The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread
- Thread starter CarolKing
- Start date
Magic9
Plant Enthusiast
Hillary Clinton has accepted a lot of money from outside groups. It's public record. Pointing out public record facts is not an attack.
Does it influence her decisions? I'm a supporter of campaign finance reform and overturning Citizens United. I support those for a reason. Anyone that supports those two things can't seriously expect others to believe money has no impact on their candidate. Only those other guys.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walker-bragman/hillary-clinton-is-no-pro_b_9204690.html
Does money bye influence? Ask Clinton. Or Obama.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-ca...k-obama-sold-access-big-donors-now-criticizes
"Sen. Obama has some questions to answer about his dealings with one of his largest contributors — Exelon, a big nuclear power company,” she declared. “Apparently he cut some deals behind closed doors to protect them from full disclosure of the nuclear industry.”
Sanders is pointing out publicly reported facts now. Clinton intentionally misrepresented employee data (Obama took $0 from registered lobbyists in 08) as lobbyist data to suggest money influences politicians.
Let's also remember that the Clinton camp has been attacking Sanders since September and has continued since. Not my opinion. The ultra conservative rags HuffPo and Time have reported on it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ers-jeremy-corbyn_us_55f73339e4b00e2cd5e79e11
http://time.com/4213441/new-hampshire-primary-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders/
But...But... that's from her SuperPAC. The one she can't coordinate with. Which again, flies right in the face of what is true.
Check out this interview with David Brock.
http://mic.com/articles/126509/9-qu...behind-hillary-clinton-s-super-pac#.eySgAD3AD
Correct the Record is unique as a super PAC — you can coordinate with the campaign since you're not doing any paid advertising.
DB: Correct.
A few weeks ago, Correct the Record circulated a memo that was critical of Sanders. He used that attack to raise $1.2 million in the 48 hours after it came out. What did you learn from that?
DB: The lesson is probably that Sen. Sanders is not the easiest person to necessarily find fault with. He certainly made lemonade out of this lemon. It was very interesting to watch. What it ended up doing was firing up his supporters. That was just a very interesting exercise. Yeah.
---
This is politics in an election season. Don't take stuff personal. Defend your candidate with facts.
Does it influence her decisions? I'm a supporter of campaign finance reform and overturning Citizens United. I support those for a reason. Anyone that supports those two things can't seriously expect others to believe money has no impact on their candidate. Only those other guys.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walker-bragman/hillary-clinton-is-no-pro_b_9204690.html
Does money bye influence? Ask Clinton. Or Obama.
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-ca...k-obama-sold-access-big-donors-now-criticizes
"Sen. Obama has some questions to answer about his dealings with one of his largest contributors — Exelon, a big nuclear power company,” she declared. “Apparently he cut some deals behind closed doors to protect them from full disclosure of the nuclear industry.”
Sanders is pointing out publicly reported facts now. Clinton intentionally misrepresented employee data (Obama took $0 from registered lobbyists in 08) as lobbyist data to suggest money influences politicians.
Let's also remember that the Clinton camp has been attacking Sanders since September and has continued since. Not my opinion. The ultra conservative rags HuffPo and Time have reported on it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ers-jeremy-corbyn_us_55f73339e4b00e2cd5e79e11
http://time.com/4213441/new-hampshire-primary-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders/
But...But... that's from her SuperPAC. The one she can't coordinate with. Which again, flies right in the face of what is true.
Check out this interview with David Brock.
http://mic.com/articles/126509/9-qu...behind-hillary-clinton-s-super-pac#.eySgAD3AD
Correct the Record is unique as a super PAC — you can coordinate with the campaign since you're not doing any paid advertising.
DB: Correct.
A few weeks ago, Correct the Record circulated a memo that was critical of Sanders. He used that attack to raise $1.2 million in the 48 hours after it came out. What did you learn from that?
DB: The lesson is probably that Sen. Sanders is not the easiest person to necessarily find fault with. He certainly made lemonade out of this lemon. It was very interesting to watch. What it ended up doing was firing up his supporters. That was just a very interesting exercise. Yeah.
---
This is politics in an election season. Don't take stuff personal. Defend your candidate with facts.
howie105
Well-Known Member
Regardless of who runs against who the debate going on within both parties is good. People are looking deeper than usual at positions taken by contenders, asking tougher questions and really looking at the players behind the facades. Sure there are still the brain dead agenda bots that just follow whatever bright colorful flag is getting waved at them but at least there are fewer of them. I hope at the end of all this folks have a clearer view of how the game is played as we meet the new boss.
