US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Joe Molotov]

2016 is probably the most interesting election I've followed (I've been paying attention since 2000).

Really? I thought 2000 and 2008 were way more interesting and dynamic.

Nothing will top 1992 though. That shit was bananas.

I wish I had been old enough to better appreciate the '92 election. I was only 9 at the time, but I still remember those Ross Perot infomercials. What a time to be alive.

[thisismyusername]

I remember when I almost bought a Dixie Chicks album out of #solidarity

spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think I copped Get Rich Or Die Trying instead

[close]

  But no, seriously around that time I was extremely bitter toward how the Bush cabinet/White House were handling the after-effects of 9/11 and the whole "you're with us or against us" bullshit soured me on America and patriotism in general. Nothing against people wanting to band together to show solidarity against terrorism, but America never did that for most other nations at the time. It seems like post-9/11 though, they started to get that "holy shit this happens daily elsewhere and maybe we should care about those nations."

Serious question: has the party of personal responsibility (tm) EVER taken responsibility for anything?

Not that I'm aware o--

Serious question: has the party of personal responsibility (tm) EVER taken responsibility for anything?

The utter defeat of the Soviet Union

Benji 

Oh, right. Reagan.

[Madrun Badrun]

https://i.imgur.com/LmWB1AB.png

Trump hitting at the Cruz and the RNC

[benjipwns]

NOT THAT I'M BITTER ABOUT IT OR ANYTHING.

Seems like someone needs to read some books to dispel their pro-Saddam fantasies:

[benjipwns]

I wish I had been old enough to better appreciate the '92 election. I was only 9 at the time, but I still remember those Ross Perot infomercials. What a time to be alive.

[TakingBackSunday]

www.jebbush.com

[benjipwns]

www.jebbushforpresident.com

[benjipwns]

It's wrong, and he's, I think, deliberately promoting those views in order to advance his political interests.

MARK LEVIN: I watched that debate Saturday night. It was a disgrace. It was a disgrace. First of all, because that bum who is the chairman of the RNC -- I've been calling for his resignation since whenever -- packed that audience with his fat-cat donors and hangers-on and consultants and all the rest. There were times I couldn't even hear Ted Cruz's answer or Donald Trump's answer because they were being booed. Have you ever heard or seen that before? That's your 'Rinse' Priebus. That's your 'Rinse' Priebus...

The debate. Let me tell you something about this debate. The fact that Donald Trump attacked George W. Bush, not because of his liberal domestic policies, not because he expanded Medicare, not because he was weak on the First Amendment. Not because of those things. Expanded Medicare, increased the debt, was for comprehensive immigration reform.

But the fact that he attacked George Bush as a commander-in-chief. Not because he disagreed with him. He attacked him as a liar who knew there were not weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and said he was responsible for 9/11 and he was responsible for those towers coming down. Ladies and gentlemen, that's why I posted on my Facebook this guy sounds like Code Pink...

He sounds like a radical kook. All the rest aside. All of it aside. I know too many Gold Star families who lost sons over there to hear this 9/11 truther crap, which is pretty close to it. Pretty damn close to it. If George Bush went to war in Iraq and was lying about weapons of mass destruction there could not be a worse thing a president of the United States could do, or human being for that matter. And there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And he was not responsible for 9/11...

To have the leading Republican nominee for president of the United States to make these statements, and he's been praised by Code Pink. He should be praised by Code Pink and every kook organization out there and every left-wing kook organization that hates America. To have him praised for what he said? Terrible. Absolutely terrible. You and I've lived through this. You and I have lived through this. This isn't distant history.

For all the talk, 'Well, Ronald Reagan changed his mind.' Ronald Reagan would have never said what Donald Trump said. Never, ever. That's a disgrace. And not only that, Mr. Trump, it's a lie. You like to throw that word around? 'Cruz is a liar, and Carson is...' You're a liar! Bush did not lie about weapons of mass destruction in order to get us into that war. And he is not responsible for 9/11, or those towers coming down. You've crossed the line one too many.

