U.S. Presidential Election 2016 (Sponsored by Betty Croker's Hamburger Helper)

[phonics]

I was wondering why that guys name was so familiar...

http://dronecenter.bard.edu/files/2014/03/Gonzales-testimony.jpg

It's the, "I Don't Recall" guy! Oh what a time that was. The guy fired a bunch of democratic US Attorneys so he would know something about bias judging at least.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IBvZlRqOTw

[Bartholomert]

I was intrigued what part of this article would uphold merts arguments about this radical pro-immigrant group who has spoken exhaustively against Trump.

I found this



You've gone from being an asshole to an infowars level conspiratard. Well done.

Your argument is effectively like saying the 'Manchester United Fan Group of Greater Manchester' probably doesn't support Manchester United because they're not officially affiliated the club.

[Lofty]

I assumed Mert would love Trump despite the fact Trump would probably be seething inside if he had to shake hands with Mert.

[Lewis]

Barack Hussein Obama sez: 'I don’t think there’s ever been someone so qualified [as 'Hillary'] to hold this office'. Gutted, Eisenhower, mate.

[Davgooner]

740973710593654784

It's gone right off.

[GS]

She's the most qualified person in America at the minute.

[Lewis]

I still say that nobody is really 'qualified' for it, but Colin Powell ticks all the boxes (Stansfield Turner is still alive as well).

[Bartholomert]

Lol so much for the Judge gaffe having any effect on Trump, the God Emperor leading in Florida:

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282534-poll-trump-clinton-in-dead-heat-in-fla

Trump puts DEEP BLUE Connecticut into play, only down 4 (Romney lost by 18):

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Q-poll-Clinton-has-small-lead-over-Trump-7956289.php

[Bartholomert]

740973710593654784

It's gone right off.

http://i.filmot.org/BKATBwN.jpg

Fukin rect. The God Emperor remains un-stumable. Next 5 months are going to be awesome.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZWQ3YOMtJaM/UEsnJKgjdkI/AAAAAAAACo0/miO-N7XEaFA/w1200-h630-p-nu/black-kid-oh-snap.gif

[Lewis]

The MELTDOWN if he won would be incredible. Not least because the 'Bernie' people will go to their graves thinking that he would have beaten him.

[Bartholomert]

The MELTDOWN if he won would be incredible. Not least because the 'Bernie' people will go to their graves thinking that he would have beaten him.

I'm telling you, he's going to win. The media is very very out of touch with how actual Americans feel, I have no doubt he will vastly out perform polls.

Trump tied with Clinton in support among Latinos:

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinion/2016/06/07/opinion-big-data-reports-latino-support-for-trump-on-rise-at-37/

[Jimmy Floyd]

In a way I'm fully on board the lolmobile, but in another way, if he wins that will just fuel the self-righteous pillocks over here into further anti-Americanism, so meh.

Our po-faced commentariat have all en masse decided Hillary is absolutely wonderful within the last 48 hours, so that's bad news for her as they haven't got anything right since about 2004.

[Pepe]

I'm fully on board the Trump train.

[Lewis]

I'm telling you, he's going to win. The media is very very out of touch with how actual Americans feel, I have no doubt he will vastly out perform polls.

Trump tied with Clinton in support among Latinos:

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinion/2016/06/07/opinion-big-data-reports-latino-support-for-trump-on-rise-at-37/

You'll certainly deserve the e-victory if he does, since we've all lolled at it.

[Shindig]

And we'll promptly lol when Mert's student visa expires and he's punted off to Turkey.

[Spoonsky]

It's a real shame there are no frats to rush at McGill.

[Davgooner]

The God Emperor

What the fuck mate.

[Bartholomert]

And we'll promptly lol when Mert's student visa expires and he's punted off to Turkey.

Not sure if serious; are you unaware that both my parents are citizens, and I was born and lived most of my life in Virginia?

[Bartholomert]

It's a real shame there are no frats to rush at McGill.

It's going to objectively suck. But you can lead a horse to water, etc.

[Disco]

What the fuck mate.

It's an amusingly misjudged Warhammer reference.

[Shindig]

Not sure if serious.

Again, you can't talk to people like this. Opening any post with a meme just sets you up as some sort of brain damaged toilet. You're studying law or something, right? What kind of opening statement is, "u wot m8!?"

[Disco]

Brain damaged toilet. :D

[phonics]

Not sure if serious; are you unaware that both my parents are citizens, and I was born and lived most of my life in Virginia?

Still Turkish, a nation that is crushing free speech across Europe if you didn't know, and you hate America, the greatest nation on earth, because Muslims hate America so clearly you should hand your passport in as you cannot be trusted not to be a proud American, you just can't be trusted, because you are Turkish.

It's fun talking like 'God Emporers'

[Davgooner]

The most interesting angle on Trump is probably the efforts to prove he's worth a lot less than he says he is. He still refuses to release his tax returns, and their was a story last week examining some tax exemption he applied for which put his income last year at less than $500k. Normally with these sort of things you'd be suspicious of tax irregularities but with Trump it's far more likely he's holding back because any disclosure would confirm he's not quite as loaded as he says he is.

[Bartholomert]

Still Turkish, a nation that is crushing free speech across Europe if you didn't know, and you hate America, the greatest nation on earth, because Muslims hate America so clearly you should hand your passport in as you cannot be trusted not to be a proud American, you just can't be trusted, because you are Turkish.

It's fun talking like 'God Emporers'

You realize America doesn't work that way right? It is accepting of immigrants and considers them all American. Putting aside your bigotry, I'm ethnically Armenian (my mother is Orthodox) and Circassian; I am not 'Turkish' (to the extent that refers to Muslims from Anatolia).

[phonics]

My bigotry

:D

You literally accused a federal judge of being unable to get over the fact that his parents are Mexican as cause to call him incompetent and unreliable, as well as tying him to an 'extremist' society that there's zero evidence of him being part of, on the last page. Because his parents are Mexican. That's your entire argument.

[Magic]

The real DT trolling Clintz on Twitter is absolutely amazing.

140k RTs. :|

[Bartholomert]

My bigotry

:D

You literally accused a federal judge of being unable to get over the fact that his parents are Mexican as cause to call him incompetent and unreliable, as well as tying him to an 'extremist' society that there's zero evidence of him being part of, on the last page. Because his parents are Mexican. That's your entire argument.

So I guess you're also calling Justice Sotomayor, the first Latina POC on the Supreme Court and one of it's most liberal members, racist too?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/09/what_sotomayor_said_was_worse_130828.html

"Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences ... our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging."

[7om]

The next few months here are going to be wonderful / mental. If there's not a riot at some point, I'll be disappointed.

[phonics]

So I guess you're also calling Justice Sotomayor, the first Latina POC on the Supreme Court and one of it's most liberal members, racist too?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/09/what_sotomayor_said_was_worse_130828.html

"Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences ... our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging."

Of course your belief system makes a difference in your judging but as long as you're applying the law, that literally doesn't matter. Should no Jewish lawyer be able to try an Islamic terrorist because the defendant probably isn't a big fan of Israel?

There are judges that will hand down harsher punishments than other judges based on their beliefs. That's what they're there for, to exercise judgement within certain parameters based on the arguments laid before them.

You're going to law school and I'm having to explain the basic notions of objective v subjective... No wonder you're having such a tough time.

edit: P.S. Both your examples of appealing to authority have explained in those very articles why you're wrong. It's okay if you can't find a source to agree with you, just pretend or link to something that you found on Stormfront, Harold did it for years.

[Bartholomert]

Of course your belief system makes a difference in your judging but as long as you're applying the law, that literally doesn't matter. Should no Jewish lawyer be able to try an Islamic terrorist because the defendant probably isn't a big fan of Israel?

There are judges that will hand down harsher punishments than other judges based on their beliefs. That's what they're there for, to exercise judgement within certain parameters based on the arguments laid before them.

You're going to law school and I'm having to explain the basic notions of objective v subjective... No wonder you're having such a tough time.

edit: P.S. Both your examples of appealing to authority have explained in those very articles why you're wrong. It's okay if you can't find a source to agree with you, just pretend or link to something that you found on Stormfront, Harold did it for years.

Yes and according to Sotomayor those beliefs are based in or influenced by characteristics like ethnic background, gender, etc. How is this any different from what Trump implied?

[phonics]

Trump said it's a conflict of interest and the judge must recuse himself of an ongoing case. For being Mexican. It's both an attack on the idea of an independent judiciary and racist. That's the difference.

Your only defence of it is that he has ties to some extremist Latino group that he doesn't have and there's not even a shred of proof that he has ever had. So even you know this is ridiculous and yet you still defend it. It's embarrassing.

