Yeah, it's kind of weird how somehow all these people who have worked for her, or for her people, or that have business associates in common, are in position to influence the election.
Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
Dave
Staff member
If you are allowed to.
Yes, you might find yourself suddenly de-registered, like hundreds of thousands of people so far this election season.
Dave
Staff member
Or polling places inexplicably closed (usually in poor or ethnic neighborhoods), or machines not working (and recounts being changed in one politician's favor), or people being told to leave when this would invalidate their vote. and on, and on, and on. All in Hillary's favor. Yet nothing is really done.
Well, they changed the results in Nevada, they're auditing the election in Colorado and may change the number of delegates awarded to each candidate (yes, apparently a lot more Sanders votes somehow went uncounted), the AG of NYC is starting an investigation into that election's results, both campaigns are suing Arizona over that clusterfuck election... this is far from over.
Oh, and now there's this: https://electionfraud2016.wordpress...s-catch-sanders-votes-going-down-screen-shot/
I mean, Colorado is too big now for caucuses. Where I live it's fine, I'm in a small town. But anything even remotely resembling a city was a giant clusterfuck.
Republicans didn't even get a chance to straw poll, they just had to elect delegates, so no one showed up to the early caucuses, if you really want to talk about disenfranchisement. There is a pretty big push now to get rid of caucuses, but that will cost money, so I'm sure the state government will make platitudes until people forget about it in a year and then sweep it under the rug.
Republicans didn't even get a chance to straw poll, they just had to elect delegates, so no one showed up to the early caucuses, if you really want to talk about disenfranchisement. There is a pretty big push now to get rid of caucuses, but that will cost money, so I'm sure the state government will make platitudes until people forget about it in a year and then sweep it under the rug.
To open up one of those other cans of worms yet again (I can't find the proper thread):
Apparently it isn't rape if it's only oral and the victim's unconscious in Oklahoma.
Now, it bears mentioning there were no signs of violence or being forced, and the girl in question doesn't remember. Still, "too drunk to consent" probably should have meant, you know, don't go any further. And so on. Oh well. Let the name calling begin!
Apparently it isn't rape if it's only oral and the victim's unconscious in Oklahoma.
Now, it bears mentioning there were no signs of violence or being forced, and the girl in question doesn't remember. Still, "too drunk to consent" probably should have meant, you know, don't go any further. And so on. Oh well. Let the name calling begin!
a rape culture megathread is too depressing, even for me
Pentagon to test F-35 against A-10 in "common-sense war scenario".
I guess the brass in the Airforce finally had their corporate masters demand they do something about the A-10 program, especially after Gen. Mark Walsh testified against the F-35 replacing the A-10 back in March. This totally won't be a dog and pony show. *rolls eyes*
I guess the brass in the Airforce finally had their corporate masters demand they do something about the A-10 program, especially after Gen. Mark Walsh testified against the F-35 replacing the A-10 back in March. This totally won't be a dog and pony show. *rolls eyes*
So many unopposed positions on my primary ballot. And no write-in option for nearly all of them. So you take your one candidate for Congress and like it.
And Natalie Tennant, thanks to your shitshow of a senatorial campaign, if Cletus the Slack-jawed Yokel was the opposition for Secretary of State, he'd get my vote. PROTIP: seeing who can yell "FUCK OBAMA" the loudest isn't a viable campaign strategy.
And Natalie Tennant, thanks to your shitshow of a senatorial campaign, if Cletus the Slack-jawed Yokel was the opposition for Secretary of State, he'd get my vote. PROTIP: seeing who can yell "FUCK OBAMA" the loudest isn't a viable campaign strategy.
Here's some a decent legal write-up by Popehat: Regarding That Oklahoma Rape Decision You're Outraged About
This is false. Ask every 2010 House winner from the Tea Party. They all got elected and got to make actual, real votes for real federal laws by just saying "obama bad, me good" over and over.
More Hillary dirty pool: As it turns out, less than 1% of the money raised, supposedly for "down ballot races" and state democratic groups, has stayed with those groups.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...draising-gives-little-to-state-parties-report
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...draising-gives-little-to-state-parties-report
Y'know, I'm not entirely sure Sanders is what the USA needs? We've seen lots of socisl-democratic experiments in Europe, after all. Belgium or Germany are better for some groups of people in some ways than the USA, but certainly not always for everyone.
However, I'm 100% convinced Trump, Cruz and Clinton are all, for various reasons, much worse.
However, I'm 100% convinced Trump, Cruz and Clinton are all, for various reasons, much worse.
GasBandit
Staff member
There's one thing I can say for Sanders, even though I agree with very little of his platform (abarring the obvious social stances that Libertarians share), I would trust him to act constitutionally. I believe he would try to enact his desired policies above board and according to how they're supposed to be done, as opposed to the cloak-and-dagger locked-room dead-of-the-last-night-of-session fraudulent chicanery that has gone on for the last 8+ years. He might try to change the constitution, but I believe he'd do it through the established amendment process, instead of through the abuse of executive orders. I can't say the same for Trump or Hillary. Cruz, maybe, because he's a strict constitutionalist, but I kinda get the feeling tonight's Indiana primary will eliminate him.
Don't kid yourself about Cruz... he's also a fierce religious conservative. He'd start using EOs for faith-based shit the second he didn't get his way.
I'm also pretty sure Bernie Sanders would be willing to use EOs to actually do something about the accountability problems on Wall Street.
GasBandit
Staff member
Actually, I've come to the conclusion that Cruz's faith is a recently implemented affectation. I remember very clearly his bid for Senate, he ran lots of advertising and participated in many debates against our then Lieutenant-Governor, his opponent for the republican nomination, and then against the democrat Paul Sadler. There wasn't much talk of faith at all - it all focused very heavily on economics, health care and government spending. This sudden surge of open and aggressive displays of faith, I think, are supposed to rally the social conservatives to him. Perhaps it was supposed to make sure that, if he got nominated, the republican base wouldn't sit at home and sulk in November like they did in the 08 and 12 presidential elections. Problem is, that ruffles the feathers of effete northern pretend-moderates who like to couch uninformed spinelessness as a refined decision-making process.
Alternatively, he simply didn't expose his views THEN and is only doing it NOW because it actually benefits him to do because it separates him from Trump. That's the rub: we're not going to know which side is real unless he actually wins the election.
GasBandit
Staff member
I don't buy it, and I'll tell you why. What seems more likely to you, a religious politicians stifling his beliefs in an election where displaying them would help him, or a non-religious politician faking religious faith because he thinks it will benefit him?
It's all moot now anyway. I was right: Trump absolutely smashed Ted Cruz in Indiana and Ted Cruz has suspended his campaign
I don't live in Texas, so correct me if I'm wrong, but would religious conviction be seen as a given for a Republican there, and so not necessary to be brought up a bunch during a campaign?
I guess it doesn't matter now; if he's suspending his campaign, he could only be a step away from concession.
GasBandit
Staff member
"Suspending my campaign" is basically tantamount to concession, just with conditions. It means he doesn't give up his delegates, so that, if by some miracle, Trump somehow DOESN'T get to 1237 delegates and the primary DOES go to a contested convention, his delegates still go to him in the first round of voting. If he full-on removed his name for consideration, his delegates would be up for grabs.
The WV GOP primary ballot still has 11 names on it. Has anyone officially released their delegates yet?
GasBandit
Staff member
Not to my knowledge. Practically nobody ever does.
Also, "suspending" does some legal mumbo jumbo that lets them keep their campaign money/not go into debt or have to pay anyone
Kasich, OUT!
Please no. Not Trump... please...