And to those headbangers who want to ignore it, that's up to them. But the rest of heard it. We watched it. My jaw hit the floor. What the hell was this? Am I watching the Democratic debate? It sounds like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. It sounds like every kook conspiracy theorist out there and he said it. And doubles down.

[benjipwns]

~1:05

 

omarosa the goat

[Phoenix Dark]

 

This election is what The Wire S5 should have been.

[Oblivion]

Tamara

[Steve Contra]

[Human Snorenado]

[benjipwns]

"If there is a silver lining in the Obama-Clinton foreign policy debacle, it is that now we know what a world without America would start to look like," the Texas senator said. "Far more dangerous and beholden to terrorists and criminal regimes."

"Starting next year our sailors won't be on their knees with their hands on their heads," Cruz said referring to the U.S. sailors who were held in Iranian custody after their ship entered that country's waters. "Our secretary of state will not be apologizing and thanking their Iranian captors. Instead, they will be standing on the decks of the mightiest ships the world has ever known with their heads held high, confident that the great country that they volunteered to serve has their back."

Cruz called for an increase in the active duty military force to 1.4 million in order to be prepared for the "possibility of multiple, near-simultaneous conflicts" on the world stage. He also promised to review the Marine Corps' request "for an exemption from the policy requiring women to serve in combat positions."

He also expressed his belief that women should not be drafted into the combat roles in the military.

"After seven years of neglect," he said, "it is time for America to once again prioritize a strong, advanced and robust military."

Another theme emerged throughout his remarks: An end to "political correctness" in military matters.

"The last thing any commander should need to worry about is the grades he is getting from some plush-bottomed Pentagon bureaucrat for political correctness or social experiments or providing gluten-free MREs," he said of ready-to-eat meals . "If I am elected president, one of my first orders to the secretary of defense will be to restore the U.S. military's combat ethos."

"I am confident that if we put in the hard work we can, as Ronald Reagan did in the 1980s, rebuild our military so it will be so feared by our enemies and trusted by our allies that, God willing, we won't have to use it," Cruz said. "That is the essence of what President Reagan used to call 'peace through strength.'"

"Senator Cruz is the only candidate in this race who has consistently sided against our military and intelligence professionals and whose foreign policy vision changes with his poll numbers," Rubio spokesman Joe Pounder said in a statement. "When it comes to our national security, Marco Rubio is the only candidate with the actual experience and policies needed to keep America safe."

[Mandark]

Imagine being lectured about a crisis of masculinity by a dude with those eyebrows.

[Joe Molotov]

Iran will be looking forward to their next shipment of strong, advanced and robust missiles.

[benjipwns]

[recursivelyenumerable]

why isn't there a Jeb!moticon yet?

[benjipwns]

~3:50, especially 4:40+

 

[ToxicAdam]

Internet aggregator Matt Drudge sure has become a generous man after 20 years as the left’s whipping boy and the conservative right’s digital voice.

Drudge last week gave away half of his real estate holdings in the far south Miami suburb of Redland.

Miami-Dade County property records show longtime area dweller Drudge, 49, gifted a 4,600-square-foot house on 4.5 acres of shrubs and woods he bought in January 2013 for $700,000 cash.

If you believe the quitclaim deed that appeared in records Jan. 15, the founder of The Drudge Report surrendered the property that’s adjacent to his $1.45 million homestead to a man with whom he shared the same addresses for the past 11 years.

The lucky new homeowner was identified as Juan Carlos Alvarado, 55.

He did have to pay Drudge a grand total of $10, the paperwork shows.

http://www.miamiherald.com/entertainment/ent-columns-blogs/jose-lambiet/article56121200.html#storylink=cpy

 

[octopushover]

(Image removed from quote.)

what a thug

[Brehvolution]

[Human Snorenado]

This shit is so infuriating.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/scalia-s-death-quickly-turned-from-reflections-on-scalia-to-talk-of-replacement

"It seems to me to be a huge political mistake," said one Democratic aide who spoke to TPM on the condition of anonymity in order to shed light on Democratic strategic thinking in the wake of Scalia's death. "We knew that we were going to have to counter a narrative that this president does not get another justice. ... We were shocked at how quickly we had to start countering that narrative."