Farid
Well-Known Member
It seems you disagree with people who think that donations from corporations influence a politicians decisions. No reason to threaten to block people for having a different opinion.
Last edited:
lwien
Well-Known Member
(putting on mod-hat even though I'm not a mod)
This has been a great thread with some great discussions going on but I have a suggestion. Like most discussions with polarizing views, the discussions can veer from taking about the subject at hand to personal attacks with many of those personal attacks being of the passive-agressive type. I know how easy it is to get sucked into that 'cause I've been sucked into it and instigated some of it as well but for the sake of the life of this thread....................don't do it.
Just a friendly reminder........
(taking mod-hat off....)
Hillary is a self-serving bitch. Bernie is a socialist, commie pig. Cruz is a fundamentalist scum bag. Kaisich is a passive-agressive wimp and Trump is.............fuck, there's not enough bandwidth to even begin.
This has been a great thread with some great discussions going on but I have a suggestion. Like most discussions with polarizing views, the discussions can veer from taking about the subject at hand to personal attacks with many of those personal attacks being of the passive-agressive type. I know how easy it is to get sucked into that 'cause I've been sucked into it and instigated some of it as well but for the sake of the life of this thread....................don't do it.
Just a friendly reminder........
(taking mod-hat off....)
Hillary is a self-serving bitch. Bernie is a socialist, commie pig. Cruz is a fundamentalist scum bag. Kaisich is a passive-agressive wimp and Trump is.............fuck, there's not enough bandwidth to even begin.
Last edited:
Magic9
Plant Enthusiast
Donald Trump Has An Ace To Play Against Fox News
"The GOP front-runner has information that could damage the cable news network if it were to be made public."
That might explain how Trump has survived/avoided a massive backlash from Fox.
Edit*
Trump is on MSNBC doing a rally right now and ripping into Cruz and the media. Same old song and dance, but it's even more striking after he laid low for a few days.
"The GOP front-runner has information that could damage the cable news network if it were to be made public."
That might explain how Trump has survived/avoided a massive backlash from Fox.
Edit*
Trump is on MSNBC doing a rally right now and ripping into Cruz and the media. Same old song and dance, but it's even more striking after he laid low for a few days.
Last edited:
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Sometimes I get the same vibe from posts in this thread as I got from that scene in Forest Gump. The one where the guy who loses his shit and hits Jenny .... the next day blames his lack of control on that damn Vietnam War and Lyndon Johnson. It feels the same because once someone lowers themselves to name calling and such antics they've lost control. Feeling strongly doesn't give you the right to say or do something immature or out of control. I can almost here the excuse....it's that desperate, stupid Bernie supporter telling lies.....
I've said 'I'm not saying Hillary is bought and paid for' and 'the difference between Bernie and Hillary's campaign funding approach should be made known because it highlights a significant difference between the candidates'. This is a pure Dragnet (Just the facts Ma'm) but in the mind of those who can't control their own emotions it provokes an over-the-top immature response. I can certainly understand why this difference would be a pain point for a Hillary supporter. It used to surprise me when a childish name calling response would occur. That's no longer the case. I've convinced myself that I must have made my point and struck an exposed nerve when the Gump scene plays. Makes it easy to not take the bait and in some perverse way I've started to look forward to it as an affirmation I made my debate point.
Bernie or Bust....This one has legs folks. Not for me....I've said multiple times that whoever wins the democratic primary will get my support in the general. BUT I've heard from some of my closer millennials that they are so disillusioned with everything that smells like old-school-politics that they may just stay home if Bernie doesn't win.
I consider all of the above interrelated in some ways....when either side of the Bernie/Hillary support lose the ability to converse and debate on a mature level the message sent is .... it's me or you but not both. Sure...I know most of us would never take such a hard-line but if you're one of the immature name callers be aware that the immature escalation is the same sentiment that fuels the real....Bernie or Bust.
I've said 'I'm not saying Hillary is bought and paid for' and 'the difference between Bernie and Hillary's campaign funding approach should be made known because it highlights a significant difference between the candidates'. This is a pure Dragnet (Just the facts Ma'm) but in the mind of those who can't control their own emotions it provokes an over-the-top immature response. I can certainly understand why this difference would be a pain point for a Hillary supporter. It used to surprise me when a childish name calling response would occur. That's no longer the case. I've convinced myself that I must have made my point and struck an exposed nerve when the Gump scene plays. Makes it easy to not take the bait and in some perverse way I've started to look forward to it as an affirmation I made my debate point.
