You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 06:20:22 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 40623 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Skynet

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #800 on: February 29, 2016, 06:57:39 PM »
Donald Trump refuses to denounce David Duke and other white supremacist reporters:



Both Hillary and Bernie were in agreement for once.  "We can't go from the nation's first black President to a President who refuses to condemn the Ku Klux Klan."

Offline consortium11

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #801 on: February 29, 2016, 07:54:31 PM »
Donald Trump refuses to denounce David Duke and other white supremacist reporters:



Both Hillary and Bernie were in agreement for once.  "We can't go from the nation's first black President to a President who refuses to condemn the Ku Klux Klan."

This is such a silly and made up scandal.

Trumpy literally disavowed Duke's endorsement two days prior to this "scandal" in a major news conference (link here, although it's embedded in Trump's own tweet for those concerned about such things), pretty much as soon as news of Duke supporting Trump got any real attention. All that's happened is that the media kept asking the same question until they got a somewhat controversial soundbite.

This is little different to the Ayers-Obama thing in 2008 (with the exception being that as far as I know Trump has never met Duke while Obama did meet with Ayers a number of times). How would people have felt about Obama constantly being questioned about Ayers and any answer that was in any way vague was immediately jumped upon as an example of Obama refusing to condemn a terrorist? Well, we know that answer... most people considered it a pretty vile smear and an example of dirty campaigning at its worst.

And Hillary is one to talk about refusing to denounce a white supremacist...



That's Robert Byrd, former KKK member and someone Hillary was happy to describe as her friend and mentor.

Now, should one run around and use Hillary's support for Byrd as an argument that's she's racist or playing on people's base instincts with regards to race? I'd say pretty clearly not... and her connection to Byrd is a hell of a lot deeper than Trump not being absolutely equivocal in one interview having already disavowed Duke's support.

Offline 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 #802 on: February 29, 2016, 08:44:34 PM »
Just something for a little giggle...

Offline Merah

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #803 on: February 29, 2016, 09:19:14 PM »
Yes, that's a line being advanced by Bernie's campaign.  For it to be relevant, Bernie still needs to win more non-super delegates, which he's hasn't done and likely won't do tomorrow.

I agree, first Bernie has to win more regular delegates and that just doesn't seem likely at this point, barring a major upset tomorrow.

Now, as to whether the 'line being advanced by Bernie's campaign' is true, let me just say this... if the American people, specifically those voting in the Democratic nomination process, choose Clinton, I will be greatly disappointed in their choice and greatly skeptical of their good judgment. But it will have been a choice that was theirs to make. Despite the media and establishment bias towards Clinton, if the American people really do want Sanders, they are still free to choose him. And so I will vote for Hillary, the lesser of what will be (imho) two evils.

If, however, the American Democratic electorate were to choose Bernie (by popular vote and voted delegates), despite all the disadvantages stacked against him... but the party elite (superdelegates) flout the will of their constituents to anoint one of their own cronies? Well then, I will write in either Sanders or Warren in the general.

And I highly doubt I would be the only one to refuse to accept such a farce of a 'Democratic' system.

Online 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 #804 on: February 29, 2016, 09:35:15 PM »
Here's a question to be asked, though.  We've heard, for the last eight years, that Hillary was going to be the next nominee, that she was going to be the one, that her being SecState was just a sidestep on the road to being the first woman President.

Let's grant that she wins the nomination and goes up in the election against the Republican candidate (who looks more and more like it WILL BE Trump every day).

What happens after the election?  Regardless of whether she wins or loses - the Democratic Party is going to need someone to follow her.  All that changes if she wins is how long the Democrats have to pull up a candidate.  If she loses, they'll have 4 years; if she wins, they'll (probably) have 8.  How many Democrats can we name that would be recognized in, let's go Congressional here, 2/3rds of the states?  Half of the candidates in this election were guys I had never heard of!

Republicans, on the other hand, have a far larger set of names they can pull on that people have seen in the news.  Cruz.  Rubio.  McConnell (though I think he won't run, given his age and that the GOP is trying to court the youth vote).  Christie.  Paul.  Part of that, I think, is for 6 of the last 8 years, we've heard the representatives of a GOP-controlled Congress bitch about how bad Obama is/was.

To a certain extent, Obama actually did Clinton a favor by getting elected in front of her - because it let her stay in the political sphere for another 8 years.

Now, there's a couple of people I could personally name that I would vote for in 4/8 years time, but I don't really think they have national-level recognition yet.  So here's the question: what does the DNC plan to do?

Online 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 #805 on: February 29, 2016, 09:41:57 PM »
I don't know about the DNC, but there seems to be popular support for Elizabeth Warren running.  Whether she will or not is another question. 

Online 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 #806 on: February 29, 2016, 09:43:13 PM »
Warren's the one name I've got, but if I hadn't watched TDS, I'd never have heard of her.  And I would really liked her to have run on Sanders' ticket, but she said she's staying right where she is.  Now, in 8 years, who knows?  But...

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #807 on: February 29, 2016, 11:40:20 PM »
John F Kennedy wasn't a very well-known figure in late 1959, was he? He had won a Pulitzer for a book some years before but there wasn't very much remarkable about his career in Congress - outside of the inner circles of the Democratic party he would have been fairly unknown, and even to the party bosses he was a bit of an outsider, not the guy you would have expected to land the nomination.

Online 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 #808 on: February 29, 2016, 11:52:01 PM »
Kennedy is more well-known than you might think.  For one, he served in the Navy during WWII - there was the PT-109 incident, which made him a war hero; for another, he served for a dozen years in both the House and Senate as a representative from Massachusetts before he ran for President.  And that's not counting the actions of his dad, Joe Kennedy, who was the first chairman of the SEC, and Ambassador to the UK during the early parts of WWII amongst other things.  Kennedy can be likened to Jeb Bush in a way - we don't necessarily know a lot about him, but the name would have been familiar.

Offline Praxis

  • Don't worry loves. The cavalry's here.
  • Knight
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Location: Canada
  • Gender: Male
  • "Be a dissident. Who ain't kissin' it."
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #809 on: March 01, 2016, 12:26:59 AM »
This is such a silly and made up scandal.

All that's happened is that the media kept asking the same question until they got a somewhat controversial soundbite.



Somewhat?

How difficult is it to say, "I can't abide racism.  I don't want their votes."

How in this day and age; for someone that wants to be the president of the United States; it's considered a "silly scandal" when he pauses and gives an evasive answer regarding him being supported by an intolerant, ignorant group of people?

I'm not really sure how you can downplay what a ridiculous cartoon he is.

Offline consortium11

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #810 on: March 01, 2016, 03:41:22 AM »
Somewhat?

How difficult is it to say, "I can't abide racism.  I don't want their votes."

How in this day and age; for someone that wants to be the president of the United States; it's considered a "silly scandal" when he pauses and gives an evasive answer regarding him being supported by an intolerant, ignorant group of people?

I'm not really sure how you can downplay what a ridiculous cartoon he is.

How difficult is it to say "at one point a small fundraiser was held in his living room but that was many years ago and Ayers has never been a mentor or personal friend of mine"? Yet the Obama campaign originally insisted the fundraiser never happened, only to look fairly silly when Ayers said it had.

As with Clinton's links to Byrd I'm not for a moment arguing the Obama/Ayers connection is a serious thing, a big deal or something he should be hit over the head with. But if you objected to the way the right wing media used Ayers (and Reverend Wright) to attack Obama then you should also object to this muckraking exercise... and there's a far deeper connection between Ayers/Wright and Obama then between Duke and Trump. Let's repeat this once again... Trump had already disavowed Duke's support. He'd done so publicly the moment he was told about it. Journalism that consists about repeatedly asking the same question (which has already been definitively answered) until you get the soundbite you want and then running with that soundbite rather than the others is just bad journalism, not something that should be applauded.

I'm not denying that Trump's cartoonish in his ways, although I do rather suspect that some of it is being put on for the campaign (watch this to see Trump discussing serious issues in a serious context) and that his positions are going to move more towards the center if he gets the Republican nomination. But him being cartoonish doesn't justify or excuse bad journalism and manufactured scandals. It's as silly as arguing that Sanders is racist because of the way he answered the Black Lives Matter protesters at the Netroots Nation (although I will note that considering Sanders horrible polling figures among the African American community that argument seems to have actually gained some traction).



On the idea of the next Presidential candidate for the Democrats it's worth remembering that "Presidential candidates in waiting" (Hillary and Romney for example) aren't always that common (or successful). Obama basically came out of nowhere by delivering an excellent keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, Kerry was hardly the standout candidate going into 2004 and even Clinton was far from a sure thing in 1996 and started the campaign on the back foot. Four years is a long time in politics and someone will likely emerge. Warren's been mentioned previously (and the cynical argument is that the reason she hasn't endorsed Sanders is that she wants establishment support for a later run), Webb and O'Malley might fancy another go while New York governor Andrew Cuomo and New Jersey senator Cory Booker have both suggested they might make a 2020 run. Kirsten Gillibrand's been mentioned, as has Kamala Harris and Steve Fulop. Julián Castro's seen as Clinton's likely running mate if she does win the nomination and there's a presumption that a running mate in one election will make a full bid for the next one.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #811 on: March 01, 2016, 08:16:10 AM »
So here's the question: what does the DNC plan to do?

I am not 100% sure it'll be up to the DNC.  The political parties are losing control of the process--well, at least in the sense of picking the candidates.  What this cycle has shown is that the voters' voice can weigh more than the schemes of the so-called party "elites":  Trump Drumpf is the perfect example of this.

That having been said, I agree with Oniya on Warren.  I think Gabbard was also being groomed, but with the bad blood between her and the DNC now, that may hurt her chances.  I think Joaquin Castro is another possibility.  Born in San Antonio, so he can put Texas in play (maybe).  He's 41 now, so running at 45 or 49 is perfectly fine.

For now, I'd be happy to see a Clinton/Sanders (VP) ticket go up against Drumpf/Duke.  That outta wrest control of Congress out of Republican hands...
« Last Edit: March 01, 2016, 08:19:13 AM by Cycle »

Offline elone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #812 on: March 01, 2016, 09:15:57 AM »
We can only hope that the political parties lose control of the process. Many people are rebelling because the parties on both sides keep blabbering on to their shrinking base without regard to what people actually want. Thus we see the rise of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump as alternatives to the chosen. (I would not lump these two together except as outsiders to the parties). Whether you like what is happening or not, it is a good thing that we are getting choices, actual choices.

That being said let me quote my t-shirt. "Quit Your Bitchin' and Start a Revolution!"

GO VOTE!!! 

 

Online 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 #813 on: March 01, 2016, 09:35:18 AM »
That being said let me quote my t-shirt. "Quit Your Bitchin' and Start a Revolution!"

GO VOTE!!!

*grumbles*  My primary isn't for another month.

But I'm going to be there!!

Offline AffablyEvil

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #814 on: March 01, 2016, 03:10:23 PM »
Warren's the one name I've got, but if I hadn't watched TDS, I'd never have heard of her.  And I would really liked her to have run on Sanders' ticket, but she said she's staying right where she is.  Now, in 8 years, who knows?


I heavily doubt it. Warren has been very strong on that she wants to remain where she is, as she feels that's where she can do the most difference. Or perhaps she just does not want to be president.

Also, barring the choice of Sanders, is there anyone which Hillary looks likely to put as VP?

Offline consortium11

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #815 on: March 01, 2016, 03:50:38 PM »
Also, barring the choice of Sanders, is there anyone which Hillary looks likely to put as VP?

Julian Castro (not to be confused with his twin brother and fellow politician Joaquín Castro) is the name most people suspect will get the nod; he's actively campaigned for her (especially in Iowa which was seen as a "test run" for if he could be effective on the campaign trail), has a close relationship in general, helps bring in some different demographics and areas and Clinton's spoken favorably of him a number of times.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #816 on: March 01, 2016, 05:22:20 PM »
Julian Castro (not to be confused with his twin brother and fellow politician Joaquín Castro) is the name most people suspect will get the nod; he's actively campaigned for her (especially in Iowa which was seen as a "test run" for if he could be effective on the campaign trail), has a close relationship in general, helps bring in some different demographics and areas and Clinton's spoken favorably of him a number of times.

*tries out the words "president Castro" after half a century of distancing and mutual suspicion between  Cuba and the US*

I don't know anything about the guy but he'll probably be a likely choice (and having a hispanic VP is quite logical, of course). Just sounds a bit odd...  :P

Online 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 #817 on: March 01, 2016, 05:29:38 PM »
Castro - though I should point out that Castro is his mother's name, his father's name is Guzman (they were divorced when Julian was still a kid) - isn't actually from Cuba.  His grandmother came here from Mexico back in the 1920s, long before anyone had heard of Fidel.  He'd be a pretty good choice, too, even if you discount his ethnicity.  Castro served as the mayor of San Antonio for five years before he was pulled into Obama's cabinet.  He might be able to help bring the Southwest (and Texas, too) closer to Hillary, when that part of the country has largely been GOP for the last few elections.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #818 on: March 01, 2016, 07:49:47 PM »
Oh god I didn't vote today (I'm in Virginia)... and just as I finally decided I should have supported Bernie because I realized Trump is only appealing to emotions and not logic and would probably cause a war with his antics.

ahhh I feel like an idiot...not that it probably would have made any real diference though right? its just one vote.