YOU ARE AT WAR, YOU FUCKING PUSSIES. YOU HAVE BEEN AT WAR SINCE *BEFORE* OBAMA WAS INAUGURATED AND YOU STILL DON'T HAVE A WARTIME CONSIGLIERE RUNNING SHIT. QUIT SITTING THERE WAITING TO GET PUNCHED AND START THROWING PUNCHES FOR FUCKS SAKES.

[Human Snorenado]

I know it's 2 weeks out and that there are 2 more primaries in between, but it's looking like the Dem race will be effectively over in early March, per expectations

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/clinton-leads-12-states-ppp

The polls showed Clinton leading in 10 of the 12 states, most of which are in the South, with a double-digit lead in nine of them. She leads by 10 percentage points or more in Alabama (59 percent to 31 percent), Arkansas (57-32), Georgia (60-26), Louisiana (60-29), Michigan (50-40), Mississippi (60-26), Tennessee (58-32), Texas (57-34) and Virginia (56-34), while leading in one closer race in Oklahoma (46-44) and losing in one in Massachusetts (42-49). The only strong lead for Sanders in the states polled was in his home state of Vermont, where he stood at 86 percent to Clinton’s 10 percent.

The PPP poll shows much stronger support for Clinton among black voters than for Sanders, reflecting a potential shift in the political dynamic of their race as it moves into states with more diverse populations than early-voting Iowa and New Hampshire. In states where the black voting population exceeds the national average, the poll shows that Clinton leads among black voters by consistently crushing margins. Sanders strongest showing with this demographic is in Texas, where he trails Clinton by 40 percentage points. His weakest is in Arkansas, where Clinton leads by 62 percentage points.

GOOD JOB, KILLER MIKE

[Steve Contra]

But Bernie fans told me the Clintons were the worst thing for black America since slavery

Real talk, why would older black people believe another old white dude who says he has all the answers?

[Human Snorenado]

I honestly don't know. All I can speak to is the disillusioned Gen X cac experience, because that's all I have to draw on. And in my book, despite the fact that I know his numbers don't add up, I can't say that I can support the "establishment" candidate (which Hillary is, despite any claims to the contrary) when the establishment has created this fucking mess. Bernie's issues are the ones that appeal to me: massive campaign finance reform (issue #1 before anything else can be dealt with, IMO) and publicly murdering banksters and CEOs on the steps of the New York Stock Exchange.

I mean, don't get me wrong. In the general when it's a binary choice (and stfu, mods help, with your Jill Stein crap) I will vote for Hillary because the alternative will in all likelihood be the worst Republican presidential nominee in all of recorded history, which is saying something. But in the meantime, I'm going to send Bernie $20 and schlep my ass to the polls to vote for him on March 1st. Everyday he's in the race he makes Hillary a less shitty candidate in the long run.

[ToxicAdam]

I think it's interesting that Obama, Sanders and Trump all share a similar quality. 20 years ago, people would have said these men have 0% to ever win a party nomination, let alone a presidential election.  Yet, they are all viable today.

I think it just speaks to the complete breakdown in trust of the establishment. 'Conventional wisdom' has been kneecapped and nothing is really out of bounds of happening now. Which can be exciting or scary, depending on who gets enough momentum.
 

[brawndolicious]

Well if you made Obama white then a guy with his experience/positions would make sense as a presidential candidate. I wouldn't say he was exactly an anti-establishment candidate so much as he just happened to be born at the right time for a black man to attain that office.

I still don't think someone like Trump will have much momentum past the primaries. Consider how he's screwed either if he changes his positions or sticks by them.

[tiesto]

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-you-more-likely-to-vote-for-a-woman-or-a-man/

- another article dispelling the "Bernie bro" myth.

[Phoenix Dark]

I can buy the idea that Sanders is different enough from traditional democrat candidates that it's not fair to compare him to Bill Clinton for instance, when it comes to black issues/letting people down. Sanders is proposing a lot of things that haven't been done before and I think some of them would definitely help the black community more than the traditional democrat approach to black people.

All that being said I get why Sanders is failing with black people. His message remains rather one-note. And his fans remain asinine. I had one defend Sanders' one note mentality by basically saying "would you call Gandalf one note for focusing on the One Ring more than any other issue? No because that was the most important issue and all others are impacted by it." Ok.


Yea Wall St is a major issue and I want a lot of changes made. Yes income inequality is huge but Sanders' solutions are fairy tales. I'll probably still vote for him in a few weeks during our primary but jeez, I'm getting real tired of him repeating the same thing 5-6 times an hour. And I kind of wish a candidate would just tell people the truth, which is that they're fucked long term because a lot of skilled and unskilled labor are going bye bye in the next 10-20 years. Let's make college affordable or free in the meantime though...I agree with that obviously.

[Human Snorenado]

I don't think Sanders is a single candidate issue. He does beat to death his positions on the 5 or so issues he's staking his candidacy around: income inequality, campaign finance reform, and what amounts to a huge expansion of entitlements (health care/education). Ok, so that's really just 3 things when you boil it down.

Does his laser focus on those things turn off African Americans who are justifiably concerned about a police state gone shitballs insane? (Thanks, black man in the White House. Kidding. Not kidding. Only sort of just barely kidding.) Yeah, probably. My thing, though, is that the people who are saying, "Well, what about Hillary?" have a legit point, at least as far as I'm concerned. If she wants to run in part on Bill's record in the 90's (and let's not pretend she doesn't) then his record on welfare and police expansion should absolutely be up for debate. Maybe shitting out 100k new, poorly trained cops onto the street was a poor fucking idea, it turns out. To say nothing of her taking money from private prison corps (I know, she stopped, but it's still a legit criticism imo)

Basically, my problems with Hillary are that I feel there are a lot of legit gripes to be had with her. The sad thing is that not a lot of people (hello, Killer Mike) seem able to bring those criticisms to bear without falling into the easy and stupid trap of couching them in sexist terms.

Ultimately, though, like I said above: I will gladly vote for Hillary over any lunatic the Republicans nominate. And it will be a lunatic, most likely Trump at this point IMO.

[benjipwns]

There is one aspect to this that our standard view of electoral politics doesn't account for. We've internalized (rightly) a cynicism that politicians have any real ideological basis, and we're also loathe to accept it because it's constantly condemned in favor of compromise/bipartisanship/reaching across the aisle/etc. horseshit. So people think Sanders' socialism is a marketing thing, a branding, and to an extent it is. And yes, he's not a "real" socialist. But he was, he came up through the New Left, and he internalized the Marxist argument on relations of production among the social classes being the "one ring." Under standard Marxist theory, you eliminate that main exploitation and all the rest fades away, and that's essentially the Bernie argument.

It's like that guy I quoted in the GAF thread:

If Democrats really cared about dismantling transphobia and other oppressive systems that come with patriarchy then they would work towards building a society where class and privilege don't exist. They are doing exactly the opposite by serving the interests of the wealthy and strengthening their privilege. The issues of patriarchy and racism and all other social injustices cannot be separated from the economic injustice which allows them to flourish in the first place.

Sanders has been able to avoid, even while being part of it, the bulk of Washingtonian politics by setting himself off as special. So he, like Trump, (and Obama and Cruz) gloss over a lot of the notions of those politics through a singular vision. Hillary hasn't, and now probably can't, which is why they're constantly fretting about her messaging and narrative. When you're trying to create specific policy proposals to satisfy all the interest groups separately, you're never going to build as strong of message as someone who purports to have an answer that settles all or most issues with an overarching principle.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[benjipwns]

An Open Letter from Past CEA Chairs to Senator Sanders and Professor Gerald Friedman
Posted on February 17, 2016 by lettertosanders
Dear Senator Sanders and Professor Gerald Friedman,

We are former Chairs of the Council of Economic Advisers for Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. For many years, we have worked to make the Democratic Party the party of evidence-based economic policy. When Republicans have proposed large tax cuts for the wealthy and asserted that those tax cuts would pay for themselves, for example, we have shown that the economic facts do not support these fantastical claims. We have applied the same rigor to proposals by Democrats, and worked to ensure that forecasts of the effects of proposed economic policies, from investment in infrastructure, to education and training, to health care reforms, are grounded in economic evidence.  Largely as a result of efforts like these, the Democratic party has rightfully earned a reputation for responsibly estimating the effects of economic policies.

