The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

yogoshio

Annoying Libertarian
They don't have to try that hard. The intermittent booing is plenty.

Also, I think this is the first time in a LONG time that the opposing presidential contender did not openly endorse the candidate for EITHER party.

I think that's a very poignant statement about where we have come. The two party system is not working, and this is becoming more and more obvious as lines are blurring on issue affiliation. Especially with the hardlined stances the opposing parties are taking on major issues.
 
yogoshio,
  • Like
Reactions: grokit

lwien

Well-Known Member
They don't have to try that hard. The intermittent booing is plenty.

Yeah, I hated that but it died down quite a bit in the second half of the convention as compared to when it first opened. Probably will start up again today with the roll call but I have total confidence that by the end of the convention, they'll all come together.

Still waiting for the other shoe to drop in regards to more hacked emails being released. May not happen during the convention but it will happen between now and the general election.
 

yogoshio

Annoying Libertarian
Still waiting for the other shoe to drop in regards to more hacked emails being released.

If that shoe includes SoS emails, that could legit kill her run for good. Even if its "legal (which the FBI admitted it wasn't)" the fact it was hack-able would just bolster the the poor decision making part and make independents question her integrity even more which is one of her biggest stumbling blocks for those outside of the mainstream Dems.
 
yogoshio,

Gunky

Well-Known Member
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ntion-Day-2.html?list_item=hecklers-for-trump
Hecklers for Trump
By David Leonhardt
For at least a decade, the Democrats have been acting like the more mature, reality-based political party.

They have avoided damaging Congressional primaries that give away winnable seats and tear down their own stars. They have not engaged in big, silly conspiracy theories – about, say, skewed polls or global warming. They have been willing to compromise to advance their cause.

The party has much to show for it: a health-care expansion that had eluded the country for decades; L.G.B.T.-rights victories that came faster than once seemed fathomable; the first serious attacks against climate change; a slew of new taxes on the top 1 percent; and the prospect of the most liberal Supreme Court in a generation.

The start of the Democratic convention offers reason to wonder whether the party is in the early stages of a new phase – a self-defeating phase in which a large segment of liberals would rather lose than compromise.

Let’s be clear: The hecklers in Philadelphia are doing Donald J. Trump’s work. They are his allies, no matter how much they may believe otherwise and no matter how honest their passion. Their attempts to inject chaos into the convention will undermine the single best opportunity that Hillary Clinton has to make her case to voters.

Whatever their motives, the Bernie-or-Busters are actually working to keep Citizens United as the law of the land. They are working to cut taxes on the rich. They are working to take health insurance away from families that have only recently received it. They are working for Big Coal and against the climate. They are doing the bidding of a candidate who has demeaned prisoners of war and the disabled, described Mexicans as rapists, referred to women as barnyard animals, called for banning Muslims from entering the country and cozied up to Russia’s authoritarian president.

No doubt, many of the protesters come to their anger in good faith and are expressing it productively. (And, no doubt, others are mostly interested in calling attention to themselves – or, in fact, support Mr. Trump. “Maybe he wouldn’t be so bad,” one small-business owner at a pro-Sanders rally on Monday said.) They are angry about inequality and about a nominating process in which the Democratic establishment sided with Clinton. But there is nothing new about a party establishment backing the favorite. John McCain, Gary Hart, Jerry Brown and even Barack Obama all had occasions to resent their party’s establishment.

This year, the race was simply not close enough to be decided by party maneuvering. Mrs. Clinton beat Bernie Sanders by 3.8 million votes – a whopping 57 percent to 43 percent margin. “Let me be clear,” Symone D. Sanders, a top campaign aide (but no relation) to Mr. Sanders, tweeted yesterday. “NO ONE STOLE THIS ELECTION! Team Sanders we did AMAZING WORK. But we lost. It’s a hard reality for some.”

In other ways, of course, Team Sanders won. It moved Mrs. Clinton’s position to the left on trade, the minimum wage and college financing. The Sanders campaign “transformed” the political landscape, Ms. Sanders proudly noted in another tweet yesterday. When Bill Clinton speaks tonight, I expect he’ll present an especially striking embodiment of the party’s leftward shift.

