• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

2016 American Presidential Campaign

Status
Not open for further replies.
And people wonder why Bernie supporters claim this election is rigged. Look at North and South Dakota tonight. North Dakota is a caucus state where they manually count the votes. South Dakota uses voting machines with secret proprietary software owned and operated by Hillary Clinton's biggest campaign donor.

Bernie destroyed Hillary by 30 points in North Dakota. He's losing to Hillary by 8 points in South Dakota. This has been the case in similar states all over the country when it's caucus vs voting machine.
 
My bad, Sanders beat her by 33 points in North Dakota. That's a 40 point difference from South Dakota. That is a HUGEEEEEE statistical difference. Does anyone really believe those two states are THAT different? 40 points in political ideology is like the difference between Iran's form of government and ours.
 
He'll keep saying dumb things because his candidacy is fake. He was talked into running for president by Bill Clinton(confirmed straight from Trump's own mouth) and he and the Clintons have been friends for decades. They were at his wedding for Christ sake.

As long as he keeps saying ridiculously insulting 90% of the major news networks, who are all listed as Clinton campaign donors on her mandatory disclosure filings, will spend all their time talking about what Trump said instead of Hillary's shady past. That'd the plan and it's worked perfectly.
 
You're even dumber than I thought if you would ever think I would "come over to her side." I've explained several times in this subforum why I believe she's one of the most dangerous people on the planet. Not only will I never vote for her, if Sanders dropped out of the race I would dedicate as much effort to making sure she lost the general election as I have making sure Bernie wins the primary.
 
Was reading something yesterday about Hillary picking up warren as her VP which would make sense. Warren never did officially endorse bernie. not a whole lot of options and would most likely persuade a handful of bernie supporters.

@ Arci

bernie bros sexism continues
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...out-in-full-force-harassing-female-reporters/

lol wapo has been up there with the worst coverage of the election. i doubt i could take anything i read from them seriously ever again.
 
Last edited:
Shaun King of the New York Post summed it up nicely last night:

We'll never really know or be able to measure the negative impact that the Associated Press falsely calling the race for Hillary yesterday had on voting today.

Today was scheduled to be the biggest single day of voting in the entire Democratic Primary. Instead, I've received hundreds of messages today from people saying their friends and family said some version of "fuck it, why vote if the race is over."

I actually understand. We're all busy as hell. Imagine you are working two jobs or are a single parent or use public transportation or are under the weather, the temptation to just sit it out after you were told the race is over is a very real thing. I get it.

The Associated Press so badly wanted to be first that the manufactured this news with super-delegates putting Hillary over the top when they don't even vote until July 25th.

I am very troubled by what happened. We should all be troubled. People worked for months and months and months for today to be so big for the Democratic Party, and they blew it. They absolutely blew it.
 
Well, your side of the aisle was shocked, shocked that the general was "thrown" for G.W. Bush (on which subject I was never entirely sold either way, in all honesty; and one that I have never given a lot of question to since then—not to start a side debate, but I think the outcome of Bush v Gore was probably injust, but legally solid) ... I'm surprised there's a lot of shock left to be mustered. Even if we admit Bush v Gore was tainted somehow, all the more reason today's news ought not be shocking: family power and establishment ties prevail (which Gore had, although less than Bush, and of which Bernie has none.)

Unless somehow Bernie does pull through a contested convention, which I consider impossible even if not in the strictly mathematical sense (which are terms that you could well apply, actually, to Bush v Gore), then anti-Establishment hopes lie with Trump; who is not even all that anti-Establishment, but just guaranteed to shake things up again, which what this country needs. My sort-of fantasy would be a Trump–Sanders ticket, but we're not getting that (and a Sanders third party candidacy might pose more threat and less guarantee of a Trump presidency than at one point, although I'll take that too, A.B.H.), failing that, any vote against Trump is a vote for one of the most tainted Establishment candidates in recent history, a case could well be made for the history of the century.
 
jammin83 said:
Was reading something yesterday about Hillary picking up warren as her VP which would make sense. Warren never did officially endorse bernie. not a whole lot of options and would most likely persuade a handful of bernie supporters.

@ Arci

bernie bros sexism continues
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...out-in-full-force-harassing-female-reporters/

lol wapo has been up there with the worst coverage of the election. i doubt i could take anything i read from them seriously ever again.
Click to expand...

I'd rather Warren stay in the senate and then try for president in 2020 maybe with Tulsi as VP. I would definitely vote for them. It's disappointed she never endorsed Bernie but considering how spiteful the Clintons are you can't blame her too much for not having the courage to go against them.