We are concerned to see the Sanders campaign citing extreme claims by Gerald Friedman about the effect of Senator Sanders’s economic plan—claims that cannot be supported by the economic evidence. Friedman asserts that your plan will have huge beneficial impacts on growth rates, income and employment that exceed even the most grandiose predictions by Republicans about the impact of their tax cut proposals.

As much as we wish it were so, no credible economic research supports economic impacts of these magnitudes. Making such promises runs against our party’s best traditions of evidence-based policy making and undermines our reputation as the party of responsible arithmetic. These claims undermine the credibility of the progressive economic agenda and make it that much more difficult to challenge the unrealistic claims made by Republican candidates.

Sincerely,

Alan Krueger, Princeton University

Chair, Council of Economic Advisers, 2011-2013

Austan Goolsbee, University of Chicago Booth School

Chair, Council of Economic Advisers, 2010-2011

Christina Romer, University of California at Berkeley

Chair, Council of Economic Advisers, 2009-2010

Laura D’Andrea Tyson, University of California at Berkeley Haas School of Business

Chair, Council of Economic Advisers, 1993-1995

KILLJOYS

[Human Snorenado]

Well, isn't that special. For a rebuttal, we turn to Ogre. Ogre?

[brob]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/269702-hillary-trails-trump-head-to-head-poll


 

Clinton trails Republican primary front-runner Trump by a 45-43 margin head-to-head, according to a USA Today/Suffolk University poll released Wednesday.

Clinton also loses to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), 45-44, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), 48-42 and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, 49-38.

Her Democratic primary rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), fares slightly better against the GOP competition, besting Cruz by a 44-42 margin.

But Sanders still loses to Trump by 1 point, 44-43, Kasich by 3, 44-41, and Rubio by 4, 46-42, head-to-head.

Many of the results are within the poll’s 3-point margin of error.

 

[Phoenix Dark]

remember when obama was losing to hermain cain in 2011/early 2012 polls

[benjipwns]

and then the racist lamestream media took him out to prevent people from seeing a black conservative and realizing there's a path off the plantation

[Atramental]

 

[Human Snorenado]

remember when obama was losing to hermain cain in 2011/early 2012 polls

Remember when you and Cheebs were convinced into like April/May 2008 that Clinton was gonna beat Obama?

 

[tiesto]

Cruz or Trump would turn off a ton of independents and swing voters and Hillary would coast to an easy victory. Only people who'd have a chance at getting swing voters are Rubio and Kasich, and the latter is way too moderate to make it out of the primaries (either him or Carson are next to drop). I've said it before, Rubio is the one I'm mostly scared of since I think he is the only one who has both a chance of winning the nom and getting swing voters. Originally I thought it would be Jeb due to name recognition but he's floundered ever since the first debate.

[CatsCatsCats]

Seriously, tumblr has failed us and we're going back to being full Amurricacs -- get out while you can

[benjipwns]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/17/opinion/who-are-we.html?_r=0

Thomas L. Friedman FEB. 17, 2016  798 COMMENTS

I find this election bizarre for many reasons but none more than this: If I were given a blank sheet of paper and told to write down America’s three greatest sources of strength, they would be “a culture of entrepreneurship,” “an ethic of pluralism” and the “quality of our governing institutions.” And yet I look at the campaign so far and I hear leading candidates trashing all of them.

Donald Trump is running against pluralism. Bernie Sanders shows zero interest in entrepreneurship and says the Wall Street banks that provide capital to risk-takers are involved in “fraud,” and Ted Cruz speaks of our government in the same way as the anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist, who says we should shrink government “to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.” (Am I a bad person if I hope that when Norquist slips in that bathtub and has to call 911, no one answers?)