[Bartholomert]

Trump said it's a conflict of interest and the judge must recuse himself of an ongoing case. For being Mexican. It's both an attack on the idea of an independent judiciary and racist. That's the difference.

First of all it's not because he's Mexican, it's because he's affilliated with radical Leftist "Latino Interest" anti-Trump groups. Second, if you accept what Sotomayor says as true, isn't it indeed a conflict of interest? Or is she a racist too? You can't have it both ways.

For the record I don't agree or support Trump's comments, but am more concerned with the unsurprising hypocrisy of liberals in its wake.

[Bernanke]

First of all it's not because he's Mexican, it's because he's affilliated with radical Leftist "Latino Interest" anti-Trump groups.

If this was the case, he wouldn't have doubled down with "I don't think a Muslim judge could give me a fair trial either". The question that led to that statement had nothing to do with affiliations, and everything to do with heritage.

It's a serious stretch to say that Sotomayors comment implies a judge not conducting a fair trial, which is what The Donald claims is happening to him, and would happen if a Muslim judge presided over his case.

[phonics]

First of all it's not because he's Mexican,

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkDYTVgWYAAgkGd.jpg

"he said, it “would be possible, absolutely” that he would consider a Muslim judge inappropriate in court."

Nothing to do with him being Mexican of course.


it's because he's affilliated with radical Leftist "Latino Interest" anti-Trump groups.

You're conflating two completely seperate groups. Completely seperate. Nothing to do with each other.



Second, if you accept what Sotomayor says as true, isn't it indeed a conflict of interest? Or is she a racist too? You can't have it both ways.

This literally makes no sense.


For the record I don't agree or support Trump's comments, but am more concerned with the unsurprising hypocrisy of liberals in its wake.

Sure.

At least Harold was good at this.

[Bartholomert]

If this was the case, he wouldn't have doubled down with "I don't think a Muslim judge could give me a fair trial either". The question that led to that statement had nothing to do with affiliations, and everything to do with heritage.

It's a serious stretch to say that Sotomayors comment implies a judge not conducting a fair trial, which is what The Donald claims is happening to him, and would happen if a Muslim judge presided over his case.

Yes please tell me more about the inaccurate distortions by mainstream media. Here is Trump's official statement which reitierates what I said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/us/politics/trump-university-statement.html?_r=0

[phonics]

Yes please tell me more about the inaccurate distortions by mainstream media. Here is Trump's official statement which reitierates what I said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/us/politics/trump-university-statement.html?_r=0

A week later, not written by him, after getting eviscerated by the people ON HIS OWN SIDE. That's me convinced. What a compelling argument.

[Bartholomert]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CkDYTVgWYAAgkGd.jpg

"he said, it “would be possible, absolutely” that he would consider a Muslim judge inappropriate in court."

Nothing to do with him being Mexican of course.



You're conflating two completely seperate groups. Completely seperate. Nothing to do with each other.



This literally makes no sense.



Sure.

At least Harold was good at this.

Are you retarded, he's implying that a radical Mexican nationalist would potentially be biased, just like a radical Islamist might be biased under certain circumstances. His statement explains this point further.

Again we went over this example. The Greater Manchester Manchester United Supporter's Club is not affiliated with Manchester United, they are indeed SEPERATE!!, but to pretend as if the Manchester United Supporter's Group doesn't support Manchester United (which is effectively what you're metaphorically claiming) is laughable.

[Bartholomert]

The next few months here are going to be wonderful / mental. If there's not a riot at some point, I'll be disappointed.

What would be more likely to spark riots, a Trump or a Clinton election?

[phonics]

Are you retarded, he's implying that a radical Mexican nationalist would potentially be biased, just like a radical Islamist might be biased under certain circumstances. His statement explains this point further.

What makes him a Radical Mexican Nationalist?

Can black judges not preside over police violence cases that involve white officers attacking a black man?

Can Jewish judges not preside over cases involving Islamic extremism?

Can no latino judge oversee an immigration case?

Can no female judge oversee a sexual harassment suit?

The world is full of bias and beliefs, as long as you're interpreting law based on the arguments made in court, none of it matters. Unless you have a direct conflict of interest that can be proven in court through a recusal motion.

Trump has tried to get this guy to recuse himself by leaning on him via the media, or his lawyers would have asked for the Judges recusal. But they didn't because they know there's no conflict of interest. It's a massive attack on the independent judiciary and Mr "OBAMA IS A DICTATOR WHO RUNS ROUGHSHOD OVER THE THREE BRANCHES" should be able to see this.

[Bartholomert]

What makes him a Radical Mexican Nationalist?

Can black judges not preside over police violence cases that involve white officers attacking a black man?

Can Jewish judges not preside over cases involving Islamic extremism?

Can no latino judge oversee an immigration case?

Can no female judge oversee a sexual harassment suit?

The world is full of bias and beliefs, as long as you're interpreting law based on the arguments made in court, none of it matters. Unless you have a direct conflict of interest that can be proven in court through a recusal motion.

Trump has tried to get this guy to recuse himself by leaning on him via the media, or his lawyers would have asked for the Judges recusal. But they didn't because they know there's no conflict of interest. It's a massive attack on the independent judiciary and Mr "OBAMA IS A DICTATOR WHO RUNS ROUGHSHOD OVER THE THREE BRANCHES" should be able to see this.

It's not because he's Mexican. How many times do I need to say this?

Change Black with card-carrying Black Panther member and Black Nationalist.

Change Jewish with card-carrying Jewish Supremacist/Zionist group member.

Etc.

That's the real comparison.

[Bernanke]

Change Black with card-carrying Black Panther member and Black Nationalist.

That would easily be possible to prove in court, this apparently isn't.


Change Jewish with card-carrying Jewish Supremacist/Zionist group member.

That would easily be possible to prove in court, this apparently isn't.

[phonics]

It's not because he's Mexican. How many times do I need to say this?

Change Black with card-carrying Black Panther member and Black Nationalist.

Change Jewish with card-carrying Jewish Supremacist/Zionist group member.

Etc.

That's the real comparison.

Where's the proof? Because Donald Trumps lawyers certainly don't have it. They need you to hurry up and finish that law degree. Maybe they should check his wallet for his Radical Mexican Nationalist card.

[Bartholomert]

Where's the proof? Because Donald Trumps lawyers certainly don't have it. They need you to hurry up and finish that law degree. Maybe they should check his wallet for his Radical Mexican Nationalist card.

Okay:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/01/judge-presiding-over-trump-university-case-is-member-of-la-raza-lawyers-group/

[phonics]

okay:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/01/judge-presiding-over-trump-university-case-is-member-of-la-raza-lawyers-group/

They're not the same thing. Not sure how many times this can be stated.

741291548193792000

Sums up this page well.

edit: Stupid embed doesn't highlight the actual tweet.

741289758689796096

[7om]

What would be more likely to spark riots, a Trump or a Clinton election?

Trump not getting the nomination at the GOP convention, I reckon :drool:

[Spoonsky]

Clinton would spark IRL riots, Trump would spark Facebook riots.

[Pepe]

No one will riot if Clinton wins. One or two 'peaceful demonstrations' drowned by liberal tears might occur if Trump wins. Twitter, of course, would go bananas.

[Pepe]

Reading about how fantastic Elizabeth Warren is is getting a bit boring.

[Shindig]

Trump's already sparked some shaky protests.

[Pepe]

I know. There were several when he came to St. Louis.

[Davgooner]

Will be interesting to see which, if any, of Bernie's policies Hillary adopts now things seem to have softened a bit following yesterday's talks. He seems to be ready to step aside if not openly endorse her, and you'd imagine he'd have wanted some guarantees on certain things. Warren as VP and her getting on board with say, the $15 minimum wage, would probably see her grab a good chunk of his support in the general.

[GS]

Except national elections are won in the centre, so winning over Bernie Sanders' army of new-found socialists - the vast majority of whom will end up voting for the Democratic candidate anyway - isn't a strategy which will win her the general.

If she has any sense, she'll pay lip service to Bernie, talk about his great work, and then ignore him.

[Shindig]

I know it won't happen but maybe he should man up and take the VP?

[Pepe]

She would never even offer it to him, would she?

[GS]

She won't bother, if she has any sense. Again, she's just shoring up a vote she's going to win anyway (youth and liberal) and he's from fucking Vermont so it's not like he wins a state that matters.

[Bartholomert]

Clinton would spark IRL riots, Trump would spark Facebook riots.

How much do you want to bet that there will be 0 injuries in riots if Clinton gets elected, and more than 0 injuries in riots if Trump gets elected?

