Who do you think will be the next president of the United States?

@Finn dAbuzz,

It's more likely that Trump will be convicted of fraud in NY than Hillary will be indicted or anyone will resign because of a lack of indictment.

Indictments still require an actual law be broken and evidence of that crime. So far, the actual law says you need a hell of a lot more evidence than anything we have seen or has even been alleged. People keep claiming it is a felony for her to have received classified information by email that wasn't designated classified at the time. The law says no such thing. It isn't a crime to receive it unless you know it is classified and have intent to do something with it like give it to a foreign power.

2 Replies

@roger,

roger wrote:

snood wrote:

blatham wrote:

No easy answer on that one, ci. There's a lot of things swirling around in the mix.

And here's one I think is true, but don't think the MSM can say out loud:
3. Racists, homophobes and misogynists with little education see someone they think is one of them and want him to lead them back into preeminence.

I agree, and am distinctly disturbed with how often I've been agreeing with snood this past several months.

Well! I never! Smile

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

@Finn dAbuzz,
It's more likely that Trump will be convicted of fraud in NY than Hillary will be indicted or anyone will resign because of a lack of indictment.

That Hillary might become subject to some legal action is the right's last remaining hope. And boy are they clinging to that one. It's possible, of course, but the greater likelihood seems as you suggest.

One of the truly ugly tactics the right has developed over the last few decades is the use of constant "investigations" against senior Dem figures. This began with Bill Clinton and they've just carried on because it has propaganda value (creating doubts, riling up the base, filling the media space with negatives). And it will continue until that party regains some civic sanity and responsibility.

3 Replies

@blatham,

What bothers me a great deal is that my brother is a republican even with all these negative reports about the GOP. How can my brother support a racial bigot like Trump?

Quote:

One of the truly ugly tactics the right has developed over the last few decades is the use of constant "investigations" against senior Dem figures.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

I don't expect an indictment but that would certainly qualify.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

What bothers me a great deal is that my brother is a republican even with all these negative reports about the GOP. How can my brother support a racial bigot like Trump?

Amanda Taub at Vox has a terrific piece up that is as explanatory as anything I've come across. I really recommend highly to everyone. (Just as a ps... to the group of academics studying authoritarianism that Taub references, you can add Bob Altemeyer of the University of Manitoba. His work provides the core of John Dean's thesis on authoritarianism in the modern American right in his book Conservatives Without Concience).

Quote:

The Rise of American Authoritarianism
A niche group of political scientists may have uncovered what's driving Donald Trump's ascent. What they found has implications that go well beyond 2016.

... Authoritarians are thought to express much deeper fears than the rest of the electorate, to seek the imposition of order where they perceive dangerous change, and to desire a strong leader who will defeat those fears with force. They would thus seek a candidate who promised these things. And the extreme nature of authoritarians' fears, and of their desire to challenge threats with force, would lead them toward a candidate whose temperament was totally unlike anything we usually see in American politics — and whose policies went far beyond the acceptable norms.

A candidate like Donald Trump."

http://bit.ly/1oRo34K

1 Reply

@blatham,

Let me just add to that last post a note of clarification.

Authoritarianism has a double provenance (it is found in two distinct and complimentary places). One the one hand, it is resident in someone like Trump or Stalin or Rupert Murdoch or the playground bully or that despicable "little Caesar" running your strata council. That is to say, in some individual who manifests the urge to dominate others.

The other aspect or location of the thing is within those people who yearn for such an individual to provide "leadership" (and firm direction and simple answers and who prefer a highly heirarchical social order. Nuance and complexity are unwelcome to such folks).

One can quite easily see how both facets of authoritarianism will tend to rise and gain prominence when the social order is under stress.

1 Reply

@blatham,

I read the piece yesterday and I do think it is insightful.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

How typical of you to base your prediction totally on a work of fiction.

My prediction is hardly based on a work of fiction. It is just that certain doomed characters in that work of fiction resemble the foolishness of today's Liberals.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

I know of absolutely no one who predicted Trump's performance correctly or who even came close.

Hawkeye saw Trump coming long before the first votes were cast.

I didn't see it until the New Hampshire primary results were announced, but have consistently predicted ever since that point that Mr. Trump is going to smash the Democrats so hard that they will be out of the White House for a good 20 years.

0 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

That Hillary might become subject to some legal action is the right's last remaining hope. And boy are they clinging to that one.

Nonsense. The right are about to shut the Democrats out of the White House for 20 straight years.

There are some old school Reaganites who don't like how Mr. Trump is going to reshape the Republican Party, but once the Democrats have been electorally obliterated I suspect most conservatives will come around to liking Mr. Trump a lot more.

blatham wrote:

One of the truly ugly tactics the right has developed over the last few decades is the use of constant "investigations" against senior Dem figures. This began with Bill Clinton and they've just carried on because it has propaganda value (creating doubts, riling up the base, filling the media space with negatives). And it will continue until that party regains some civic sanity and responsibility.

It's really horrible of those mean old Republicans to expect the Democrats to not commit felonies in the White House. What is the world coming to?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You wrote,

Quote:

work of fiction resemble the foolishness of today's Liberals.

Please explain what you mean by "the foolishness of today's liberals?"

0 Replies

@fbaezer,

Quote:

I read the piece yesterday and I do think it is insightful.

You're still a heck of a smart fellow even if you are probably much less handsome these days.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote Oralloy:

Quote:

The right are about to shut the Democrats out of the White House for 20 straight years.

You really are set on this Republican 20 year thing, aren't you?

If the Republicans do win, are you going to go on TV with a 900 number and call yourself Mr. Cleo?

1 Reply

@parados,

Come on Parados. Its a Clinton. they have been breaking laws for 24 years. We just cant prove it. But we'll keep on trying till she is convicted of something.

0 Replies

@blatham,

Or until the {media?} finally realizes they have become an arm of the republican party. Its a throw shyt against the wall to see what shows up tactic.

1 Reply

@Blickers,

Blickers wrote:

You really are set on this Republican 20 year thing, aren't you?

Facts are facts.

Blickers wrote:

If the Republicans do win, are you going to go on TV with a 900 number and call yourself Mr. Cleo?

Is this a reference to psychics?

My prediction is not in any way based on psychic ability. What I am doing is like saying "If you drop a baseball off a cliff, it will fall and hit the ground at the bottom." No psychic ability is involved. It's just straightforward logic and reason.

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

Quote:

Or until the {media?} finally realizes they have become an arm of the republican party.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean to say here. But if you refer to the mainstream media as a functionary of the GOP, that's a charge I'd not agree with.

There are three over-arching analyses I find explanatory. The first, from Chomsky, is that mainstream media does tend to function in support of existing power structures, mainly corporate. The second, from NYU journalism prof Jay Rosen (pressthink.org) is that the mainstream media has evolved a framework for thinking/reporting which presents a posture of objectivity through a mandatory equivalence - "World round say some. Others disagree" The third is the more commonplace observation that media chases conflict and drama (eyeballs, clicks) as a money-making strategy (and they do have to make money to survive).

But perhaps you meant something else.

2 Replies

Kansas has been right for the past 50 years.

Kansas says Bernie. Smile

2 Replies

@Lash,

But Kansas has never seen an election like this one, dear.

0 Replies

Who do you think will be the next president of the United States?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know