US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[Raist]

FBI
KGB

IFB
KGB

JGB
KGB

KGB
KGB

210. Half of 420. Coincidence? I think not.

[Madrun Badrun]

[benjipwns]

FBI
KGB

IFB
KGB

JGB
KGB

KGB
KGB

210. Half of 420. Coincidence? I think not.

Pang Layman19 hours ago (edited)
Kudos to Tim Ryan here! Finally someone speaking the truth! Could Anthony Weiner actually be working for the Russians now? Like maybe his name is really Anthony Weinarov? Could the penetration go this far? The American people should be so concerned about where these emails are coming from it isn't funny and he was trying to be Mayor of New York. Imagine Putin in control of New York! OMG!!! American people please wake up before you are enslaved by Russia!!!! Thanks Tim Ryan!!!

[Mandark]

Story here.

It's crazy that David Fahrenthold has been churning out stories with actual new content for months based on just one narrow aspect of Trump's fuckery.

[Joe Molotov]

In 1997, for instance, he was “principal for a day” at a public school in an impoverished area of the Bronx. The chess team was holding a bake sale, Hot & Crusty danishes and croissants. They were $5,000 short of what they needed to travel to a tournament.

Trump had brought something to wow them.

“He handed them a fake million-dollar bill,” said David MacEnulty, a teacher and the chess team’s coach.

The team’s parent volunteers were thrilled.

Then disappointment.

Trump then gave them $200 in real money and drove away in a limousine.

#MAGA #YOLO

[benjipwns]

“The challenge for everybody’s going to be, 'What if he gets 48 or 49 percent?’” Gingrich said in a video interview for POLITICO’s “Open Mike” series. “And what if he says: ‘You know, I like this campaign and stuff. I ain’t leaving’? There will then be a Trump Party.”

Speaking a few hours before the FBI’s email review became public, Gingrich declared that “odds are better than even” that Trump will win.

But the former House speaker added that if not, Trump might form “a Trump Party inside the Republican Party, just the way William Jennings Bryan brought populism into the Democratic Party.”

Gingrich floated the notion when he was asked if Trump TV — a new media empire that might emerge from the campaign’s aftermath — would be a good idea.

“It’d be silly,” Gingrich said at his office in Arlington, Va. “He’s bigger than that. … It’s an irrelevancy. I mean, I know what it takes to run CNN or Fox. These are big operations, and he could do that if he wants to get out of politics, but he doesn’t need it.”

And so you think he might run again in 2020?

"I think that’s very possible,” Gingrich responded. "I think he likes being part of a movement — he likes thinking of it as a movement. … I was thinking about this, [and] he said to me the other morning, … ‘I sent out one tweet and 15,000 people showed up.’”

POLITICO asked: So you’re predicting a Trump-Clinton rematch?

Gingrich: “Could be, assuming she survives.”

[Joe Molotov]

All these people that are going to wake up on November 9th and have to find a way to salvage their reputations.

[HyperZoneWasAwesome]

All these people that are going to wake up on November 9th and have to find a way to salvage their reputations.

no, they really won't. And that's the great thing about it.

[zomgee]

(Image removed from quote.)(Image removed from quote.)

Story here.

It's crazy that David Fahrenthold has been churning out stories with actual new content for months based on just one narrow aspect of Trump's fuckery.

That article is a great read, thank you.

[benjipwns]

https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/792359883744174080
 

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-aide-huma-abedin-has-told-people-she-doesnt-know-how-her-emails-wound-up-on-her-husbands-computer/2016/10/29/1d30c2b8-9e15-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html

Has anyone floated the idea that Russian hackers placed those e-mails in Weiner's laptop?  Howard Dean came close.

[Raist]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-aide-huma-abedin-has-told-people-she-doesnt-know-how-her-emails-wound-up-on-her-husbands-computer/2016/10/29/1d30c2b8-9e15-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html

Has anyone floated the idea that Russian hackers placed those e-mails in Weiner's laptop?  Howard Dean came close.

No, it was the FBI, on Putin's orders.

[VomKriege]

All these people that are going to wake up on November 9th and have to find a way to salvage their reputations.

no, they really won't. And that's the great thing about it.

I heard the other day that someone said that Trump "had the issues right", which sounded very similar to what have been said about the far right over here ("The right questions, with the wrong answers" ). I don't think there will be a reckoning, Never Trumps will probably be celebrated but ultimately they'll just put the skeleton in the closet without really adressing "the issues"... If even that because if the rumors of a "Trump TV" have any truth, Donald will linger around politics for a few years still.

[benjipwns]

https://twitter.com/bobshrum/status/792095468897521666
https://twitter.com/BobShrum/status/792097780659478528
https://twitter.com/BobShrum/status/792102571288604672

 

[benjipwns]

fully half (50%) of social media users say they have been surprised by the political views of someone in their online network because of something that person posted.

Users who said they were surprised by friends’ views based on their social media postings were asked to describe a recent situation where this happened, a number of themes emerged when these comments were coded and analyzed. In particular, a substantial share of these respondents indicated that they had been surprised to learn that someone they knew felt positively toward a specific candidate in this year’s presidential race. Here is a selection of these responses:

• “Someone who posted a pro-Trump post, who [being from] an immigrant family would likely be someone that the Trump camp would not like at all.”
  “Someone who I assumed never ever bothered to vote and I’ve never heard talk about politics at all has been a big vocal supporter of Trump. Mostly for the wrong bigoted and misinformed reasons. It was surprising to see such a nice person jump on the hateful bigot bandwagon.”
  “I thought my neighbor was a true diehard Republican until he began to post negative things about Trump and began hitting the button when somebody posted positive things about Secretary Clinton. What a surprise!!!”
  “It has shocked me to think that people really feel that Clinton, in spite of all the wrong that she has done still would be a positive for presidency … how can she not be held accountable for Benghazi, emails, and everything?”

One-in-five social media users (20%) say they have modified their views about a political or social issue because of something they saw on social media, while 17% say they have modified their views about a particular political candidate.

When asked to describe a recent situation in which this had happened to them, a substantial share of respondents made reference to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump – in many cases indicating that social media content had changed their opinions of these candidates for the worse. Here is a sample of some of their responses:

• “Became more wary of Hillary Clinton based on what I saw on social media.”
  “Trump continues to voice his opinion incredibly ignorantly about immigration and made my respect for him tank.”
  “My opinion on Trump is MUCH worse after reading his tweets.”
  “All the videos circulating about Hillary Clinton and her email debauchery. Now I think she is even more evil and corrupt than originally thought.”

Other issues on which users indicated that they had changed their minds thanks to material on social media include race and race relations, guns and gun control, gay marriage, and immigration. Here is a selection of these responses:

• “Videos of black people being murdered by police made me more angry and therefore more outspoken about Black Lives Matter.”
  “I saw some of my friends were animated about left-leaning things like Bernie Sanders and gay marriage. Originally I was against gay marriage and have now accepted it.”
  “I don’t know that anything specifically has changed, but I’m pretty open-minded and I always try to take other people’s opinions to heart and learn from them. There are issues, such as global warming and immigration – just to name two – that I have softened my stance on, because I see another perspective, and understand it better based upon social media posts.”

[agrajag]

Amir0x has the same temperament as Donald Trump.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Chicago Tribune asks Hillary to step down: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html

It's funny how a couple days ago, people delusionally thought Hillary had a chance in places like Arizona and Texas (she never did).  Today, everyone but the hardcore is ready to admit defeat.

I'm glad I was able to place some well timed bets while the getting was good

[Stoney Mason]

Chicago Tribune asks Hillary to step down: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html

It's funny how a couple days ago, people delusionally thought Hillary had a chance in places like Arizona and Texas (she never did).  Today, everyone but the hardcore is ready to admit defeat.

I'm glad I was able to place some well timed bets while the getting was good

Your better than this.

[toku]

Are any of us?

[TakingBackSunday]

ffs MTW

[agrajag]

Amir0x has the same temperament as Donald Trump.

Sorry, forgot to post quote/link

We know Clinton is gonna win.

The thing to fear is whether all this will make us lose the Senate. If it does, the first fucking thing Clinton needs to do is destroy Comey's life.

Number one, on day one. The first fucking conversation: how many ways can we ruin Comey?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=222135347&postcount=4016

So he wants the new POTUS, as their first act as Commander in Chief to plot revenge, like a petty, thin-skinned, vindictive idiot? Why doesn't he just vote for Trump?

[agrajag]

You know if Joe Biden ran it would have been a fucking landslide.

Why does Shillary have to be so bad at being a politician.

She is good at being a politician, maybe too good. She just sucks with technology (how does i email)

Biden is a straight shooter, and less of a politician, which is why he would have killed it.

And the only reason he didn't run is because his son was dying. We could have had President Biden.

[Mandark]

What is with these Joe Biden fantasies?  I like Diamond Joe as much as the next guy, but he and Hillary already ran for president in the same cycle.

He got 1% in Iowa and dropped out before New Hampshire.

[benjipwns]

What is with these Joe Biden fantasies?  I like Diamond Joe as much as the next guy, but he and Hillary already ran for president in the same cycle.