Bernie or Bust....This one has legs folks. Not for me....I've said multiple times that whoever wins the democratic primary will get my support in the general. BUT I've heard from some of my closer millennials that they are so disillusioned with everything that smells like old-school-politics that they may just stay home if Bernie doesn't win.
I consider all of the above interrelated in some ways....when either side of the Bernie/Hillary support lose the ability to converse and debate on a mature level the message sent is .... it's me or you but not both. Sure...I know most of us would never take such a hard-line but if you're one of the immature name callers be aware that the immature escalation is the same sentiment that fuels the real....Bernie or Bust.
Last edited:
Chill Dude
Well-Known Member
New poll.. Bernie up by 8% in Wisconsin! Woo hoo!
Gunky
Well-Known Member
If people say things that piss me off I say so. Finding out that quite a few people like me really don't like the Hillary-hating slams from bernie-bots ought to be useful info to them, though I don't hold out a lot of hope that it will have much effect. Once I find out that someone here posts in 'call me pisher' mode (ie "your candidate is corrupt... no offense!"), I use the ignore function and try very hard not to reply if I accidentally see their posts. Such a person is not going to be affected in the least by any facts, fact-checkers, argument or citation I can adduce. There is no point arguing with a true believer because they are not swayed by arguments or evidence. They do not assent to a proposition on its merits; they have drunk the Kool-aid and believe.
Last edited:
out.
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
This type of thread can be dicey but we are all grown ups and we will agree to disagree. Let's see if we can keep this thread open until the election. Our conversations here isn't going to make or break the election. It's just our little piece of the world.
Most of us are Independents or Democrats. We all pretty much agree on the basics right? We know what they are and I don't need to list them. Opposite of what the Republicans believe in.
I respect everyone's right to have their opinion. Just keep in mind the "be nice" rule and that should take care of everything.
Edit
Both democratic candidates want to win the election but I think Hillary wants it more.
Most of us are Independents or Democrats. We all pretty much agree on the basics right? We know what they are and I don't need to list them. Opposite of what the Republicans believe in.
I respect everyone's right to have their opinion. Just keep in mind the "be nice" rule and that should take care of everything.
Edit
Both democratic candidates want to win the election but I think Hillary wants it more.
Last edited:
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
I couldn't agree more!
It's personal attacks and name calling that's the issue. It detracts from intelligent discourse.
Farid
Well-Known Member
I find this statement extremely ironic. You are the one who blocks people you disagree with. There is no possibility of swaying you with evidence or arguments if you block people.
grokit
well-worn member
Same as the old boss!
lwien
Well-Known Member
Oh, one more thing. If anyone disagrees with anything from my previous post, you are a whining, stupid, nutty true believing koolaide drinking internet troll who deserves nothing more than having Rush Limbaugh as your father, Ann Coulter as your mother and Sean Hannity as your live-in uncle.
So there. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.
So there. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.
His_Highness
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king
Oh, one more thing. If anyone disagrees with anything from my previous post, you are a whining, stupid, nutty true believing koolaide drinking internet troll who deserves nothing more than having Rush Limbaugh as your father, Ann Coulter as your mother and Sean Hannity as your live-in uncle.
So there. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.
How low can you go lwien!?!?!? You could have called me just about anything except 'a pipe smoker'
Magic9
Plant Enthusiast
Donald Trump is Beginning His Exit Strategy.
"Donald Trump does not want to be president. In fact, he never wanted to be president. His entire campaign has been a long con and a ruse to strengthen his brand and feed his ego.
Last week, Stephanie Cegielski, a strategist for the Make America Great Again super PAC published an open letter to Trump supporters on the website xoJane in which she details the original intent of Trump’s presidential bid:"
"Donald Trump does not want to be president. In fact, he never wanted to be president. His entire campaign has been a long con and a ruse to strengthen his brand and feed his ego.
Last week, Stephanie Cegielski, a strategist for the Make America Great Again super PAC published an open letter to Trump supporters on the website xoJane in which she details the original intent of Trump’s presidential bid:"
Amoreena
Grown up Flower Child
IMO, it would be nice to see folks share information and opinions without striving to convince others of anything...unless this thread is intended to be an actual debate. I don't know. Never participated in a politically oriented thread before and got sucked into this one unintentionally. Perhaps the urge to change others' minds is necessary on some level I don't understand? 
lwien
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the urge to change others' minds is necessary on some level I don't understand?
I don't think anyone is really trying to change anyone else's minds here.
I just think for some, it's really frustrating when they come across someone who doesn't share their sense of reality and that frustration is exactly the same regardless on what side of the coin you occupy.
CuckFumbustion
Lo and Behold! The transformative power of Vapor.
I still believe it is any bodies race. Kasich and Hillary possibly being closer to the center. With Trump fatigue is sitting in and the RNC scrambling to breakout the esoteric rule set to find a way to dump him. A lot happens in a news cycle. Hopefully people will realize he is too thin skinned and a chronic exaggerator and ignorant on basic foreign policy and frankly half of population (women.) It is sickening how he plays victim, after people respond to something jaw dropping stupid and pigheaded he said/tweeted.
There is a small part of me that wants him to shape up and fly right and start acting presidential. But this guy got most of his political attention during his "birther movement'
Remember the Bait and switch tactic he tried to use on Obama with his 'special announcement' that was going to blow the lid off Obama's residency. He got tons of BS press and when the 'special announcment' came it was a sleazy way to draw attention to his 5m offer.
It has been a disruptive and for some stressful campaign season.
Even for the most level headed of politician's. Let's all be better then the people we don't want to elect this term. I come here expecting to hear opinions and facts other than my own. Or why bother?
For clarity's sake tho, if people mention whether they are trying having a factual discussion or emoting what they are feeling right now. That would save a lot of unnecessary energy on arguing semantics. It is one thing to say someone else's posts is hyperbolic or speculative. But leave the name calling and pigeon holing to the Donald. I'm not convinced anybody here is a complete ideologue and can hear balanced critical arguments on any position. Many here have a #2 candidate just in case.
Disagreeing on a topic and discussing it (then vaping
)is a great thing. If it furthers the discussion and both sides of the argument are challenged. Then good on both of you. The best way to redefine and refine ones own beliefs is to compare it to something different. You might not have changed the other person's opinion, but they might walk away with a clearer understanding of their own and where that fits.
On another note. We all should help Trump with an exit strategy. He could quit the RNC because he felt no love and go independent like he has threatened. We have to remind him often that he is unfit.
Thanks for the information and discussion fellow FCer's. Not as current but some might find the subject relevant.
Secrets of Body Language
There is a small part of me that wants him to shape up and fly right and start acting presidential. But this guy got most of his political attention during his "birther movement'
Remember the Bait and switch tactic he tried to use on Obama with his 'special announcement' that was going to blow the lid off Obama's residency. He got tons of BS press and when the 'special announcment' came it was a sleazy way to draw attention to his 5m offer.
It has been a disruptive and for some stressful campaign season.
Even for the most level headed of politician's. Let's all be better then the people we don't want to elect this term. I come here expecting to hear opinions and facts other than my own. Or why bother?For clarity's sake tho, if people mention whether they are trying having a factual discussion or emoting what they are feeling right now. That would save a lot of unnecessary energy on arguing semantics. It is one thing to say someone else's posts is hyperbolic or speculative. But leave the name calling and pigeon holing to the Donald. I'm not convinced anybody here is a complete ideologue and can hear balanced critical arguments on any position. Many here have a #2 candidate just in case.
Disagreeing on a topic and discussing it (then vaping
)is a great thing. If it furthers the discussion and both sides of the argument are challenged. Then good on both of you. The best way to redefine and refine ones own beliefs is to compare it to something different. You might not have changed the other person's opinion, but they might walk away with a clearer understanding of their own and where that fits.On another note. We all should help Trump with an exit strategy. He could quit the RNC because he felt no love and go independent like he has threatened. We have to remind him often that he is unfit.
Thanks for the information and discussion fellow FCer's. Not as current but some might find the subject relevant.
Secrets of Body Language
MinnBobber
Well-Known Member
...............................................
Not trying to change your mind on this lwien
but IMO some are very much trying to change other's minds here.The "some" are a very small number but very vocal
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
I would LOVE to be able to change some minds or inform some that I think may need it, but I have little expectation of doing so. That is extremely hard in person, and almost impossible online. In most circumstances. There ARE exceptions, but they are not common.
I do like to share information, however, and the receiver can do with it what they wish. I feel better having shared it...
I also think I learn stuff in here all the time.
Last edited:
Magic9
Plant Enthusiast
NYT did an interesting article about the early missteps of the Sanders campaign. (candidate neutral)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0
Seth Abramson wrote an interesting piece on how the Dems. can lose the election. (Pro Sanders)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-...tion_b_9605608.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2016
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/04/us/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0
Seth Abramson wrote an interesting piece on how the Dems. can lose the election. (Pro Sanders)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-...tion_b_9605608.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2016