80
   

When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

 
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 07:48 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Interesting graph, bobsal. I think we can refer to it as the "sociopath curve".
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 07:50 am
From Robert Kagan
Quote:
"In all likelihood, {Trump's] defects will destroy him before he reaches the White House. He will bring himself down, and he will bring the Republican Party and its leaders down with him. This would be a tragedy were it not that the party and its leaders, who chose him as their nominee and who now cover and shill for this troubled man, so richly deserve their fate."
http://wapo.st/2aFHzwL
revelette2
 
  3  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 07:51 am
@blatham,
Well, lets hope you are right. In spite of the polls, I admit I live in daily fear Trump will be president precisely because it seems so unlikely.
blatham
 
  1  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 08:25 am
@revelette2,
Yes, there's good cause for fear of that result, as unlikely as I see it. And you aren't alone. Everyone with a functioning brain stem shares the anxiety.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 08:30 am
Over the years, Josh Marshall and team at Talking Points Memo have concentrated on one issue probably more than any other - the GOP scam of voter fraud leading to promotion of voter obstruction laws. Which makes this piece worth your time...
Quote:
Five Points On The Big Court Losses For GOP Vote Suppressors
http://bit.ly/2aFOW7y
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 08:44 am
If you are going to read anything today, read this.

Quote:
Avik Roy is a Republican’s Republican. A health care wonk and editor at Forbes, he has worked for three Republican presidential hopefuls — Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and Marco Rubio. Much of his adult life has been dedicated to advancing the Republican Party and conservative ideals.

But when I caught up with Roy at a bar just outside the Republican convention, he said something I’ve never heard from an establishment conservative before: The Grand Old Party is going to die.

“I don’t think the Republican Party and the conservative movement are capable of reforming themselves in an incremental and gradual way,” he said. “There’s going to be a disruption.”

Roy isn’t happy about this: He believes it means the Democrats will dominate national American politics for some time. But he also believes the Republican Party has lost its right to govern, because it is driven by white nationalism rather than a true commitment to equality for all Americans.

“Until the conservative movement can stand up and live by that principle, it will not have the moral authority to lead the country,” he told me

...“I think the conservative movement is fundamentally broken,” Roy tells me. “Trump is not a random act. This election is not a random act.”.
http://bit.ly/2aFREtN
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  4  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 09:03 am
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

Hillary Clinton violated federal law that's a fact. The law does not require intent that's a fact. Lois Lerner violated the law that's a fact. The fact that neither of these people were prosecuted does not take away from the facts... That they both violated the law.
Hillary lied to the American public and to the relatives of the victims of Benghazi that's a fact. So Hillary is a liar. These facts cannot be disputed. Just because somebody is not charged with a crime doesn't mean that they didn't commit the crime. All it means is they were given political cover by not being charged.



I thought you required "evidence that you'd based your life on" before you make judgement on someone's guilt.

That's the standard you've stated you employ when dealing with Trump.
maporsche
 
  4  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 09:05 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

Nope, Caddell used the term 'cooked.'

We used to marvel and feel so superior to Russians, wondering why they'd tolerate a state-sponsored media. Things are devolving pretty rapidly.


Have you given up the pretense of supporting liberal policies yet?
izzythepush
 
  3  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 09:06 am
@maporsche,
He just requires something that fits in with his preconceived notions and supports his prejudice.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  4  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 09:08 am
@maporsche,
I have Lash on ignore, but if you really want an example of a supine state controlled media you can't far wrong by looking at the American Media in the run up to the illegal war in Iraq. That was the nadir.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 09:16 am
@maporsche,
The fact that she violated federal law is Undisputed the director of the FBI has said so he also stated that she lied he swore to this under oath... He did not recommend a charge against her because he said no one has ever been charged under that particular statue... The fact that she wasn't charged does not mean that she didn't violate the law it only means the exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to charge.
maporsche
 
  4  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 09:17 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Actually the people denouncing Trump due to Democratic demagogy are cowards. The brave people are the ones standing up to DNC hate and saying that Trump is in the right.


It's completely logical to hold positions of a) hating the DNC, b) wanting Trump to lose, and c) voting for Clinton to bring about said Trump loss.

THAT is brave.
Blickers
 
  3  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 10:14 am
@giujohn,
Quote giujohn:
Quote:
The fact that she violated federal law is Undisputed the director of the FBI has said so he also stated that she lied he swore to this under oath... He did not recommend a charge against her because he said no one has ever been charged under that particular statue... The fact that she wasn't charged does not mean that she didn't violate the law it only means the exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to charge.