Sanders seems to me like someone with a good soul, and he is right that Wall Street excesses helped tank the economy in 2008. But thanks to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, that can’t easily happen again.

I’d take Sanders more seriously if he would stop bleating about breaking up the big banks and instead breathed life into what really matters for jobs: nurturing more entrepreneurs and starter-uppers. I never hear Sanders talk about where employees come from. They come from employers — risk-takers, people ready to take a second mortgage to start a business. If you want more employees, you need more employers, not just government stimulus.

I have just the plan for him: The 2015 “Milstein Commission on Entrepreneurship and Middle-Class Jobs” report produced by the University of Virginia, which notes: “The identity of America is intrinsically entrepreneurial [enshrined] by the founders, popularized by Horatio Alger, embodied by Henry Ford. … With enough hard work anyone can use entrepreneurship to pave their own way to prosperity and strengthen their communities by creating jobs and growing their local economy.”

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Jeff Kentuckian in Southern Indiana 14 hours ago

If you look at the polls on issue after issue America is still a centrist nation, our politicians are who have become more extreme. I am old enough to remember the 1990s when our society and govt were very functional. We were all brothers and sisters in the days after 9/11. I trace today's torn asunder society to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, which was hated by 50% of America. That is where we became a nation of red and blue states and counties. As recently as 1996 that concept didn't exist.Obama has strongly pushed America forward towards European style govt and ideals which has produced a pushback. I generally like Obama but I do think his ideologically driven Long View approach tends to alienate older and working class Whites who don't adjust well to change. Thus here we are, a nation held together by duct tape.

lol

Ray Texas 14 hours ago
In regards to Sander's seeming disconnect with the entrepreneurial spirit of America, I think he'd have a common sense solution: form an agency at the Federal level, to review business ideas and fund them, based on criteria like social benefit, green technology and minority owenership. By relying on a dependable government bureaucracy to vet business growth, we can insure that our economy grows in a direction that benefits the many and not the few.

[close]

[benjipwns]

Donald Trump on Wednesday blasted former presidential candidate Lindsey Graham for criticizing his electability and temperament to be president.

“I think Lindsey Graham is a disgrace, and I think you have one of the worst representatives of any representative in the United States, and I don’t think he should run,” Trump said about the South Carolina senator at a campaign event in front of the lawmaker's home-state crowd. “I don’t think he could run for dog catcher in this state and win again. I really don’t. Other than that, I think he’s wonderful.”

...

“He’s one of the dumbest human beings I’ve ever seen,” Trump said.

Graham suspended his campaign in December but struggled to gain any traction in the crowded GOP field in early-state and national polls.

“He ends up at zero [percent]. Zero,” Trump said. “Here’s a guy running for the presidency — he’s at zero. He leaves in disgrace, in my opinion.”

Trump said he watched Graham speak on “America’s Newsroom” and ridiculed him for going “crazy” when the billionaire’s name was mentioned.

“I saw him on television this morning, and I think he lost it. He said 'Donald Trump, he’s' — he couldn’t even talk,” Trump said. “He was shaking. The hatred. They say, 'What do you think of Donald Trump? Well, waahhh.' He went crazy. The guy is a nut job.”

Graham endorsed former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in January, calling him the best potential commander in chief in the field. Trump, however, maintained that he didn’t want Graham’s endorsement or anything to do with him, for that matter.

“His thinking,” Trump began. “He says, ‘I know so much.’ He knows about the military? I could push him over with a little thimble.”

Trump added that Graham would lead the U.S. into World War III and continued to deride Graham for his struggling campaign. “I think I’d crawl in a corner and I’d hide. I would just sort of put out a release: I’ve left the race,” Trump said, again referring to Graham's low poll numbers. “I wouldn’t even give a news conference. I’d be too embarrassed.”

[benjipwns]

Guy on GAF posted this a few times as some kind of epic Hillary take down:

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

EDIT: I literally did not know that Secular Talk was part of "The Young Turks Network" or in any way involved with them. I apologize.