There is still plenty of work for Sanders supporters to do. They can pressure Mrs. Clinton to hold fast to her campaign positions. They can identify and campaign for candidates who believe in a more radical liberalism than the Clintons or the Obamas. And they can do everything within their power to prevent a Trump presidency – a presidency with the potential to be more damaging to the country than any in our lifetimes.

If Democrats need a reminder of the importance of principled compromise, they need look back only 16 years. Then, a few million voters decided that Al Gore was no different from George W. Bush and voted for Ralph Nader instead. Those votes made it possible for Mr. Bush to win the White House.

How’d that work out for the liberal cause?
 

lwien

Well-Known Member
If that shoe includes SoS emails, that could legit kill her run for good.

Wiki intimated that they had more and it was concerning the Clinton Foundation but I still don't think it's enough to kill her run and I feel that way only because of Trump. If she was running against anyone else, I'd be really concerned.
 
lwien,

yogoshio

Annoying Libertarian
I feel that way only because of Trump.

Yet another reason I loathe him :lol:

If the Clinton Foundation emails even hint at international pay to play, that would be a BIG bullet in the game of Russian Roulette the Clintons have been playing with their affairs for decades.
 
Last edited:
yogoshio,

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Keep dreaming, Yogo. Who knows, maybe she'll spontaneously combust on stage too.

So, I'm starting to read a lot of parallels between the Russian hack and release and Watergate, and the more I think about it the better the analogy gets. Especially when compared to all the bogus "gate" memes the Rethugs have tried to spew on our current President.

A Watergate comparison that finally makes sense
07/26/16 03:03 PM—Updated 07/26/16 03:45 PM

By Steve Benen
It is the political scandal to which all others are compared. It’s the only scandal to force a sitting American president to resign in disgrace. It’s the scandal that has led so many of us to quickly add the “-gate” suffix to practically every new controversy that arises, political or not.

It’s Watergate, which ended Richard Nixon’s presidency, led to 40 criminal indictments against government officials, and did lasting harm to how Americans think about politics and their own government.

For many in the political world, the search for the next Watergate is practically constant. The last time I counted, there were at least 10 separate “controversies” that President Obama’s critics eagerly labeled “Obama’s Watergate,” each of which turned out to be meaningless, further diluting an already over used cliché.

But what if a story came along that actually resembled Watergate in meaningful and direct ways?

Remember, the spark that lit the Watergate fire was a third-rate burglary in which Democratic opponents tried to steal embarrassing information that could be used to help a Republican win a presidential election.
Writing in Slate today, Franklin Foer takes note of the parallels 44 years later: the alleged Russian theft of Democratic emails, published online ahead of the Democratic convention, possibly to help the Republican nominee.

A foreign government has hacked a political party’s computers – and possibly an election. It has stolen documents and timed their release to explode with maximum damage. […]

The better analogy for these hacks is Watergate. To help win an election, the Russians broke into the virtual headquarters of the Democratic Party. The hackers installed the cyber-version of the bugging equipment that Nixon’s goons used – sitting on the DNC computers for a year, eavesdropping on everything, collecting as many scraps as possible. This is trespassing, it’s thievery, it’s a breathtaking transgression of privacy. It falls into that classic genre, the dirty trick. Yet that term feels too innocent to describe the offense. Nixon’s dirty tricksters didn’t mindlessly expose the private data of low-level staff.

Some caveats and caution is in order.

Though Foer, who’s done some important work on Donald Trump’s Russian ties, is obviously confident in his conclusions, the matter of the virtual break-in is still under investigation, and we don’t yet know what the probe will uncover.

U.S. cyber-security experts have reason to believe Russia was responsible for stealing the DNC materials, and the FBI suspects Russia’s motivations were political: Vladimir Putin’s government sees Trump as an ally, so Russia allegedly took steps to help the Republican win.

This is still, however, very much in the realm of suspicions and allegations. The evidence is real and it’s raising legitimate questions, but we don’t yet have firm answers to those questions.

That said, if Russia broke into the DNC’s virtual headquarters and stole materials to help a Republican win a presidential race, everyone waiting for the next Watergate just might get their wish.
 
cybrguy,

gangababa

Well-Known Member
Allegations and speculation is the new reality of our internet world.