He got 1% in Iowa and dropped out before New Hampshire.

hey! look at that over there! wow can you believe

[Mandark]

2016 Joe Biden isn't the same as 2008 Joe Biden, tho.

Yeah, he'd probably be a bit closer to Edwards in '08 if he ran this time.

[agrajag]

What is with these Joe Biden fantasies?  I like Diamond Joe as much as the next guy, but he and Hillary already ran for president in the same cycle.

He got 1% in Iowa and dropped out before New Hampshire.

That's the problem. Both Bernie and Joe lose to Clinton in the primaries, but they stack up so much better vs. Trump head to head.

[Phoenix Dark]

https://twitter.com/bobshrum/status/792095468897521666
https://twitter.com/BobShrum/status/792097780659478528
https://twitter.com/BobShrum/status/792102571288604672

 

Is there anything more progressive than losing?

[Mandark]

That's the problem. Both Bernie and Joe lose to Clinton in the primaries, but they stack up so much better vs. Trump head to head.

How so?

[benjipwns]

Jamie Gorelick? We're really scraping the bottom of the barrel now: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/james-comey-is-damaging-our-democracy/2016/10/29/894d0f5e-9e49-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html

Chicago Tribune asks Hillary to step down: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-kass-1030-20161028-column.html

Has America become so numb by the decades of lies and cynicism oozing from Clinton Inc. that it could elect Hillary Clinton as president, even after Friday's FBI announcement that it had reopened an investigation of her emails while secretary of state?

We'll find out soon enough.

That he announced this so close to Election Day should tell every thinking person that what the FBI is looking at is extremely serious.

This can't be about pervert Anthony Weiner and his reported desire for a teenage girl. But it can be about the laptop of Weiner's wife, Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and emails between her and Hillary. It comes after the FBI investigation in which Comey concluded Clinton had lied and been "reckless" with national secrets, but said he could not recommend prosecution.

So what should the Democrats do now?

If ruling Democrats hold themselves to the high moral standards they impose on the people they govern, they would follow a simple process:

They would demand that Mrs. Clinton step down, immediately, and let her vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, stand in her place.

Democrats should say, honestly, that with a new criminal investigation going on into events around her home-brew email server from the time she was secretary of state, having Clinton anywhere near the White House is just not a good idea.

What if she is elected? Think of a nation suffering a bad economy and continuing chaos in the Middle East, and now also facing a criminal investigation of a president. Add to that congressional investigations and a public vision of Clinton as a Nixonian figure wandering the halls, wringing her hands.

The best thing would be for Democrats to ask her to step down now. It would be the most responsible thing to do, if the nation were more important to them than power. And the American news media — fairly or not firmly identified in the public mind as Mrs. Clinton's political action committee — should begin demanding it.

If you take a step back from tribal politics, you'll see that Mrs. Clinton has clearly disqualified herself from ever coming near classified information again. If she were a young person straight out of grad school hoping to land a government job, Hillary Clinton would be laughed out of Washington with her record. She'd never be hired.

MerryPrankster
The only way the email story could get any worse for Clinton would be if some kind of actual wrongdoing were unearthed at some point.

[Mandark]

did you just block quote a piece that someone else linked to upthread?

[benjipwns]

says who?

[Mandark]

we luv ya benji, but sometimes you can be a bit too benji

[benjipwns]

like anyone was going to follow MTW's link to see the delicious morsels within

if you held yourself to the high moral standards you try to impose on the people of lower poster classes, you'd step aside

[agrajag]

That's the problem. Both Bernie and Joe lose to Clinton in the primaries, but they stack up so much better vs. Trump head to head.

How so?

Are you serious? Hillary has way too much baggage and is surrounded by scandals.

[Mandark]

What baggage do you mean?

[headwalk]

is there anywhere on the internet i can go for a lite relatively neutral take on US politics where people can take a joke?

basically this thread but with more than six people in it.

[benjipwns]

is there anywhere on the internet i can go for a lite relatively neutral take on US politics where people can take a joke?

basically this thread but with more than six people in it.

http://truthfeed.com/

[agrajag]

What baggage do you mean?

the fact that she was married to Bill alone makes people question voting for her. Voting for the Iraq war. There's tons, man, come on.

[VomKriege]

She might have a pretty brief honeymoon period as a President, once the big orange baloon is out of the way.

[headwalk]

will that happen though? seems to be a whole generation of warriors who are now engaged in mortal combat with all her detractors due to the apocalyptic nature of the alternative, paladins who have sworn their virginity to her.

presidential personality cults weren't really a thing for liberal america until obama. did it become a coping mechanism to deal with the disparity between his likable personality and same old same old corporatism?

mental to think of how popular he is still despite the whole NSA thing coming out under his watch. not only that, the organisation that broke that story are now widely despised in liberal circles.

point is, i can't see these people who have personally invested every fibre of their being in getting this person elected suddenly reactivate their faculties for critical thought in a few months time.

[benjipwns]

what if trump had run for the democratic nomination, attacking jeb and rubio and bernie and carly and etc.

[TakingBackSunday]

is it a good time to get off this planet

[agrajag]

Humanity is not worthy of Elon Musk 

[Mandark]

the fact that she was married to Bill alone makes people question voting for her. Voting for the Iraq war. There's tons, man, come on.

In the context of Joe Biden being a better, less burdened candidate?

[agrajag]

It's not one isolated thing with Hillary, but then sum of everything. How many things can Biden be nailed on besides that one thing?

[Joe Molotov]

What baggage do you mean?

Being a woman.

[headwalk]

biden seems like he could be fallible and everyone would be alright with it. he could probably put out a special on netflix where he just riffs on various times everything went tits up a month before polling day and he'd come out ahead. probably even get his hair ruffled on jimmy fallon.

[Phoenix Dark]

Surprise: just about anyone would beat Trump this year. Biden for sure, even Sanders.

[Great Rumbler]

Biden would be getting hammered for various things if he were in the middle of the general election fire, but right now he's just the cool uncle VP so he gets away with stuff because most people don't really care.

[Mandark]

It's not one isolated thing with Hillary, but then sum of everything. How many things can Biden be nailed on besides that one thing?

Off the top of my head:

• His '88 campaign was basically ended by a plagiarism scandal. He was pretty credibly accused of plagiarism in college, to boot.
• He was chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee when Clarence Thomas was confirmed, and was largely seen as going very easy on the Anita Hill accusations.
• A record of being very protective of the financial industry (a lot of which is based in Delaware cause of favorable state laws), culminating in the 2005 bankruptcy bill which he sponsored.
• Didn't just vote for the final '96 welfare bill, but for an earlier version which was harsh enough that Bill Clinton had vetoed it.
• Not only voted for the Iraq War but actively used his role as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee to push towards that war (inviting pro-war testimonials etc.)
• The crime bill which came up this cycle as a knock on Hillary? Biden was a sponsor and was taking credit for having written it as of his '08 campaign.
• He sponsored a bill on civil forfeiture in the 80's, and has generally been a big supporter of the war on drugs.
• Has a generally hawkish record, though he never quite went full dingus like Joe Lieberman did.

I know that Biden is the cuddly, plain-talking uncle now, but that's largely a function of him not running for president and inviting all the oppo research and scrutiny that comes with that.

More generally, any successful mainstream Democratic politician from the 80's or 90's is going to be an awkward fit in some ways because the party has moved left in several areas.  A campaign just gives reason to actively discuss it.


edit:    I swear I wrote the uncle thing before I saw Rumbler's post.

[headwalk]

"i tell ya, there was this one time in college, i'd just got with this girl and i was spending all my time with her...who here went to college in the 60s? ain't like it is now let me tell ya!"

*audience howls"

[agrajag]

Mandark, YOU and other libs can fault him for being too right of center in the past, but certainly not republicans. If anything that would make him seem way less moderate and threatening than Hillary to independents. As for the Iraq stuff, fair point. But as we saw, the Iraq thing didn't do much to derail Hillary either.

[Mandark]

Dude what?

[agrajag]

Dude what?

might have misread your post bro, I'll do more research on Biden

[tiesto]

It's not one isolated thing with Hillary, but then sum of everything. How many things can Biden be nailed on besides that one thing?

Off the top of my head:

• His '88 campaign was basically ended by a plagiarism scandal. He was pretty credibly accused of plagiarism in college, to boot.
• He was chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee when Clarence Thomas was confirmed, and was largely seen as going very easy on the Anita Hill accusations.
• A record of being very protective of the financial industry (a lot of which is based in Delaware cause of favorable state laws), culminating in the 2005 bankruptcy bill which he sponsored.
• Didn't just vote for the final '96 welfare bill, but for an earlier version which was harsh enough that Bill Clinton had vetoed it.
• Not only voted for the Iraq War but actively used his role as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee to push towards that war (inviting pro-war testimonials etc.)
• The crime bill which came up this cycle as a knock on Hillary? Biden was a sponsor and was taking credit for having written it as of his '08 campaign.
• He sponsored a bill on civil forfeiture in the 80's, and has generally been a big supporter of the war on drugs.
• Has a generally hawkish record, though he never quite went full dingus like Joe Lieberman did.

I know that Biden is the cuddly, plain-talking uncle now, but that's largely a function of him not running for president and inviting all the oppo research and scrutiny that comes with that.

More generally, any successful mainstream Democratic politician from the 80's or 90's is going to be an awkward fit in some ways because the party has moved left in several areas.  A campaign just gives reason to actively discuss it.


edit:    I swear I wrote the uncle thing before I saw Rumbler's post.

Also the R.A.V.E. act, which led to the closer of some amazing clubs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reducing_Americans%27_Vulnerability_to_Ecstasy_Act

[Mandark]

Aight, I'll elaborate.

In terms of actual record, Hillary's "baggage" is basically being implicated in DLC style politics from the 80's and 90's: hawkish on foreign policy, punitive on drugs and crime, soft on banks, giving away jobs through free trade, etc.  These are the areas on which she's been attacked the most throughout the campaign, and they're subjects where Biden either shares or outdoes those vulnerabilities.  If it's baggage for her, it's baggage for him (and if it's not, then Molotov is right).

Now some of them are more of a problem in a Dem primary than in the general, but if we assume a centrist record is a plus with the electorate, then we can't also say Sanders would be a better matchup against Trump.

[agrajag]

Aight, I'll elaborate.

In terms of actual record, Hillary's "baggage" is basically being implicated in DLC style politics from the 80's and 90's: hawkish on foreign policy, punitive on drugs and crime, soft on banks, giving away jobs through free trade, etc.  These are the areas on which she's been attacked the most throughout the campaign, and they're subjects where Biden either shares or outdoes those vulnerabilities.  If it's baggage for her, it's baggage for him (and if it's not, then Molotov is right).

Now some of them are more of a problem in a Dem primary than in the general, but if we assume a centrist record is a plus with the electorate, then we can't also say Sanders would be a better matchup against Trump.

Well, I am operating on the assumption that there would be no private server scandals associated with Biden. Or being married to a sexual predator. I'm not saying it's justified baggage, just shit for republicans to latch on to.

Yes, you are right that if we assume a centrist record is a plus for the electorate then Sanders is problematic. But against Trump, he would be the perfect candidate I feel. Hillary has that "Washington establishment" thing everyone holds against her, whereas Bernie had that rogue outsider thing going for him, as does Trump. He has no history of saying or doing anything racially or sexually inflammatory. And is extremely popular with younger voters who are not energized by Trum or Clinton. When all the scandals about Trump's indescretions came out, if it were Sanders running against him, there would be no way for the Trump campaign to deflect it against Sanders (or most other candidates) in any way. Now, their strategy was not effective as far as damaging Clinton's poll numbers. But it definitely built a narrative that this election cycle is a disgusting circus that no one really wants anything to do with. Anecdotal, but I see things like this on my social media feeds and in real life all the time.

[brawndolicious]

Obama was charismatic but that didn't help him avoid government shutdowns. Hillary is more electable than anyone else right now because no one can get anything passed in Congress anyways. At least not until new House maps are drawn up anyways.

The problem with electing a white dude at this point in time is that it'll make the loud, backwards part of the GOP settle down when what we need is for that party to get split the fuck up and redeveloped into something more modern.

Also the R.A.V.E. act, which led to the closer of some amazing clubs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reducing_Americans%27_Vulnerability_to_Ecstasy_Act

Yeah but weren't a lot of clubs doing shady shit due to drug usage? Like charging outrageous prices for water bottles because they knew what people would pay anything if they were dancing all night on Ecstasy?

[Tasty]

Seeing agra regurgitate Fox News talking points and faux-scandals is pretty sad confirmation that HRC was right about the "vast right-wing conspiracy."

Compared to Biden and most Dem's who've been on Capital Hill since the 90's, Hillary's only "weakness" is that she was in the public light enough for the right wing hit-squad to notice her. Along with, of course, being a woman (which likely fed into that last point, too.)

[Mandark]

Well, I am operating on the assumption that there would be no private server scandals associated with Biden. Or being married to a sexual predator. I'm not saying it's justified baggage, just shit for republicans to latch on to.

That's the point!

There is no candidate or potential candidate so pure and angelic that they would not be subjected to Republican FUD, or that the FUD wouldn't stick to them.  You think someone who's been in public service as long as Biden, with such close ties to banks, with a tendency to speak very frankly, who's been VP in an administration Republicans loathe, wouldn't be subjected to attacks, or that the same people who believe shit about Hillary wouldn't believe it about Biden?

I remember when a lot of Dems thought that nominating combat veteran, war hero John Kerry would act as a shield against that stuff.  It doesn't work that way.