Don't you feel ridiculous parsing these tiny differences between violate the law, having intent to do something to violate the law and declining to charge when the whole purpose of national security is to prevent Russia from gaining an advantage on us? Meanwhile your boy Trump wants to disband NATO and leave all of Eastern Europe unprotected so that Russian tanks can just roll in and take over.

When you argue national security, it's like you want to argue about re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Trump is that big of a national security disaster.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 10:28 am
@Blickers,
From Politifact: "While Clinton may have technical arguments for why she complied with each of these and the other rules that have been discussed in the news, the argument that Clinton complied with the letter and spirit of the law is unsustainable," said Douglas Cox, a law professor at City University of New York who studies records preservation.
Blickers
 
  3  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 10:36 am
@cicerone imposter,
By now it has been established that Clinton did not comply with the letter of the law, though she thought her Email security setup did. Regardless, the whole reason we have any type of national security setup at all is primarily to prevent Russia, the second largest military power in the world, from gaining an advantage on us which they will immediately turn into putting those Eastern European countries they held in subjugation until 1991 back into subjugation. That's over 100 Million people.

With Trump talking about disbanding NATO and letting Eastern and Western Europe stand undefended against Russian forces moving back in, talking about whether the evidence is sufficient that Hillary's Email server was hacked by Russians doesn't make much sense. Trump wants to turn all of Eastern, and possibly Western, Europe over to the Russians-that's our national security threat right there, not stupid Emails.
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 12:20 pm
I noted above that, given a Hillary win in the election, we can expect Republicans to claim that the election gives Hillary no mandate to forward the policies she has laid out because voters voted only to keep Trump out of office. This will be their means/rationale to declare her win illegitimate.

Trump is now pushing a similar idea, though for different reasons. He (and allies) are paving the way to protect his frightened-little-boy ego (and his brand) through claims that the election will likely be rigged (now that polling is moving towards a likely sustained divergence in her favor).

That Trump would run this scam is predictable, of course. But the first scam from Republicans is equally predictable. And if anyone wishes to make a wager on either of my predictions, I'm in.

This is deeply irresponsible, in both cases. But the Republican case is far more serious because it is institutional.

cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 01:56 pm
@blatham,
They don't even have to do that. They have gridlocked congress for a few years now, and they're going to continue as long as they can.
It's up to the American voters to elect some other people who will promise not to gridlock congress, and work towards compromise.
They are screwing our children and grandchildren by their childish behavior.

I don't give it much hope.
blatham
 
  2  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 02:14 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Congress is held mainly as a consequence of redistricting. I don't see how that changes in any immediate way but if the down ballot races reflect what I'm guessing will be the results in Nov, the Rs will lose seats and that helps.

On the negative side, I suspect that for some time, the GOP will go further right (as the Cantor types are increasingly rejected for serious extremist of the Freedom Caucus variety) they'll become even more intractable.

The Koch crowd, as their weekend parlay demonstrates, are pushing their money and considerable organizational clout down ballot, particularly to try and hold the Senate. We'll have to wait until Nov to find out how this all shakes out.

After that, our best hope is for enough voices on the right come to similar realizations as Roy (noted above). Another WH loss along with another big loss in the popular vote ought to help. No easy fix. This is deeply institutionalized now.

cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 02:20 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
I'm guessing will be the results in Nov, the Rs will lose seats and that helps.


I can only hope you are right. Otherwise, we'll continue to see the protracted, nonperforming, congress.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Tue 2 Aug, 2016 02:24 pm
Garrison Keillor
Quote:
We made our mistakes back in the 20th century, Lord knows, but we never nominated a man for president who brags about not reading. Calvin Coolidge had his limits. Warren G. Harding spent more time on his hair than strictly necessary. Lyndon Baines Johnson was a piece of work. But all of them read books. When I envision a Trump Presidential Library, I see enormous chandeliers and gold carpet and a thousand slot machines. God help us. I mean it. We’re in trouble down here.
http://wapo.st/2aGEr3N
 

Related Topics

The Pro Hillary Thread - Discussion by snood
get this woman out of my view/politics - Discussion by ossobuco
Hillary Clinton hospitalized - Discussion by jcboy
Has Hillary's Time Come? - Discussion by Phoenix32890
I WANT HILLARY TO RUN IN 2012 - Discussion by farmerman
Hillary's The Secretary Of State..It's Official - Discussion by Bi-Polar Bear
Hillary the "JOKESTER"?? - Discussion by woiyo
Hillary Rebuked by Iraqi Leader - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 01/29/2025 at 02:38:43