But for those who wish to read beyond the few words of spin we post here,
here is another 'unsubstantiated troller' claiming forenzic evidence tied the DNC hacking to Russia.

All Signs Point to Russia Being Behind the DNC Hack
"The metadata in the leaked documents are perhaps most revealing: one dumped document was modified using Russian language settings, by a user named “Феликс Эдмундович,” a code name referring to the founder of the Soviet Secret Police, the Cheka, memorialised in a 15-ton iron statue in front of the old KGB headquarters during Soviet times. The original intruders made other errors: one leaked document included hyperlink error messages in Cyrillic, the result of editing the file on a computer with Russian language settings. After this mistake became public, the intruders removed the Cyrillic information from the metadata in the next dump and carefully used made-up user names from different world regions, thereby confirming they had made a mistake in the first round."
"Guccifer 2.0 (claims to be Romanian) like the original Guccifer, a well-known hacker. But when asked to explain his hack in Romanian, he was unable to respond colloquially and without errors. Guccifer 2.0’s English initially was also weak, but in subsequent posts the quality improved sharply, albeit only on political subjects, not in technical matters—an indication of a team of operators at work behind the scenes."
 

t-dub

Vapor Sloth
Cyber warfare has become an everyday hazard and will increasingly become an indispensable tool for waging both cold and hot war. Nation states like China, Russia, Israel, and the U.S. will have the most resources, however, independent dark web types like Anonymous will also exist. If a kid in England can breach the Pentagon systems looking for UFO information we can probably assume that nation states have much more ability.

Moving forward I don't think anyone's information can be deemed as "safe" even if its on a stand alone system, not connected to the net, and the information is never spoken about unless it is F2F. Edward Snowden is a good example of how a well placed spy, or disillusioned employee, can undo any security. Of course this will create a "race" to have the hardest systems, the best encryption, the tightest security, and the best scripts to do the dirty work without leaving a trace. The Stuxnet virus used by Israel to burn out Iran's uranium enrichment centrifuges demonstrates that anything run by computers will be at risk, including our power grid.
 
t-dub,

lwien

Well-Known Member
If a kid in England can breach the Pentagon systems looking for UFO information we can probably assume that nation states have much more ability.

First thing I thought about when I read that, t, was this:
And THAT was from 33 years ago......

Edit: Just now, the US just made history in officially nominating the first female for the highest office in our land and all I can say is, compared to the rest of the world, it's about fucking time !!
 
Last edited:

gangababa

Well-Known Member
Denial, deception, early spins on the 'Trump is massively indebted to the Russian Mafia and that is why he won't reveal his taxes' story.
Does Trump plan to sell off America to pay his bills?
All America wants to know except one political tribe, heirs of the know-nothings of the past, who clearly received big inheritances.

Does the TrumPutiNastiness stink enough to attract attention?
This (full coverage) news Google search "dnc trump putin"
Sorted by relevance the hits start with Foreign Policy Blog and Boing Boing(?), then The Guardian, Newsweek, Gawker, CNN, Metro, New York Times

Sorted by date we have newest down; Opposing Views, TMP Blog, Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, NBC News, Honk Kong Standard...
Business Insider, Philly.com, WNYC...
Even Rush is out today with his spin (click at your own risk)
"The hack of a DNC server. The Democrats just can't wait to tell you the Russians did it, and they're dragging out all of these security experts to tell you that there are signals, there are bits of evidence that the Russian hackers did it."
"CALLER: I'm about as convinced that it was the Russians as you are. As far as I'm concerned, it could be any one of the 10 million people on this planet. I'm a big computer nerd. Like I said, I'm a computer science major, I'm a senior in college right now."

I, the poster personally suspect someone who calls him/er-self, "I", did it.

More here and here

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-really-works-for-russia-researchers-say.html
"The most minimal version of the story is actually a very, very big deal ... We know very, very little about Trump's finances. ...Trump has a long list of bankruptcies, foreign business connections, huge debt loads. Seeing his tax returns is really essential. And yet we haven't seen them. ... Even the fact that Trump owes a huge amount of money to DeutscheBank a foreign bank that has been under tight scrutiny recently from US regulators is a big deal. How would that possibly work if...the Presidential personally owes them hundreds of millions of dollars?"
 

yogoshio

Annoying Libertarian
13658913_10210478261176911_6018749743522249605_n.jpg
 

YaFreekin Right

Well-Known Member
I'd hate this thread to just turn into people re posting meems, especially intensely biased ones like this.