[benjipwns]

​DONALD J. TRUMP RESPONSE TO THE POPE

If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened. ISIS would have been eradicated unlike what is happening now with our all talk, no action politicians.

The Mexican government and its leadership has made many disparaging remarks about me to the Pope, because they want to continue to rip off the United States, both on trade and at the border, and they understand I am totally wise to them. The Pope only heard one side of the story - he didn’t see the crime, the drug trafficking and the negative economic impact the current policies have on the United States. He doesn’t see how Mexican leadership is outsmarting President Obama and our leadership in every aspect of negotiation.

For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful. I am proud to be a Christian and as President I will not allow Christianity to be consistently attacked and weakened, unlike what is happening now, with our current President. No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith. They are using the Pope as a pawn and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, especially when so many lives are involved and when illegal immigration is so rampant.

THE GOAT

[benjipwns]

Donald J. Trump  Verified account
‏@realDonaldTrump
The new Pope is a humble man, very much like me, which probably explains why I like him so much!

[Phoenix Dark]

holy shit that's actually legit, I just tried it 

[Joe Molotov]

 

[Atramental]

Donald J. Trump  Verified account
‏@realDonaldTrump
The new Pope is a humble man, very much like me, which probably explains why I like him so much!

(Image removed from quote.)

I gotta say, this election cycle has got to be the most entertaining in recent history. 

[Steve Contra]

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/hillarys-top-donor-buys-onion-starts-publishing-propaganda-immediately/

Bernie fans getting rustled by the Onion.  They really are keeping the spirit of Ron Paul's rEVOLution alive

[TakingBackSunday]

Primary: vote Bernie
General: Vote Clinton

Pretty simple.  I like what Bernie stands for and will stick to him during the primary, but when Hilary inevitably gets the nomination, I will throw my full support towards her.  Anything to get progressive Supreme Court appointments.

[Oblivion]

A new Quinnipiac University poll says if the Governor got the Republican nomination for president he would beat potential democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, 47 percent to 39 percent.

But in the same poll, Kasich loses to potential democratic nominee, Senator Bernie Sanders. In fact, pollsters say Senator Sanders would beat all the potential G-O-P candidates in a head-to-head match-up.

http://www.13abc.com/home/headlines/Poll-Kasich-beats-Clinton-Sanders-beats-everybody-369258131.html?device=tablet&c=y

 

[TakingBackSunday]

Clinton will beat Trump, Cruz and the other garbage candidates.

She would lose, I think, to Rubio and Kasich.

Sanders would lose to Trump...but I think he'd beat everyone else.

#hottakes

[Steve Contra]

Clinton would fucking wreck Rubio in a debate.

[Oblivion]

I think he meant in the election.

[brawndolicious]

I don't think Clinton or Sanders would lose to any of the remaining GOP candidates. Neither of them actively tried to shit on a subgroup of the population and they both can defend their ideas in a debate without looking stupid. Also they're both as popular in the Democratic Party as Trump is in the Republican Party so that tells you how much broader their appeal is.

Y'all acting like there's going to be a race for the general election.

[Oblivion]

Hillary's seen as untrustworthy, and Sanders is already seen as pretty extreme, and will only get worse once the commercials start running of his $18 trillion plan to have the government take over the health care system.

This is the same country that voted for Dubya twice! Anything can happen. Especially if someone like Rubio is the nominee and the American people find him a satisfactory middle ground between the extremism of Trump and Sanders/Hillary.

[curly]

Hillary has 54 percent unfavorable rating, that's only a few points better than Trump. I could definitely see her losing to Rubio.

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

Marco "Rubot" Rubio is only a moderate compared to Cruz and Trump, he's running on a substantially more conservative platform then any prior GOP nominee would. And he clearly doesn't have the percieved substance to back it up. His presentation is ace, but its clear by now that the guy would gin up about as much passion as Mitt Romney did.

[Human Snorenado]

It doesn't matter, bros. America is feeling the Bern

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/sanders-leading-fox-dem-national-poll