[Bartholomert]

Will be interesting to see which, if any, of Bernie's policies Hillary adopts now things seem to have softened a bit following yesterday's talks. He seems to be ready to step aside if not openly endorse her, and you'd imagine he'd have wanted some guarantees on certain things. Warren as VP and her getting on board with say, the $15 minimum wage, would probably see her grab a good chunk of his support in the general.

Warren would be an absolute disaster as a national politician. She is a complete and utter fraud.

[Spoonsky]

Bernie in as VP could win somewhere like Utah, with its dueling Mormon values of morality and socialism.

[elth]

There's not really a heap of evidence that picking a factional or regional candidate actually helps shore up support in a candidate's appeal, so she's probably best picking whoever actually will be the best President if she carks it.

I find it unlikely any latent sexists out there are going to hold their noses and vote for Clinton, but balk at the idea of a female VP too, so if she thinks Warren's the best choice, that shouldn't be an issue.

[Davgooner]

Except national elections are won in the centre, so winning over Bernie Sanders' army of new-found socialists - the vast majority of whom will end up voting for the Democratic candidate anyway - isn't a strategy which will win her the general.

If she has any sense, she'll pay lip service to Bernie, talk about his great work, and then ignore him.

She's been dragged left already, and his following is too big and currently too utterly against her for her not to give a shit. I'm not saying she's going to take her whole campaign in that direction, but she needs to recognise the current direction of the party and do something to appease younger people. Warren as VP is a move in that direction, but we might see some policy positions change as well.

[Bartholomert]

She's been dragged left already, and his following is too big and currently too utterly against her for her not to give a shit. I'm not saying she's going to take her whole campaign in that direction, but she needs to recognise the current direction of the party and do something to appease younger people. Warren as VP is a move in that direction, but we might see some policy positions change as well.

I pray she is retarded enough to pick Warren, every single independent would come running to Trump and Hillary would lose in a landslide.

I hope Mark Cuban is Trumps running mate.

[Davgooner]

What's your beef?

Also, while you're here: https://trumpsingles.com/

Get on it.

[niko_cee]

Mark Cuban as in the owner of the Dallas Mavericks?

[GS]

She's been dragged left already, and his following is too big and currently too utterly against her for her not to give a shit. I'm not saying she's going to take her whole campaign in that direction, but she needs to recognise the current direction of the party and do something to appease younger people. Warren as VP is a move in that direction, but we might see some policy positions change as well.

That doesn't ring true based on polling: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/sanders-supporters-prefer-clinton-to-trump-exclusive-poll

Not that I understand how 7% of Sanders' supporters defect to 'the Donald', but there you are. She's winning Sanders' converts by 6-1 against Trump when supposedly 'peripheral' candidates are considered, and less than one in seven says they'll stay home. She's going to do well, as you expect the break to her instead of Trump will only increase as election day nears and Sanders supporters are confronted with the non-abstract choice of Hillary Clinton, Democrat, or Donald Trump, Republican.

There's also this (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/05/04/rel6b.-.2016.general.pdf), which suggests that Sanders supporters favour Clinton over Trump by 86-10.

Recognising the 'current direction of the party' is also not what she should be doing. 28.5M people voted in the Democratic primary - Sanders took 42.7% of that vote or 12.4M. There are c. 226m voters for the general election - Sanders only has 5.5% of that, and they're breaking in a plurality (which will soon become a majority) for Clinton anyway. Party members are always more 'extreme' (relatively, not absolutely) than the electorate at large. She doesn't, therefore, need to recognise the direction of the party and appease younger people. Falling back on the views of the membership is a sure-fire way to lose, as they're simply not representative of the centre ground one needs to capture to win.

There's also precedent here. A lot of Clinton supporters - 54% (http://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11593434/bernie-sanders-poll-trump-clinton) - said they wouldn't vote for Obama in 2008. Nine in ten Democrats ended up voting for Obama anyway.

Sanders has had a good run but it's over now, and any sane Democrat will a) support Clinton and b) support her positions which ensure a Democratic President and a Democratic congress. That's what advances your agenda, not baying at the moon from the margins with the politics of protest and faux revolution.

[Lewis]

In the future people will divide world history into pre and post-'Bernie' phases.

[Davgooner]

That's what advances your agenda, not baying at the moon from the margins with the politics of protest and faux revolution.

Whose agenda? People uniting behind Sanders have done so because they're tired of the gradualism that is promoted by centrist Democrats and that has been implemented by Obama. It's about decisive change and there's a real feeling that Trump, bad as he would be in the short term, would bring that kind of change quicker than four/eight years of Mrs Establishment negotiating from the centre and doing the bidding of her donors.

That argument is compelling in most instances, but not when the alternative is Trump. The guy's a maniac and no-one should be doing anything that might help him into office. Fuck me, it's hard to envisage the sort of fuckwittery that would be unleashed should he get in.

:sick:

[Davgooner]

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-primary-there-are-more-than-2-5-million-1465520381-htmlstory.html

What?

[GS]

Whose agenda? People uniting behind Sanders have done so because they're tired of the gradualism that is promoted by centrist Democrats and that has been implemented by Obama. It's about decisive change and there's a real feeling that Trump, bad as he would be in the short term, would bring that kind of change quicker than four/eight years of Mrs Establishment negotiating from the centre and doing the bidding of her donors.

That argument is compelling in most instances, but not when the alternative is Trump. The guy's a maniac and no-one should be doing anything that might help him into office. Fuck me, it's hard to envisage the sort of fuckwittery that would be unleashed should he get in.

:sick:

'Your' agenda being the Democratic and / or American liberal agenda in this context.

It takes a rare set of circumstances for decisive change to be implemented. Incrementalism may not be revolutionary, it may not excite people, but it ensures that progress is made and the general trend towards a certain end game continues. In the absence of a significant consensus on an issue, it's the only way to realistically proceed. This is particularly prevalent in the American system where the checks and balances are so cumbersome that it can bring the legislative process to a halt. Take Obama's healthcare package. He just about got it through congress, and that was only by making significant concessions to conservative Democrats and Nancy Pelosi engaging in some quite clever congressional procedural tricks. He had a slim majority in the HOR and a bigger one in the Senate, but it scraped through. He was criticised for not going as far as he should have, but how is he supposed to if he doesn't have the votes in congress? He simply couldn't - that's the way the American system works.

Even if Sanders somehow won the nomination and then the White House, he could only do so much without congressional support and there are plenty of conservative Democrats who simply wouldn't stand for some of his policies. Even if he won, the 'decisive change' he wants to implement is not an agenda he could proceed with. He could try limited executive action, but then congress (whose members have their own democratic mandates and which the vast majority of members will, first and foremost, want to protect) would procedurally pound him for his entire presidency and stop him doing any number of things he wants to do.

People need to move on from the idea that Sanders is going to leave some sort of profound legacy. The Democrats need to win back a congressional majority, and they're only going to do that if they go after the Republicans hard. Sanders needs to stop baying at the moon and throw the full weight of his support (and encourage his supporters to do the same) behind the Democratic candidates in their districts / states.

[Davgooner]

Ugh. He's promoted the notion that people don't have to accept politics within the confines of what the establishment lays out; there's nothing to be gained from his attempting to reinforce that system at this point, in fact it was be farcical. See some of the flak Warren is getting for endorsing and potentially running with Hillary. His campaign seems to be more focused on making sure the movement continues to grow; it's built around principles rather than personalities and there's every reason to suggest it can continue to grow.

Also, the idea that Hillary and the DNC would in any way 'go after the Republicans hard' is laughable. DWS is busy at the moment getting in bed with them in an attempt to de-regulate the payday loan sector for fuck sake. Economically she's just a different shade of grey; a lot of money that previously flowed to Rubio and Bush has now funneled into her campaign.

Genuinely feel sorry for the choice that the yanks are going to be presented with.

[Bartholomert]

I've always been confused by people who want 'immediate, radical change'; don't you think that if the wisdom of a certain approach was overwhelmingly obvious, that the vast majority of people wouldn't be opposed to its implementation?

[Bernanke]

I've always been confused by people who want 'immediate, radical change'; don't you think that if the wisdom of a certain approach was overwhelmingly obvious, that the vast majority of people wouldn't be opposed to its implementation?

Slavery.

[Lewis]

That isn't really the best example of 'immediate, radical change'.

[Bartholomert]

Slavery.

As much as people might be uncomfortable with this response, ending slavery without the necessary underlying shift in economic organization would have probably resulted in a complete social collapse to the detriment of all parties.

And putting that aside, the vast majority of people, if we were to count slaves, were probably still against slavery. You're talking about an era without basic civil rights and full participation in the political process for adults, which in turn enabled the exploitation of groups without representation; that's just not the case today.

