity, if we were not vigilant.

But if you want to call him Tripelya, sure, go right on ahead!  :-)


Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #312 on: October 15, 2015, 02:05:14 AM »
The article does question why the media continues to try and write off Sanders, at the end.  It's not necessarily a good one, but I have heard a theory as to why that is.  I think it's safe to say that Clinton 2.0 is less interested in shaking things up than Bernie is.  She'll change things, but not necessarily the overhaul that Sanders is talking about.  That probably extends to places like campaign finance, where conglomerates that have a media outlet (like FOX or MSNBC or so on) are able to spend tons of cash to get the person they want elected. 

Larry Lessig is a guy trying to run through the Democrat platform on one major issue - overturn Citizens United and clean up the corruption from money from big name donors.  While this may be shooting at shadows, more than a few people have noticed that after Lessig managed to get some traction with voters on that, his name stopped appearing in polls for 'who'd you vote for' - disappearances that kept him from participating in the debate because he failed to get the necessary percentages.  Of course, your average voter is only going to vote for the people you stick in front of them.

It's weak tea to me, and reeks of conspiracy to control elections, but it is something that's out there.
I don't think you need conspiracy theories to explain it. Matt Taibbi adressed the topic a bit, six months ago, in an article on Bernie Sanders.

What it boils down to is that outspending the other candidates has become such a large part of elections that many in the media are just incapable of treating anyone who doesn't start the race with some big donors already behind them as anything but an outsider with little chances of winning. And once the media have started reporting a candidate as the frontrunner they find it difficult to change their story. It's not so much that the media are bought, but they have become to believe big donors are all important and see everything through those blinders of "conventional wisdom". Once you believe in something it can be difficult to recognize other possibilities.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #313 on: October 15, 2015, 06:14:16 AM »
It's not so much that the media are bought, but they have become to believe big donors are all important and see everything through those blinders of "conventional wisdom". Once you believe in something it can be difficult to recognize other possibilities.

There's also the fact that the media (or the people who own the media) are the ones doing the big donating.

Offline Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #314 on: October 15, 2015, 11:17:23 AM »
While I found this in a piece on CBC about the upcoming Canadian elections, I thought I should share it here. In a way, I think, it sums up a lot about politics - and election campaigns - very nicely.

Quote
The fact is, and politicians understand this, values are supreme in the polling booth.

Voting, the most democratic thing you can do, is the one significant public act that is unrestrained by laws protecting the rights of others.

You may vote greed, racism, sexism, ageism, classism, nativism You can project any of your "isms" onto that ballot.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #315 on: October 15, 2015, 11:45:35 AM »
There's also the fact that the media (or the people who own the media) are the ones doing the big donating.

+1

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #316 on: October 15, 2015, 11:47:31 AM »
This Just In: A Special Report: The People Who Pay Our Salaries Wasted A Ton of Money Supporting The Wrong Candidate - a news broadcast that will never happen.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #317 on: October 16, 2015, 07:11:03 PM »
So I've heard 3.0 make this claim a few times now:  "my brother kept us safe."

Does anyone know what he is referring to?  What exactly did 2.0 do that "kept us safe"?


Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #318 on: October 16, 2015, 07:15:04 PM »
Well, we didn't have another 9-11-like incident. The problem is that it's impossible to directly prove how many, if any, terrorist plots were either foiled or dissuaded from serious planning by stuff like the Patriot Act, but I think the intent is clear that Jeb is implying Dubya's post-9-11 leadership and actions prevented a followup.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #319 on: October 16, 2015, 07:45:59 PM »
Well, we didn't have another 9-11-like incident. The problem is that it's impossible to directly prove how many, if any, terrorist plots were either foiled or dissuaded from serious planning by stuff like the Patriot Act, but I think the intent is clear that Jeb is implying Dubya's post-9-11 leadership and actions prevented a followup.

But what actions?  I mean, sure, we didn't get another 9-11.  But we weren't invaded by Andromedans either.  If 3.0 wants to credit his bro for something, I want to see the list of facts to support said claim.  If he can't give me a list, then I'm going to give Oreo credit for keeping everyone safe. 

And for saving all of us from the Andromedans.


Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #320 on: October 16, 2015, 07:51:40 PM »
I never said I agree with him, but I think the context is clear - especially in regards to the comments he is replying to - that he's implying things like passing the Patriot Act kept us safe. And I did point out that it's difficult, or outright impossible, to show factual proof that X number of terrorist plots were aborted or detected in their infancy because of PA provisions; you can't exactly interrogate terrorists about schemes they never launched, and presumably any NSA/FBI records regarding foiled plots would be under gigantic security flags. Conjecture and implication are all he has, since even if those plots existed, Jeb (or George, for that matter )wouldn't have the security clearances to talk about them explicitly.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2015, 07:53:35 PM by TheGlyphstone »

Offline Zillah

  • Your kinky little sweetheart
  • On Hiatus
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: Down in the West Village
  • Gender: Female
  • The capital of Montana is not "Hannah"
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #321 on: October 16, 2015, 07:59:20 PM »
It's also a weird implication by Jeb! that only Dubya could've prevented another 9/11 type incident. Given what happened, I think whoever was President - Gore, if he had won, for example - would've "kept us safe". The only difference would be different people saying the President did a great job and different people saying the President was an idiot and didn't know what he was doing.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #322 on: October 16, 2015, 08:02:37 PM »
Conjecture and implication are all he has, since even if those plots existed, Jeb (or George, for that matter )wouldn't have the security clearances to talk about them explicitly.

Right, I don't mean to put you in the position of having to defend 3.0.  What a horrible job that would be!  ;D

I see what you are saying.  Conjecture and implication.  And that's precisely why I'm not buying 3.0's attempt to assert it as a fact.  In his opinion, his brother kept us safe.  But is that a fact?  Not without more.

It's also a weird implication by Jeb! that only Dubya could've prevented another 9/11 type incident.

Another good point.

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #323 on: October 16, 2015, 08:08:54 PM »
It is primary season, after all. The whole thing is about shaping opinions to your benefit. The sort of people who would consider voting for Tripleya in the first place would already be inclined to accept his word - his opinion - as fact regarding Dubya's successes and the consequences of his actions.

Offline Mikem

  • *Cancer Survivor*
  • Permabanned
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2012
  • Location: In the damp and dreary Pacific Northwest
  • Gender: Male
  • No labels. I'm a Man and that's all that I am.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #324 on: October 17, 2015, 01:25:36 AM »
It looks like Gary Johnson is going to try running for Libertarian again, but if he doesn't get into the debate or doesn't have a serious chance at winning, I think I'd rather spend my vote getting a Socialist into office this time.