I hear a lot of people talking about Bernie as VP for Clinton... eh I don't see a 70 year old woman with a history of strokes choosing a 74 year old VP no matter how popular he is.
 
SKL said:
Well, your side of the aisle was shocked, shocked that the general was "thrown" for G.W. Bush (on which subject I was never entirely sold either way, in all honesty; and one that I have never given a lot of question to since then—not to start a side debate, but I think the outcome of Bush v Gore was probably injust, but legally solid) ... I'm surprised there's a lot of shock left to be mustered. Even if we admit Bush v Gore was tainted somehow, all the more reason today's news ought not be shocking: family power and establishment ties prevail (which Gore had, although less than Bush, and of which Bernie has none.)

Unless somehow Bernie does pull through a contested convention, which I consider impossible even if not in the strictly mathematical sense (which are terms that you could well apply, actually, to Bush v Gore), then anti-Establishment hopes lie with Trump; who is not even all that anti-Establishment, but just guaranteed to shake things up again, which what this country needs. My sort-of fantasy would be a Trump–Sanders ticket, but we're not getting that (and a Sanders third party candidacy might pose more threat and less guarantee of a Trump presidency than at one point, although I'll take that too, A.B.H.), failing that, any vote against Trump is a vote for one of the most tainted Establishment candidates in recent history, a case could well be made for the history of the century.
Click to expand...

Absolutely this! I was actually just thinking about the whole recount in florida thing the other day when I was thinking about the race between bernie and clinton. It is not exactly the same thing, but it certainly has a similar taint to it.

With a Trump/Clinton ticket we are sunk either way. I'm looking forward to being broke, and losing some rights.
 
Too bad Elizabeth Warren turned out to be another fraud. A few years back I applauded her for going after the big banks and CC companies. Then It was found that she lied about being a Native-American to land a $400K/yr,one class teaching gig at Harvard,hence the nickname "Fauxcahontas" Poof,another dream bubble bursts. Honest politician is an oxymoron. Somethings got to give so why delay the inevitable ? Vote every incumbent out of Congress and let the chips fall where they may. What's the worst that could happen ?
 
Not to mention Warren, who is far from an entryist and much more Establishment-oriented than many of her fans (a term I use deliberately) think, or Sanders would give up all "progressive" credibility by standing for VP under Clinton. Only the most foolish of "progressives" would suppose that progressive issues be advanced should either obtain the warm bucket of piss. Hillary* is not weak enough to allow a VP to even aspire to the level of power held by a Dick Cheney, for instance.

* Who's name I've been spelling with one 'l' throughout this thread; oops.
 
MMT said:
Too bad Elizabeth Warren turned out to be another fraud. A few years back I applauded her for going after the big banks and CC companies. Then It was found that she lied about being a Native-American to land a $400K/yr,one class teaching gig at Harvard,hence the nickname "Fauxcahontas" Poof,another dream bubble bursts. Honest politician is an oxymoron. Somethings got to give so why delay the inevitable ? Vote every incumbent out of Congress and let the chips fall where they may. What's the worst that could happen ?
Click to expand...

She never got the job because she was native. She put it on an application 30 some years ago. The only reason it was ever brought up is bc of politics and scott brown. Its literally the only thing that they could find to try and smear her. trying to get an elite job via affirmative action. Her heritage really has no bearing on what she has done in her academic career or in politics. Its a bubble on an application that happened a long time ago and she genuinely believed that she was part native and there is still some speculation that she might be 1/32 cherokee or something. who cares really? out of the stupid shit these politicians do on a daily basis, i can live with that. She seems genuine to me and I would like to vote for her one day.

As far as voting the incumbents out, im with you my man.
 
My friend is of South African (Boer) descent. He always puts down AA. He's taking advantage of what he believes to be, and what is a horrible policy, and it's hilarious and probably helped him get into Yale, all while making a fucking awesome political statement (he's probably what you'd call a moderate "White nationalist," i.e. had a Stormfront account but go on OK with Blacks irl. "WN" is a term I dislike but I digress.)

On the other hand, I assume Liz Warren supports affirmative action because of SJW bullshit about helping the disadvantaged. She wasn't disadvantaged. That makes her a gargantuan hypocrite.
 
just seems like something blown out of proportion to me. Im sure she marked the bubble, maybe she knew better, idk for sure. The university blew the shit up to promote some diversity plot most likely. Politicians got wind, conservatives rejoiced.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top