Online BlytheTopic starter

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #819 on: March 01, 2016, 07:59:36 PM »
Am watching the ongoing results for Super Tuesday with interest.

I'm pleasantly surprised Bernie Sanders pulled the level of support in my home state (Oklahoma) that he did.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #820 on: March 01, 2016, 08:04:02 PM »
Oh god I didn't vote today (I'm in Virginia)... and just as I finally decided I should have supported Bernie because I realized Trump is only appealing to emotions and not logic and would probably cause a war with his antics.

ahhh I feel like an idiot...not that it probably would have made any real diference though right? its just one vote.

I may be totally off the field here, but isn't the idea that you have to pick some time in advance what side of the primaries fence you're feeling more inclined to, so that people who identify with the Dems can't vote in the GOP primaries as well? (but maybe that wouldn't apply if you sign as an independent voter...).


They don't want to have a lot of Dem voters backing the guy they feel is the most inept Reps guy, the candidate who is most likely to lose in November,. If that was it, someone like Rick Perry would have carried a few states...  :P

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #821 on: March 01, 2016, 08:07:39 PM »
I may be totally off the field here, but isn't the idea that you have to pick some time in advance what side of the primaries fence you're feeling more inclined to, so that people who identify with the Dems can't vote in the GOP primaries as well? (but maybe that wouldn't apply if you sign as an independent voter...).


They don't want to have a lot of Dem voters backing the guy they feel is the most inept Reps guy, the candidate who is most likely to lose in November,. If that was it, someone like Rick Perry would have carried a few states...  :P

My main problem is A: I enjoy being on the fence.

B: I believe both parties are nothing more than a corrupt joke and its like picking which chamber from a revolver to have the bullet come out from.

C: I hate them all soooo much....In my entire life I have never believed any candidate is a "good" candidate.....I guess this is what they call 'Voter apathy" right?

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #822 on: March 01, 2016, 08:12:11 PM »
My main problem is A: I enjoy being on the fence.

B: I believe both parties are nothing more than a corrupt joke and its like picking which chamber from a revolver to have the bullet come out from.

C: I hate them all soooo much....In my entire life I have never believed any candidate is a "good" candidate.....I guess this is what they call 'Voter apathy" right?

Wow, that was a stark grey way of putting it.  ::)

I once dubbed a certain MP from here "a corrupt joker" (joker as in playing-card joker, not just a guy who likes to toss a few jests around) but that was someone I felt was serially dishonest and dodgy.  ;)
« Last Edit: March 01, 2016, 08:19:02 PM by gaggedLouise »

Online 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 #823 on: March 01, 2016, 08:22:37 PM »
I may be totally off the field here, but isn't the idea that you have to pick some time in advance what side of the primaries fence you're feeling more inclined to, so that people who identify with the Dems can't vote in the GOP primaries as well? (but maybe that wouldn't apply if you sign as an independent voter...).

It depends on your state.  In a closed primary, like PA has, you have to be a registered Dem or Rep in order to vote in 'your party's' primary. 

In 'semi-closed', you can declare your affiliation on the day of (or even remain undeclared), but you can't vote in the opposite party's primary.  So, an undeclared could vote in either the Dem or the Rep primary, but a Dem would have to vote in the Dem primary and a Rep would have to vote in the Rep primary.

In 'open' primaries, any registered voter can vote in either primary, regardless of affiliation.  There are some historical instances of 'raiding', where members of one party stuffed the ballot boxes with votes for the weaker candidate in the opposition's primary to give their candidate a better shot at winning.  Of course, by voting in the opposition's primary, you 'take away' one vote for your candidate in your home primary.

Offline elone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #824 on: March 01, 2016, 09:56:40 PM »
Oh god I didn't vote today (I'm in Virginia)... and just as I finally decided I should have supported Bernie because I realized Trump is only appealing to emotions and not logic and would probably cause a war with his antics.

ahhh I feel like an idiot...not that it probably would have made any real diference though right? its just one vote.

A fellow Virginian, I wish you would have voted. Although you don't think so, every vote does count. If everyone thought their vote did not matter then we would not have much of an election. Yes, politics suck but it is the only game in town right now. The small numbers of voters only gives more power to the establishment whose base does indeed vote.

Virginia is an open primary, any voter can pick whether to vote Republican or Democrat, you just can not vote in both. They give you a choice of which ballot you want.  I was surprised that Governor O'Malley of Maryland was on the Democratic ballot even though he is no longer running.