In a free democratic society like those found in the modern West, belief in the necessity of radical change in any direction is simply stupid / naive / delusionally arrogant. You just don't know better than everybody else. I think our democratic system with its checks and balances and legislative gridlock in the absence of consensus is alright (minus recent epidemic of executive overreach, Congress needs to get its act together).

[Magic]

http://s33.postimg.org/4akbc728v/IMG_20160611_203944.jpg

:D

[Byron]

Alright Mert.

https://m.facebook.com/GodEmperorTrump/

[Lofty]

You realize America doesn't work that way right? It is accepting of immigrants and considers them all American. Putting aside your bigotry, I'm ethnically Armenian (my mother is Orthodox) and Circassian; I am not 'Turkish' (to the extent that refers to Muslims from Anatolia).

Tell that to the Asian Americans sent to internment camps during WW2 Lol

[Bartholomert]

Tell that to the Asian Americans sent to internment camps during WW2 Lol

Yes because American during war time 70 years ago is comparable to American society today.

More importantly LOL at Phonics, US government recused an Iranian judge from hearing Iranian-American immigration cases because she was Iranian...but Trump's the racist right?

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/10/the-obama-admin-blocked-an-iranian-american-judge-from-hearing-iranian-immigration-cases/?platform=hootsuite

[Davgooner]

Bit different from the Trump situation.

[phonics]

Yes because American during war time 70 years ago is comparable to American society today.

More importantly LOL at Phonics, US government recused an Iranian judge from hearing Iranian-American immigration cases because she was Iranian...but Trump's the racist right?

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/10/the-obama-admin-blocked-an-iranian-american-judge-from-hearing-iranian-immigration-cases/?platform=hootsuite

She's sueing them for discrimination so if she wins, yes?

It also states in the piece that it's totally out of the ordinary for such a thing to happen.


IRA KURZBAN: It's quite odd.

GONZALES: Attorney Ira Kurzban teaches at the University of Miami. He literally wrote the book on immigration laws, and he says he's surprised by the scope of the Justice Department's action.

KURZBAN: I have never heard of a case of a recusal of a judge on this basis, across the board.


GONZALES: Kurzban says by the same logic, the Justice Department would have to order African-American judges not to hear cases involving people from Africa or the Caribbean. Or a Jewish judge would be barred from hearing cases involving Israelis. Ali Mojdehi is Judge Tabaddor's attorney.

[Bartholomert]

Justice Department recuses a judge from hearing a case because of her nationality due to associated bias. Not racist. Never makes the news.

Trump says that a judge should be recused form hearing a case because of his nationality due to associated bias. OUTRAGE!! 24/7 WALL-TO-WALL COVERAGE OF RACIST BIGOT

Okay.

[phonics]

Justice Department recuses a judge from hearing a case because of her nationality due to associated bias. Not racist. Never makes the news.

Trump says that a judge should be recused form hearing a case because of his nationality due to associated bias. OUTRAGE!! 24/7 WALL-TO-WALL COVERAGE OF RACIST BIGOT

Okay.

Or no-one reported on the story because it wasn't of national interest (literally where would you put that in your newspaper? Page 12, below the fold just about maybe?) because it wasn't one of the two people set to be the next Commander-in-Chief. You're literally doing the equivalent of 'WHY DOESN'T ANYONE CARE ABOUT TERRORISTS IN YEMEN' when France was under attack.

Priorities shift when they broach our interest.

edit: By the way, Christ that Daily Caller website is terrible. It's like putting the Enquirer online.

[Bartholomert]

Or no-one reported on the story because it wasn't of national interest (literally where would you put that in your newspaper? Page 12, below the fold just about maybe?) because it wasn't one of the two people set to be the next Commander-in-Chief. You're literally doing the equivalent of 'WHY DOESN'T ANYONE CARE ABOUT TERRORISTS IN YEMEN' when France was under attack.

Priorities shift when they broach our interest.

edit: By the way, Christ that Daily Caller website is terrible. It's like putting the Enquirer online.

...ya probably true tbh but I'm being provacative

[phonics]

You do a really shitty job of it because I just have to click on the article you cite and read that you're wrong. It's satisfying to have my beliefs confirmed by someone who thinks the opposite more than anything.

[ItalAussie]

Can you get any judge recused by publicly smearing their demographic and then claiming that makes them unable to be impartial?

[ItalAussie]

At any rate, race generally can't be taken alone as a reason to recuse:


In 1998, lawyers in a case concerning a commercial breach of contract attempted to force federal Judge Denny Chin, who is of Asian descent, to recuse himself because some of the people in the case were Asian-American, and the defendants had been portrayed in the press as anti-Asian. The lawyers also argued that because Chin had been appointed by President Bill Clinton, he was biased since the case touched on conduct by the Democratic National Committee. An appeals court later upheld sanctions against one of the lawyers in the case.
The lawyers got absolutely slammed in the sanction decision, too.


Chin said to Klayman, "You asked questions of the Court, at least in part, because of my race?"
"In part," Klayman responded. "I, for instance, would not sit as a Jewish American on a case that involved a Palestinian."
Chin said the question was "offensive." He ordered Klayman and Orfanedes never to appear before him again, and to notify any other judges they appeared before that they had been sanctioned.
An appeals court upheld the punishment in 1998, saying, "A suggestion that a judge cannot administer the law fairly because of the judge's racial and ethnic heritage is extremely serious, and should not be made without a factual foundation going well beyond the judge's membership in a particular racial or ethnic group."

[phonics]

Trump has just gone up to eleven. It's mental.

[phonics]

And now he's revoked credentials of the Washington Post for negative coverage :D

The man is a coward of the highest order.

[elth]

Can you get any judge recused by publicly smearing their demographic and then claiming that makes them unable to be impartial?

Seems unlikely. If you could get a judge to recuse themselves just by being inflammatory toward them or their ethnicity, the legal system would grind to a halt.

It would be a novel defense strategy though - make your defendant publicly attack every judge appointed to the case, then demand they recuse themselves because they now might appear to be biased against the defendant.

[ItalAussie]

Yeah, the question was really aimed at how stupid the idea is. :D

Would be fun to see it catch on though. And possibly even get vindictively personal:

"We'd just like to say on the record that the judge is ugly, and his mother is a whore. Let's see him try and judge us impartially now."

[Bartholomert]

And now he's revoked credentials of the Washington Post for negative coverage :D

The man is a coward of the highest order.

Tbf they are spreading blatant lies and propaganda.

[Bartholomert]

Trump has just gone up to eleven. It's mental.

Yes because unchecked immigration from Muslim countries has worked out so well, right? Why would the West continue to do it, there is literally no reason...

[phonics]

Yes because unchecked immigration from Muslim countries has worked out so well, right? Why would the West continue to do it, there is literally no reason...

1) I can't believe I have to point this out. You're a muslim immigrant
2) What kind of unchecked immigration do you think is going on in the States? There's barely a country on earth that has stricter border and immigration control.

[phonics]

Tbf they are spreading blatant lies and propaganda.

That's Donalds job. These ethnics... No wonder he's so mad about it.

[Shindig]

1) I can't believe I have to point this out. You're a muslim immigrant


American-born, isn't he? Send his parents back, though.

[Bernanke]

Mert is an anchor baby?

[Bartholomert]

1) I can't believe I have to point this out. You're a muslim immigrant
2) What kind of unchecked immigration do you think is going on in the States? There's barely a country on earth that has stricter border and immigration control.

1) I'm not. My mother immigrated as a Christian with an H1B1 visa, my father (who for what it's worth told me he was atheist after my grandfather's funeral) only got his green card through marriage. Both were highly educated and secular. I was born to two American citizens on American soil. Regardless, 1982 is not 2016; the threats posed to American security is vastly different today.
2) 100k Muslim immigrants are admitted to the US every year. Who are these people? The San Bernadino terrorists got through this system, the Orlando shooter's dad (who is an open supporter of the Taliban) also got through this system. I'm not saying don't allow immigrants, especially those which would add value to society through their education / skills, but our current approach has clearly failed, both in the US and Europe.
3) I am not beholden to identity politics. I don't understand why you would let in people from this background, and I'm allowed to be afraid of Islamic terrorism too. I'm probably first in line in all honesty because of my various betrayals of Islamic law.

The reality is that the majority of Muslims I know refuse to integrate, view integration as betrayal of a medieval utterly intolerant value system, harbor deep seated resentment/bitterness towards Western culture, and hate America. I've seen it first hand. It genuinely is painful to confront this reality, but you can't pretend it's not there.

For all my half joking misogyny, disapproval of sex positivism / feminism, the homosexual lifestyle, etc, I recognize the existence of basic human values common to all. I don't know if it's a problem inherent to Islam or if it can be reformed, but there is absolutely a problem / intractable ideological conflict with a large group of its adherents and liberal Western norms; they cannot co-exist peacefully.

[Bartholomert]

That's Donalds job. These ethnics... No wonder he's so mad about it.

Hillary Clinton hasn't had a press conference in over a year. Obama's Administration has given the least access and been the least transparent to the media in modern US history.

But Trump is the coward...

[phonics]

All three are cowards. Obama has been absolutely shameful on this.

[Davgooner]

He's not a coward, just an absolute fucking retard. Why are we even having a discussion about immigration in the wake of this attack?

[Pepe]

Because mert.

[phonics]

Trump stands by his campaign manager through an assault (clearly not but whatever) case and then fires him on a Monday morning when there's nothing else going on in the news :cab:

[phonics]

By the way, during times like these, nothing cheers me up more than checking out the replies to his tweets. It's an incredible ocean of 100% pure, oaken brown, dog shit.

744838264058748929

744838263400194048

[Bernanke]

So, a Brit tried to assassinate Trump? What the fuck?

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36582770

[Bartholomert]

So, a Brit tried to assassinate Trump? What the fuck?

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36582770

We gunna pretend like the Left didn't cultivate a climate of hatred / violence / hysteria, because I sure as hell know if the tables were turned that's exactly the rhetoric the mainstream media would employ to somehow shift the blame on Trump.

Oh and he was an illegal immigrant.

[Davgooner]

Clocked a class of students earlier researching The Donald. In amongst people searching on his business background and political views was one lad asking Google 'Is Donald Trump dating his daughter'.

Quality.

[Bartholomert]

God Emperor up 4 (43-39), highest polling numbers since October:

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch

[Spoonsky]

Interesting article about Trump's press manager, a 27-year-old model fittingly named Hope Hicks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/style/hope-hicks-donald-trump.html?_r=0

[elth]

It's amusing how Mert keeps crowing about the Rasmussen Reports poll results, while ignoring every other poll in the country showing Trump down 2-8 points.

[ItalAussie]

I assume that solely listing Rasmussen polls is basically fishing for responses.

[Bartholomert]

It's amusing how Mert keeps crowing about the Rasmussen Reports poll results, while ignoring every other poll in the country showing Trump down 2-8 points.

How did those 'objective non-partisan' pollsters do in predicting the Brexit results? Hmm?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Some of them did reasonably well.

[Byron]

How did those 'objective non-partisan' pollsters do in predicting the Brexit results? Hmm?

So you point out a poll that helps your argument and then when faced with polls that don't agree with your view you then state that polls can't be trusted.

Lol.

[Bartholomert]

So you point out a poll that helps your argument and then when faced with polls that don't agree with your view you then state that polls can't be trusted.

Lol.

No. I don't trust polls by establishment / center-left sources, the same polls that were shockingly inaccurate in predicting the Brexit results. They have their own agendas to promote and skew their data sets accordingly. See ABC News/Washington Post poll results for more information.

[niko_cee]

Were any polls actually shockingly inaccurate as regards the referendum? Other than the secret ones the City and the bookies had access to. Wasn't the prevailing view that it was going to be margin of error tight?

[Jimmy Floyd]

Populus had an absolute mare, but the online crew did pretty given it was a one-off event with no precedents. YouGov were solidly around the correct mark throughout the campaign.

[ItalAussie]

No. I don't trust polls by establishment / center-left sources, the same polls that were shockingly inaccurate in predicting the Brexit results. They have their own agendas to promote and skew their data sets accordingly. See ABC News/Washington Post poll results for more information.

This is exactly what you said before the last election. The one where the polls (aside, notably, from Rasmussen) largely got it right.

[Bartholomert]

This is exactly what you said before the last election. The one where the polls (aside, notably, from Rasmussen) largely got it right.

You mean this election?

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-polls-were-skewed-toward-democrats/

"The polls did have a strong bias this year — but it was toward Democrats and not against them."

[ItalAussie]

I mean the one where you went into the election convinced that the polls were wrong, and then melted down, Karl Rove-style, on the night.

Surely it makes sense to listen to the polls and look to change the situation, rather than pulling a Romney and claiming that they were wrong. Like, it's no skin off my nose what you go in believing, but if you're putting all your eggs in the basket of the polling company well-known for being the least reliable, then there's a decent chance of a repeat. It's not like the fact that Hilary is dominating the polls at this point is even that big a deal - you don't get bonus points for winning early polls. There's only one that matters.

That said, if you want to bring in fivethirtyeight, their prognosis is not a strong one for Trump at this stage. :sorry:

[Pepe]

What makes sense is to light all polls on fire.

[Disco]

What makes sense is to light all polls on fire.

Something something terrified!

[Jimmy Floyd]

Didn't John Kerry have very strong early poll ratings? Although I'm really not sure why.

[Bartholomert]

I mean the one where you went into the election convinced that the polls were wrong, and then melted down, Karl Rove-style, on the night.

Surely it makes sense to listen to the polls and look to change the situation, rather than pulling a Romney and claiming that they were wrong. Like, it's no skin off my nose what you go in believing, but if you're putting all your eggs in the basket of the polling company well-known for being the least reliable, then there's a decent chance of a repeat. It's not like the fact that Hilary is dominating the polls at this point is even that big a deal - you don't get bonus points for winning early polls. There's only one that matters.

That said, if you want to bring in fivethirtyeight, their prognosis is not a strong one for Trump at this stage. :sorry:

Is this the same fivethirtyeight that said Trump would never win the nomination? There's a reason people don't trust experts, it's because they've lost all credibility.

[niko_cee]

Whilst I'm as up for a bit of pseudo-science (hello economics) bashing as the next man, this whole "what do experts know?" movement the world seems to be in the grip of does seem a bit on the cultural revolution/Pol Pot side of things.

Without wanting to assimilate too strongly into the metropolitan bourgeoisie, the man on the Clapham omnibus maybe good for a reasonable man test, but that doesn't mean he's not a fucking idiot.

[John]

Is this the same fivethirtyeight that said Trump would never win the nomination? There's a reason people don't trust experts, it's because they've lost all credibility.

The one you just posted to back up your point, but are now discrediting entirely because it speaks against another of your points.

[Boydy]

The man on the Clapham omnibus is probably a management consultant who works in the City these days.

[Disco]

Is Mert trashing his own sources? Guys, we don't even need to be here.

[niko_cee]

The man on the Clapham omnibus is probably a management consultant who works in the City these days.

Aye, so he probably can't even fulfill the common sense requirement anymore.

The man on the Clacton omnibus.

[Bartholomert]

The one you just posted to back up your point, but are now discrediting entirely because it speaks against another of your points.

Eh? An article reflecting retrospectively on the failure of pollsters (really all they've done is compiled existing data) does not add credibility to their own pollings / predictions going into me future. Especially given their track record with Donald Trump.

[John]

Eh? An article reflecting retrospectively on the failure of pollsters (really all they've done is compiled existing data) does not add credibility to their own pollings / predictions going into me future. Especially given their track record with Donald Trump.

They're either credible or they're not. You can't say they're credible when they're agreeing with you and then dismiss them when they aren't. That's just a slightly inbred cousin of confirmation bias.

[Bartholomert]

They're either credible or they're not. You can't say they're credible when they're agreeing with you and then dismiss them when they aren't. That's just a slightly inbred cousin of confirmation bias.

It's like trusting CNN for news / facts but not trusting the editorials in their opinion section. Cmon now.

[Spoonsky]

FBI won't press charges on Hillary.

Mert :wave:

[Bartholomert]

FBI won't press charges on Hillary.

Mert :wave:

I'm dissapointed but I can't say I'm surprised, welcome to Obamas partisan America where the Justice Department is only a tool to be wielded to repress conservatives.

Comey's statements directly demonstrate that Clinton lied to the public at least, so at least we'll have decent attack ad fodder.

[John]

Hillary lied to the public about important things, Trump invented and pretended to be a publicist so he could brag about all the bishes Donald Trump was fucking.

Comme ci, comme ça.

[Bartholomert]

Honestly...I'm so upset Kasich didn't get the nomination, this was a fucking lay up of an election to win. He would have been a perfect moderate socially, fiscally center-right candidate that would have brought the country together and legitimized Republicans a little bit in the eyes of the Left.

The polarization right now is indescribable, it's like living in two separate countries who hate each other, forced to co-exist in one. If our generation wasn't a bunch of pussies, I wouldn't be surprised if a civil war broke out. I predict secessions within 25 years.

[John]

But God Emperor?

[Lewis]

Provided they could prove they don't have Irish sympathies, I would be up for resettling Republicans in Scotland.

[Pepe]

I would imagine Texas is big enough for them.

[Lewis]

Mexas. Yeah right.

[Pepe]

They could even build The Wall all around the state.

[Bartholomert]

But God Emperor?

The elites won't let him win, the major media outlets pretty much run 24/7 anti-Trump propaganda and it is wearing down his supporters on the margin. And as much as I love him fighting and sticking it to the mainstream media he's too populist, I studied enough economics that I know protectionism doesn't work. Cutting taxes without cutting spending on entitlements doesn't work. Etc.

I'm mostly just upset because I don't think traditional principled conservatives (the people and principles that made this country great) are a significant voting block in this country anymore. It's beginning of the end of American greatness happening in a slow motion train wreck, and most people are totally oblivious / more interested in letting trannys into YMCA locker rooms / watching the Kardashians act slutty on TV.

[Bartholomert]

I would imagine Texas is big enough for them.

No joke I applied to a bunch of law firms in Texas in the off chance that they decide to succeede (also 10% more income because of no income tax).

[ItalAussie]

I presume all the "Texit" jokes have already been made.

But yeah, nobody really believes in principled political positions. The Republicans spent so long courting the public with populist rhetoric that they didn't realise that their philosophical supporter base had eroded from the inside out. They're basically a reactionary populist party now, with some laissez-faire capitalists trying and failing to wrangle the runaway train. I will be interested to see where they go post-Trump.

[phonics]

Bernie will endorse Clinton tonight


Hillary Clinton's campaign is making it official: Former Democratic rival Bernie Sanders will join her at a New Hampshire event on Tuesday where he plans to endorse her.
....Though Clinton effectively clinched the nomination more than a month ago, Sanders has been slow to formally endorse her fall bid against Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump. He has instead maneuvered to win commitments from Clinton and the Democratic Party to incorporate portions of his agenda into theirs.


Last week, Clinton announced revamped policy on college tuition and healthcare that did just that. And at a meeting on the Democratic Party platform, Sanders successfully pushed for liberal positions on an array of issues, including the minimum wage and climate change.
This all makes sense. Though I've had my issues with Sanders, I said a few weeks ago: (http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/05/bernie-sanders-going-town-democratic-convention-thats-fine) "In the end, the threat of Donald Trump will prevent Bernie and his followers from hating Hillary too long, but in the meantime there's no reason not to use every weapon in his arsenal to browbeat both Hillary and the Democratic Party into moving in the direction he wants them to go."
And that's what he's done. He cooled it on the personal attacks, but used every bit of leverage he had to move both Hillary and the Democratic platform to the left. He didn't get everything he wanted, but unlike some of his more rabid supporters, he never expected to. He did lose the primary, after all.


Nonetheless, he got a helluva lot. He played his cards well, and in Hillary Clinton I think he had a fairly willing sparring partner. She didn't fight all that hard against his platform demands.
But yesterday the platform was finished, and Bernie is pretty happy with it. With that done, he's endorsing Hillary almost immediately. My guess is that it will be a fairly enthusiastic endorsement, too—and will get more enthusiastic as time passes and the wounds of the primary race fade away. In the end, I'm happy to see that Bernie has pretty much played things the way he should: he stopped the personal attacks, pushed the party to the left, and now he's diving in to the campaign against Donald Trump. Good work.

The Bernster has played this incredibly well all things told.

[Davgooner]

He seems to have got her to adopt his plan for college funding, and the $15 minimum wage. It'll only make it even more annoying when she pisses it all way whilst negotiating with the Republicans.

[GS]

Quite. None of it matters unless the Democrats win congress. Even then, they'll have their own concerns far more than they do here.

Still, it's nice for him to get a platitude or two now he's finally chucked it.

[Bernanke]

r/s4p is amazing right now.


[–] [score hidden] 6 minutes ago
What a lying piece of shit.
This whole time he lied to our faces.
At least with Clinton you knew that she was a fuck. Now we find out that Bernie was even worse- he was pretending to give a shit and now he's selling us all out.
What a complete fuck.
I'm done with this politics shit. Fuck this, let whatever happen in November happen. Who the fuck can ever trust anyone again after the 1 person who promised to actually give a shit about us just stabbed us int he back.

[–] [score hidden] a minute ago
Never did I imagine that I be witness to the creation of a new political hope, a party that truly represented the people, by a person who lived those morals and values their entire life. And never did I imagine that same person, so steadfast in their beliefs, get bought and sold to destroy that movement in an instant...

[–] [score hidden] 6 minutes ago
Bernie is now a fucking paid Hillary shill!

[Pepe]

You have to assume those folks just became aware of the existence of a world around them within the past 12 months.

[Lewis]

'Bernie', mate. 'Bernie'. This time it was different.

[Pepe]

Until he betrayed us. The cunt.

[Pepe]

I wonder what will be of Marco.

[Pepe]

The Republican Obama, they said. :harold:

[Lewis]

Obama is the Republican Obama. #FeelTheBern

[Pepe]

Bernie will have another go in four years once 'Hillary' is FOUND OUT.

[Pepe]

Does this endorsement shite exist anywhere else btw? What a load of rubbish, it's as if Americans want to be told what to think.

[Magic]

We call it BACKING here, mate.

[Bartholomert]

Trump leads in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Iowa based off Quinnipac and Monmouth polls:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/quinnipiac-poll-trump-leads-florida-pennsylvania

http://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/MonmouthPoll_IA_071216/

:dust:

[Bartholomert]

Supreme Leader ahead by SEVEN points:

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch

[Davgooner]

Yep. She's getting molested in a lot of the swing states.

[GS]

It'll come back in the campaign, given he's a mental.

[Bartholomert]

Hillary BTFO with new Trump pokemon Meme:

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

[Shindig]

The state of that. Although kudos to the man for getting a Vice called Pence. "Hi, I'm Mike Pence with - my two cents."

[ItalAussie]

Pence makes Ted Cruz look like a backsliding apostate. You may as well just nominate a bible as VP.

Not one of those namby-pamby liberal translations, either. One of the ones which are all smiting, all the time.

[ItalAussie]

It does make sense though. For all Trump's posturing, he's obviously not at all religious, nor is he making any effort to learn how to dog whistle his way to appearing devout. While the evangelical right have largely fallen in line behind him (right beats evangelical, when push comes to shove), it's a choice that he has to hope will mollify the ones who are still wavering about voting for somebody outside their own tribe.

[Bartholomert]

It's an uninspiring but wise choice; it'll consolidate the GOP establishment / 'True Conservatives' behind him which is the bare minimum his pick needed to do if he was going to have any chance to beat Hillary. I'm also convinced that he is doing much better, especially among Democrats, than polls pick up.

And it needs to be said, that unfathomable 'Muslim Ban gaffe' is probably quietly looking more and more sensible to Americans across the spectrum...

[Bernanke]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrX3Ql31URA


https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLt9jO9QkAAoeF7SSQFHqPEyq2dqIA6hZD&v=oeYKFRV34kY

Love that they brought back the second one. The first one is a bit "won't somebody PLEASE think about the children?!" though.

[Bartholomert]

Hillarys Instagram is getting raided with Spicy Boi memes; worth a look

[Pepe]

https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/police_rnc_cleveland_ap_img.jpg

Looking good boys. Never know when an impromtu motocross race might occur.

[Bartholomert]

Is that security?

[Pepe]

Cleveland police.

http://image.cleveland.com/home/cleve-media/width620/img/plain_dealer_metro/photo/20761167-mmmain.png

Didn't know the streets in Cleveland were so bad that you need a mountain bike to make it through.

[Bartholomert]

It's like a bad sci-fi movie army uniform :sick:

[Pepe]

That's what 20 million gets you nowadays.

[Shindig]

Now let's see some sweet jumps.

[Bernanke]

https://mobile.twitter.com/mikehearn/status/755260215021432832/video/1

:lol:

[elth]

Trump's a post-truth candidate, nobody who votes for him or is thinking about it will care about trivia like that. He makes them feel good about themselves, that's all that matters.

[Bartholomert]

How's that unchecked mass immigration working out for Europe? Bet it felt sooo good taking them in right, all involved parties surely deserved their self-righteous fact based smugness...

[Bartholomert]

Speaking of post-truth, why didn't the media care about Obama and Biden's plagerism you delusional idiot:

http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/melania-trump-joe-biden-plagiarism-allegations-plagiarized-speech-barack-obama-neil-kinnock-deval-patrick/

Hint: the smug Leftist periodicals you read don't have a monopoly on the Truth

[elth]

I don't give a toss about anyone's plagiarism, Mert, but by all means keep drinking the Koolaid.

[Shindig]

How's that unchecked mass immigration working out for Europe? Bet it felt sooo good taking them in right, all involved parties surely deserved their self-righteous fact based smugness...

America's problems are all homegrown.

[Bartholomert]

America's problems are all homegrown.

He said Trump was a post-truth candidate. The cornerstone of Trump's popularity is his 'nativist' stance on immigration which allegedly appeals to emotions rather than facts. The point was to compare Trump's 'emotion based' position versus the consequences of Europe's 'fact based' immigration policy, to demonstrate how Elth should just go ahead and shut up, his type have ruined enough countries.

[Shindig]

These Scots are killing us at the border and raping our women.

[elth]

I love how Mert builds a throwaway observation into an entire strawman.

[Shindig]

I reckon he was bullied at school for being Turkish so he's become absorbed in a white privileged persona he can never truly own.

[Bernanke]

Clinton Has 69-Point Lead Over Trump in Latest Latino Vote Tracking Poll

http://latinousa.org/2016/07/20/clinton69-point-lead-trump/

http://latinousa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Poll2-1.png

Another one:

http://www.latinodecisions.com/files/7614/6895/2716/LVP_RNC_Toplines_Day_1.pdf


Over the last year Donald Trump has said, “The Hispanics love me. Latinos love Trump, and I love them.” Do you love Donald Trump?
Yes 12
No 88


Does watching the Republican National Convention and reading or listening to the speeches make you feel:
Happy 19
Angry 77
Proud 16
Embarrassed 70
Safe 18
Scared 65
Patriotic 26
Disappointed/Sad 76

https://media.giphy.com/media/kVaj8JXJcDsqs/giphy.gif

If the GOP don't find a way to fix this, it'll be electoral lockout for a while. Florida, Colorado, and Nevada are not going to be up for contention anymore.

[Bartholomert]

Lol are you kidding me with that ridiculous poll, look I can post propaganda too:

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/06/10/report-latino-support-for-trump-on-rise/

Trump beats Romney with Hispanics:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/17/nbc-poll-trump-outperforming-romney-with-hispanics/

[Shindig]

I liked the RNC response to the speech. "I LIKE DAT SHE SUPPAWT HER MAN!" Like every wife of a politician ever.

[Bartholomert]

I liked the RNC response to the speech. "I LIKE DAT SHE SUPPAWT HER MAN!" Like every wife of a politician ever.

*yawn*

Trump already addressed this situation and the cuck media was BTFO:

https://scontent-cdg2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t34.0-12/13820874_10154282156281678_938462548_n.jpg?oh=05e7 f28b29812b9c5be0050be69c04f3&oe=57927045

[Shindig]

Thanks, Donald. Shit all over 'I Have a Dream'.

[mikem]

Love that they brought back the second one. The first one is a bit "won't somebody PLEASE think about the children?!" though.

Not sure how to link this on my phone but if we are just going to recycle old LBJ ads I want an update of this one:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4hcpedQmOyo

That has to be my favorite attack ad ever.

[Bartholomert]

Thanks, Donald. Shit all over 'I Have a Dream'.

^^^

Also plagiarized.

[Shindig]

A closing section, yes. As opposed to a speech entirely constructed, word for word in sections, from 8 years ago. That was televised.

[Boydy]

https://pics.onsizzle.com/melania-my-early-years-in-west-philadelphia-born-and-raised-3102082.png

[John]

'Cuck' is somehow more annoying than 'sloot' ever was. Vary your insults, Mert. You look stupid.

[Bartholomert]

A closing section, yes. As opposed to a speech entirely constructed, word for word in sections, from 8 years ago. That was televised.

You mean a few phrases in two paragraphs which constituted maybe 5% of the entire speech? LOL. Are you kidding me, are you really this stupid and blinded by your prejudice?

[John]

Why assume prejudice? I had a good long lol at that daft cunt Melania and I think Trump and Hillary are equally terrible.

[Shindig]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcbiGsDMmCM

Structurally, it's identical, even if it's not word for word completely. Why are you being so defensive? Are you just shitting it because every country you've set foot in is having a complete meltdown at the minute?

[Bartholomert]

Why assume prejudice? I had a good long lol at that daft cunt Melania and I think Trump and Hillary are equally terrible.

As long as you lol at everyone equally:

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/07/19/top-10-recent-cases-plagiarizing-democrats/

[Bartholomert]

Structurally, it's identical, even if it's not word for word completely. Why are you being so defensive? Are you just shitting it because every country you've set foot in is having a complete meltdown at the minute?

Yes there is some very limited overlap in two short paragraphs because of the error of a speech writer. So? Michelle Obama plagiarized some of those same passages from Bob Dole's wife's speech at the 1996 RNC; does that bother you? It was a minor mistake, hardly news worthy beyond a passing 'lol'.

[mugbull]

You suck dude :D

Try having some depth to your personality

[John]

As long as you lol at everyone equally:

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/07/19/top-10-recent-cases-plagiarizing-democrats/

Number one is a 'refrain' too simple to be plagiarised, and the list starts out on a Congressman lifting from an op-ed piece in a minor newspaper. That's not the same as a twat having the gall to lift from someone infinitely more prominent than her. If you think anything on that list is the same as what's happened here then you're the one showing prejudice.

I won't lol at everyone equally, because Trump is funnier than Hillary. He's a shouty used car salesman, making stupid gaffes, talking about his cock in debates and referring to himself in the third person. Hillary is a virulent shitbag with a shameful voting record who's getting by on being a woman. Two incredibly shitty candidates, but one is much easier to lol at.

[Bartholomert]

You suck dude :D

Try having some depth to your personality

Ah yes right on schedule, the cuck liberal who fashions his political opinions on the basis of what he thinks impresses girls with a meaningless ad hominem attack. Being a feminist ally is still a very bad marketing policy boyo.

[mugbull]

I wouldn't say I'm a social liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I just think you're not very smart.

[Bartholomert]

I wouldn't say I'm a social liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I just think you're not very smart.

Lmk when you've got any substantive point to make.

[leedsrevolution]

I wouldn't say I'm a social liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I just think you're not very smart.

I'd say you're wrong. I think he's relatively smart. So I wouldn't worry about his "smartness". Throw the cunt on the street and watch him be eaten alive. Poor boy wouldn't know what to do. Poor rich boy.

[mugbull]

His thoughts are facile, whether or not that's an indicator of intelligence idk. I would think so

[Bernanke]

Jesus fuck this RNC shitshow. :D Cruz just went on stage and said "vote your conscience" without endorsing.

@EWErickson:

SOURCE: The Trump camp knew this morning Cruz would not endorse and told Cruz's camp they'd orchestrate booing if he refused.

Why would you let him speak? That smug grin combined with the booing, this is going to overshadow Pence hard tomorrow.

[elth]

Nobody who votes for Trump cares about Cruz endorsing him or who the VP is, either. This is all irrelevant.

Trump's message is I'm Here To Make You Feel Good About Being White And/Or Middle Class Again. Nothing else matters. Nothing else sticks. It's all noise that feeds the beast - Trump's here, it's ok to feel good again.

The worse he looks in conventional political terms, the worse the stories get, the better he'll do. His narrative is "they" hate you, I love you, vote for me and feel good and that's all being reinforced every day of this convention.

[Shindig]

I'd hate to be a speech writer in the Trump camp. Donald rarely sticks to anything you put in front of him. At least you can get his wife to open with, "As a fellow American..." and she'll stick with it.

[Bartholomert]

His thoughts are facile, whether or not that's an indicator of intelligence idk. I would think so

LOL. Please tell me more about how intelligent you are when we both know you're only at Stanford because you play a sport.

Protip: Dismissing someones opinion as 'facile' without actually addressing the merits of any particular argument is idiotic: "Oh you're just so wrong it's not even pointing out why you're wrong obviously" :rolleyes:

[Bartholomert]

Nobody who votes for Trump cares about Cruz endorsing him or who the VP is, either. This is all irrelevant.

Trump's message is I'm Here To Make You Feel Good About Being White And/Or Middle Class Again. Nothing else matters. Nothing else sticks. It's all noise that feeds the beast - Trump's here, it's ok to feel good again.

The worse he looks in conventional political terms, the worse the stories get, the better he'll do. His narrative is "they" hate you, I love you, vote for me and feel good and that's all being reinforced every day of this convention.

No it's not. This is a simplistic media narrative to try and undermine why people actually vote for him; this same psychological phenomenon appeals to the same extent to Hillary anyways. People vote for him because of his policies.

Please keep in mind Trump supporters are better educated and wealthier than Hillary supporters.

[elth]

Of course they are, they're white.

[Bartholomert]

Of course they are, they're white.

So people only make voting decisions on the basis of their race? Not education, greater good, policy, etc? So humans are basically tribal caveman without the capacity for critical thinking; this is your response?

[Lewis]

As if mokkers is on a sports ride. He makes Spoonsky look hard.

[Bernanke]

https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s480x480/13692608_10210220637571123_4946178800492339736_n.j pg?oh=b8050de814f30616dbea2f7dd724758b&oe=57EF630E

This is basically how the day went.

1. Trump threw Melania under the bus admitting she plagiarized the speech just hours after Manafort went on TV denying it.

2. Trump in an interview with the NYT claimed he would not back up NATO allies in the event of a Russian attack.

3. Heil Hitler

http://i.imgur.com/E74Oesk.gif

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cn2oCBcXEAABNhV.jpg

4. Cruz basically told the base to come out, not vote Trump, vote GOP down ballot.

5. Mike Pence did a pretty good old-school Repub speech that no one will remember after all this other fuckery.

[elth]

My response is that Trump's support is overwhelmingly white, and white people in America area much more educated and wealthy on average than everyone else.

[Lewis]

Ted Cruz trolling the hall with the smuggest face. :cool:

[Davgooner]

It was pretty good.

When you look at the list of high profile Republicans not backing Trump it's staggering. That said, there are enough who have jumped aboard to make it hard for them to ever row back from this position in the future. If he doesn't get across the line then the Republicans could be completely fucked.

[Bartholomert]

Ted Cruz trolling the hall with the smuggest face. :cool:

It was total political suicide, regardless of whether Trump wins or loses. Conservative voters worship principles, they do not like a liar who goes back on his word for the purpose of political grandstanding.

[Bartholomert]

It was pretty good.

When you look at the list of high profile Republicans not backing Trump it's staggering. That said, there are enough who have jumped aboard to make it hard for them to ever row back from this position in the future. If he doesn't get across the line then the Republicans could be completely fucked.

Pretty sure the amount of support Trump gets from Republicans is more or less equivalent to the amount Hillary gets from Democrats. So...I guess Republican leaders have more integrity and are more likely to represent their constituents honestly?

[Davgooner]

represent their constituents honestly

That's not happening whoever gets in, ever, in the current system.

[Lewis]

It was total political suicide, regardless of whether Trump wins or loses. Conservative voters worship principles, they do not like a liar who goes back on his word for the purpose of political grandstanding.

If (when) 'The Donald' gets annihilated in this election, Cruz will look like the only honest geezer who didn't fall for it, and he'll coast the nomination next time.

[Bartholomert]

If (when) 'The Donald' gets annihilated in this election, Cruz will look like the only honest geezer who didn't fall for it, and he'll coast the nomination next time.

People see through his selfish ploy which does nothing but embolden the Democrats in the short-term.

But...was this all planned to destroy Cruz as retribution for not endorsing him? Couldn't be...or could it?

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7665/exclusive-cruz-camp-trump-campaign-approved-speech-ben-shapiro


According to the source, the entire Cruz speech was cleared by the Trump campaign. Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, expressly approved the speech at 4:30 PM ET. The source, who was standing on the convention floor at the time of the speech, said that Trump operatives were present, urging the crowd to boo. “This was orchestrated by the Trump campaign to make Senator Cruz a pariah within the party,” said the source.

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/671931224819040257/3j0w48qR.png

[Pepe]

People vote for him because of his policies.

:lol:

[Lewis]

http://i67.tinypic.com/s5z81x.png

[mikem]

You have to admire how smug he is.

The primaries were decided by people for whom policy is a secondary consideration. On both sides.

[Bernanke]

#TheTedWedding is trending. :D

[Bartholomert]

...except that the GOP is now as united as it's ever been this cycle:

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/21/irony-ted-cruz-manages-to-deliver-the-unity-the-gop-convention-was-looking-for/

[GS]

Fair play to Cruz. I don't think it's even politically driven, I think he just hates Trump on a personal level for making personal attacks on his family.

[Shindig]

If they could get Clinton thrown out on purgery, they could find some dirt on Trump easily. Just look under his golf course for his eight aborted daughters.

[Bernanke]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/full-transcript-donald-trump-nomination-acceptance-speech-at-rnc-225974

Full transcript leaked.

[GS]

I was reading that earlier.


America is far less safe – and the world is far less stable – than when Obama made the decision to put Hillary Clinton in charge of America’s foreign policy.
I am certain it is a decision he truly regrets. Her bad instincts and her bad judgment – something pointed out by Bernie Sanders – are what caused the disasters unfolding today. Let’s review the record. In 2009, pre-Hillary, ISIS was not even on the map.

Libya was cooperating. Egypt was peaceful. Iraq was seeing a reduction in violence. Iran was being choked by sanctions. Syria was under control. After four years of Hillary Clinton, what do we have? ISIS has spread across the region, and the world. Libya is in ruins, and our Ambassador and his staff were left helpless to die at the hands of savage killers. Egypt was turned over to the radical Muslim brotherhood, forcing the military to retake control. Iraq is in chaos.

Iran is on the path to nuclear weapons. Syria is engulfed in a civil war and a refugee crisis that now threatens the West. After fifteen years of wars in the Middle East, after trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost, the situation is worse than it has ever been before.

This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: death, destruction and weakness.


Yeah, alright.

[mugbull]

LOL. Please tell me more about how intelligent you are when we both know you're only at Stanford because you play a sport.

Protip: Dismissing someones opinion as 'facile' without actually addressing the merits of any particular argument is idiotic: "Oh you're just so wrong it's not even pointing out why you're wrong obviously" :rolleyes:

I don't play a sport? You think I play tennis for Stanford?

[Bernanke]

His trade "policy" is somehow even worse than I previously believed.

Just the complete stupidity of wanting to rip up and remake every trade deal INDIVIDUALLY.

[niko_cee]

Sounds familiar.

[mikem]

Someone might be trying to win the Midwest.

And once again someone proves the maxim that nobody thinks America is more shit than a proponent of American exceptionalism.

[elth]

Ivanka's speech would have gone down well at the Democratic convention.

Trump's giving the Trumpiest speech possible. Fair play to him, dancing with the girl he brought to the party. The centre is for low energy losers anyway.

[Shindig]

That's the thing that concerns me most about Trump. As soon as he gets on the mic in a time of national tragedy, it'll be the most fire-stoking bitterness fuel known to man.

[Bartholomert]

So how about those DNC leaks :drool:

[Lewis]

I liked the one about Mexicans never changing their voting habits.

[Davgooner]

So how about those DNC leaks :drool:

Pretty much confirms what we already knew. DWS has just resigned. :)

[GS]

Should start a petition to see if they can re-run the primary campaign.

[mikem]

Never underestimate our ability to shoot ourselves in the foot.

Saddest thing is that this will probably stop "the progressives" from learning that the real reason they lost was all the 80 / 20 losses in the South where the party is made up of the two biggest practical instead of ideological voting groups.

[GS]

The 'Solid South' defecting to the Republicans en masse after the Civil Rights Act is one of the most spectacular seethes in history. You'd think they'd be over it by now.

[mikem]

Not really. People still vote in the same blocks. Is it any different than my wife's family who voted for Republican's after they got the chance to desert the rice plantations in South Carolina to fight with Union Army? They left the party of Lincoln just as quickly.

[elth]

Pretty much confirms what we already knew. DWS has just resigned. :)

DNC chairs serve at the nomination of the party leader ie. President or Senate leader so her term was up with Obama leaving anyway. It's a nice little sop to Sanders supporters - pretending to quit a job she was leaving anyway.

The bigger win for Sanders is that there's going to be less super delegates going foward. Of course he got smashed on regular delegates anyway, but in the future a populist insurgency may have a better chance.

[Davgooner]

The media not counting super delegates from the start would be a nice touch.

[Spammer]

Nearly a new page :cool:

[Bartholomert]

Oh lawd, Trump in the lead in new CNN and Morning Consult poles, and they haven't even properly incorporating the fallout from the DNC email leaks:

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/25/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-poll/index.html


Donald Trump comes out of his convention ahead of Hillary Clinton in the race for the White House, topping her 44% to 39% in a four-way matchup including Gary Johnson (9%) and Jill Stein (3%) and by three points in a two-way head-to-head, 48% to 45%.

https://morningconsult.com/2016/07/25/trump-surges-past-clinton-post-convention-bump/


In the national poll, conducted from July 22 through July 24, Donald Trump pulls ahead of Hillary Clinton by 4 points (44-40), a sizeable swing from the past week, when the former secretary of State was clinging to a 2-point lead.

[Bartholomert]

Me in November:

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS3ZY753X8e3Oz8OHcDiPO_FrHoNSEIp d9aPsQuR9UNKjErrADHmMOnOGI

[ItalAussie]

I'll still be surprised if he wins. The bulk of the polls still favour Clinton, and he won't have a convention bounce in November.

Lots of time though, so cockiness this early is a bit of a risky strategy. Does remind me the board in 2012, mind.