As an outsider I'm at a complete loss how people do not understand that a vote for anyone else besides Hillary is a vote for Trump. I understand the need for people to express their beliefs by voting for their candidate of choice but in an election with such great stakes, sometimes one has look beyond ones own needs and vote for the greater good.
 

yogoshio

Annoying Libertarian
I won't throw up any more after this. I am sick of the greater good arguments though. It's a load of bullshit to make vomit taste better.

Every time I hear the greater good argument this is what happens
tumblr_inline_nnbv3m4fPe1sdgkr8_540.gif
 
yogoshio,

Bdubbdiblets

Well-Known Member
I'd hate this thread to just turn into people re posting meems, especially intensely biased ones like this.

As an outsider I'm at a complete loss how people do not understand that a vote for anyone else besides Hillary is a vote for Trump. I understand the need for people to express their beliefs by voting for their candidate of choice but in an election with such great stakes, sometimes one has look beyond ones own needs and vote for the greater good.
If I could like this several times I would...well said. I'm no democrat by any means but my Dog it's so clear to see that one turd is obviously so much shinier than the other...and this year the less shiny turd is particularly smelly... If that makes any sense....Yeesh back to my hopper...I have a feeling I'm gonna need my hopper alot in the next several months:uhoh:
 

YaFreekin Right

Well-Known Member
I won't throw up any more after this. I am sick of the greater good arguments though. It's a load of bullshit to make vomit taste better.

Every time I hear the greater good argument this is what happens
tumblr_inline_nnbv3m4fPe1sdgkr8_540.gif

Do you feel meems are the best way to communicate? I must be getting old I just don't understand.

Why is it a load of bullshit? Do you believe that everyone should only act in their own self interest?
 
YaFreekin Right,

Silat

When the Facts Change, I Change My Mind.
Yet another reason I loathe him :lol:

If the Clinton Foundation emails even hint at international pay to play, that would be a BIG bullet in the game of Russian Roulette the Clintons have been playing with their affairs for decades.

As compared to Drumpfs business with the Russians and love of Putin?
 

yogoshio

Annoying Libertarian
I believe that if your conscience tells you no, its generally not a good idea to do it. And for all the people here saying they will hold their nose, if they wrote in or voted 3rd party we could actually do something about it in the short and long term instead of just continuing to hold their noses. We have a lot of power when we vote, and if people voted for what they really believe in instead of voting based on fear, we would be in a much better state right now.
 
yogoshio,

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
With Bernie staying in the race he has pushed the Democratic Party closer to the left. He will be making sure that the democrats follow through on what they are promising far as minimum wage and free college tuition for families making under $125,000.00. They are making some other changes that Bernie wanted too.

Trump has too many crazies out there voting for him to take a chance on a third party. There are too many people who actually like Hillary. I've always been kinda lukewarm far as she's concerned. For me she is the only choice. She's not my favorite person but she may make a good president. I'm not willing to gamble on having a fascist as a president.

Neither of the two other third choice candidates seem to be ready to serve as a president IMO. Gary Johnson seems kinda goofy and doesn't have a strong personality. Promising to make cannabis legal isn't worth voting for him for. I've heard his stance on things and he's really similar to what Bernie believes in. But he's no Bernie. I've listened to him speak and I've read about Jill Stien and have watched some videos of her. She definitely isn't ready to be a commander and chief.

I agree there doesn't seem to be a great choice. I'm warming up to Hillary with all the speakers at the convention. Some of the speakers such as the moms of the black children that have died from gun violence have had me in tears. Bernie's brother had me in tears talking about his parents, how proud they would have been to have seen their son come so far.

Some of the most bat shit crazy stuff coming out of Jeffrey Lord's mouth. Reminding us originally the Democrats were the party of racism and they need to apologize for that. Get him off of CNN, he's nuts. Van Jones said I think the democrats have moved on.

Edit
I agree, Bill made a home run. He hit it out of the park for his wife. He owes her big time too.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom