The General Election

[zoogs]

There's this persistent theme of if voters simply knew better, there wouldn't be two camps. And I disagree.

 

Voters are more fractured in other countries, but are they more educated or rational in France or Austria? Do voters here not know what they are doing by comparison? I don't think so.

 

Here's my thesis: there aren't two camps in America. There's an abundance of them, each fiercely devoted to their ideologies. The things we call "parties" here are alliances among these groups that, as we've seen, periodically fracture and reorder.

 

Socialists don't vote Democratic because they don't bother to learn about the other parties that do exist. They do so because on their own, they're not numerous. The minute they form an alliance, the resulting candidates no longer completely represent them. But if they don't, they lose the ability to influence a unified platform.

 

So yes, better education and more resources would be a great thing. But the way Americans organize politically, and the ways new movements gain traction and assert themselves (i.e, using existing structures), is the product of more rationalism than is being given credit here. Which isn't to say it's not flawed, by any means. It's slow, opaque, and awfully rigid.

[zoogs]

An alternate view on moderatism: what if we, the mostly well-educated middle-class American-looking folks who have time to talk collegiate sports online, are the gilded elites? The ones completely out of touch with the American mainstream?

 

To be a moderate in this - our - group is to tack heavily to lofty, noble, deeply learned ideals. We reject the popular movements of the country as the gaspings of fools.

 

But what if the average American isn't all that bothered with all that? What if clashing schools of public policy are "the fray", not the common sensibilities of wanting protection from foreign attackers, immigrants, and industries?

 

In this view, they're the nonpartisan center that hasn't had much representation until Donald Trump. For our part, we continue to think they shouldn't get represented -- or that if they would only receive our wisdom, they'd assist in our more highbrow agitations.

[HuskerNation1]

 

In other news, it looks like Bernie is once again leaving the Democratic Party and classifying himself as an Independent. He ran as a Democratic socialist for POTUS but I'm sure the fact that the Democratic party completely screwed him over makes him want to run as far away as possible from the word "Democrat."

 

http://heatst.com/politics/bernie-sanders-leaves-the-democratic-party/

So BNL- I'm assuming seeing the pattern and volume of your posts that your are a lifelong Dem? Guessing you have a Hillary bumpersticker on the car?

Yes, my bumper stickers reads "Please elect crooked Hillary"

 

[HuskerNation1]

I've been traveling all day and have not had a chance to post, but it's comical looking at some of the posts on here about Trump's Russian remarks in his ONE-HOUR press conference. First off, when was the last time Hillary gave a lengthy press conference. Trump timed this press conference to steal some of the thunder from the DNC, and the media is besides itself with his request of the Russians to find Hillary's 33,000 deleted emails. For those that think Trump is a dumb guy, he's a master at manipulating the media. I spent the entire GOP primary process opposed to his antics and approach and by the end realized he's campaigning in a totally different way than any of us are accustomed to. Moreover, its puts the email scandal back in the news, and as Charles Krauthammer and others have pointed out, the Dems fell right into his trap: (Note-Krauthammer is not a huge Trump fan and never has been)

 

 

Instead of talking about Bill's speech last night, we are all now talking about Wikileaks and tying it to Hillary's email scandal. If Russia actually had such emails, it would be damaging for Hillary in potentially two ways:

 

1. It would require that all the emails were about wedding planning and completely unimportant information.

 

2. It would show that Hillary did compromise our country's best interests by allowing hackers into her private email server.

And another article citing how Hillarys team fell for the trap.

 

http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/27/donald-trump-just-got-hillary-clinton-to-admit-her-e-mails-are-a-national-security-issue/

[HuskerNation1]

I am certain Hillary will get a rebound bounce, but I am perplexed why she hasnt stopped Trumps growing numbers in the LA Times daily tracking poll yet. This poll is in a seven day rolling average, and Trumps numbers have gone up during the first 3 days of the DNC, not down. I would have expected the numbers to have gone down by now. I do think you will see them shrink by tomorrow but we shall see.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/

[TGHusker]

 

I've been traveling all day and have not had a chance to post, but it's comical looking at some of the posts on here about Trump's Russian remarks in his ONE-HOUR press conference. First off, when was the last time Hillary gave a lengthy press conference. Trump timed this press conference to steal some of the thunder from the DNC, and the media is besides itself with his request of the Russians to find Hillary's 33,000 deleted emails. For those that think Trump is a dumb guy, he's a master at manipulating the media. I spent the entire GOP primary process opposed to his antics and approach and by the end realized he's campaigning in a totally different way than any of us are accustomed to. Moreover, its puts the email scandal back in the news, and as Charles Krauthammer and others have pointed out, the Dems fell right into his trap: (Note-Krauthammer is not a huge Trump fan and never has been)

 

 

Instead of talking about Bill's speech last night, we are all now talking about Wikileaks and tying it to Hillary's email scandal. If Russia actually had such emails, it would be damaging for Hillary in potentially two ways:

 

1. It would require that all the emails were about wedding planning and completely unimportant information.

 

2. It would show that Hillary did compromise our country's best interests by allowing hackers into her private email server.

And another article citing how Hillarys team fell for the trap.

 

http://thefederalist.com/2016/07/27/donald-trump-just-got-hillary-clinton-to-admit-her-e-mails-are-a-national-security-issue/

 

And linked within the article is the story on how Dem Sen Ted Kennedy asked the Soviets to get involved in trying to unseat Reagan in the 84 election. Talk about meddling - this makes the Trump statement look like child's play.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/10/ted-kennedy-secretly-asked-the-soviets-to-intervene-in-the-1984-elections/

 

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/kgb-letter-details-kennedy-offer-to-ussr

[Moiraine]

I am certain Hillary will get a rebound bounce, but I am perplexed why she hasnt stopped Trumps growing numbers in the LA Times daily tracking poll yet. This poll is in a seven day rolling average, and Trumps numbers have gone up during the first 3 days of the DNC, not down. I would have expected the numbers to have gone down by now. I do think you will see them shrink by tomorrow but we shall see.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/

 

Trump's RNC bump didn't start until after the RNC convention. If Hillary gets one it probably won't show up until after the DNC convention.

[BigRedBuster]

 

You are assuming everyone looks at issues and makes educated decisions.

And you are assuming that if only they did, they'd vote for various minor parties catering to niche slices of the electorate.

 

I'm sure you know these people better than I do, but I don't think you're giving their argument enough credit. The reality is this country has shaped itself into these two coalitions. No, the negotiated party platforms don't represent every wing of each coalition equally well, and in some cases it barely represents them at all. Nonetheless, those are the options we as voters with particular preferences in a country where millions of other people have different ones, are left with.

 

If these coalitions realigned, then we'd all have a different decision calculus. That seems completely fair.

 

For example: traditionally, libertarians probably voted for Republican candidates. That would've been thinking about issues, not abandoning their views, but taking a strategic view of the choices that existed.

 

No, that's not really what I'm assuming. Why do you claim it's a "niche slice"?

 

This whole thing with just Rs and Ds have the ability to be President is just ridiculous. Look at the British. They have many different parties that bring different view points to the table. Why is it set in stone that the US can only have two? Well, I believe the answer to that's two fold.

 

a) The Rs and Ds right now have all the power and therefore all the political money and political press. They have a vested interest in not allowing a third party to take hold. They will do whatever it takes to squash that movement.

 

b) The voters are brainwashed into thinking everyone else that isn't an R or D is just a pesky little candidate with no real views on anything....or.....they only really care about one or two issues they want to make noise about.

 

That simply doesn't have to be the case. But, the only way that is going to change is if the voters revolt and force the issue. Problem is, the Rs and Ds will fight tooth and nail (while smiling at the camera) to prevent it. It's sad that millions of Americans just follow those two parties along like lemmings and we end up with the pathetic two candidates we have right now.

[BigRedBuster]

There's this persistent theme of if voters simply knew better, there wouldn't be two camps. And I disagree.

 

Voters are more fractured in other countries, but are they more educated or rational in France or Austria? Do voters here not know what they are doing by comparison? I don't think so.

 

Here's my thesis: there aren't two camps in America. There's an abundance of them, each fiercely devoted to their ideologies. The things we call "parties" here are alliances among these groups that, as we've seen, periodically fracture and reorder.

 

Socialists don't vote Democratic because they don't bother to learn about the other parties that do exist. They do so because on their own, they're not numerous. The minute they form an alliance, the resulting candidates no longer completely represent them. But if they don't, they lose the ability to influence a unified platform.

 

So yes, better education and more resources would be a great thing. But the way Americans organize politically, and the ways new movements gain traction and assert themselves (i.e, using existing structures), is the product of more rationalism than is being given credit here. Which isn't to say it's not flawed, by any means. It's slow, opaque, and awfully rigid.

That's all fine and dandy......until parties decide who their candidate is going to be behind the scenes and squash candidates with slightly differing views. When that happens, the reordering of political views are prevented from happening because of a few power brokers that don't want it to happen.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

I am certain Hillary will get a rebound bounce, but I am perplexed why she hasnt stopped Trumps growing numbers in the LA Times daily tracking poll yet. This poll is in a seven day rolling average, and Trumps numbers have gone up during the first 3 days of the DNC, not down. I would have expected the numbers to have gone down by now. I do think you will see them shrink by tomorrow but we shall see.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/

Trump's RNC bump didn't start until after the RNC convention. If Hillary gets one it probably won't show up until after the DNC convention.

Well and it depends on the poll. Rasmussens poll just out now shows no bump for Trump at all in the past week. I've never seen more variance among major polling groups in any election cycle.

[TGHusker]

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/libertarian-party-grows-gop-disaster/2016/07/27/id/740892/

 

Libertarian party - on the move but can they reach 15% to get into the debates??

 

One poster posted the following after the article and I thought it was worth reposting:

 

Jeff • 14 hours ago

What is a libertarian? Here is my definition:

A libertarian is for the transfer of authority from the state to the individual. In exchange for that transfer, the individual will then be responsible for themselves. They will either succeed or fail based on their own effort.

A libertarian is for minimal government. Minimal taxes. And minimal involvement in world affairs. Note that I'm not saying "No Involvement". There is a difference. And that is the difference between an anarchist and a libertarian.

A libertarian is for free markets. Markets dictate the value of goods and services not some arbitrary value selected by someone in government. No more minimum wage. No more price controls. The markets will pick the winners and the losers.

A libertarian is for free will. You have the freedom to select your own lifestyle. Yes, that means gay..even gay marriage. But it also means christian bakeries that can operate unmolested. It means the end to mind numbing and court clogging frivolous lawsuits.

If I were to have to decide, I would tell you that I am more of a libertarian than I am of anything else. I don't personally care what you do in your life as long as it doesn't involve me. I am personally creeped out watching two guys kiss in public. You know what my response is? I look the other way. I find abortion to be abhorrent and would advise my daughters against it. But I don't think we make it unlawful whereby we throw the mother, the doctor, and anyone else involved in jail. That's the libertarian view. You can have an opinion. You can voice your opinion. But once you beg the government to impose your opinions onto someone who doesn't share them...then you are no longer living the ideals of libertarianism...or this country.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

I am certain Hillary will get a rebound bounce, but I am perplexed why she hasnt stopped Trumps growing numbers in the LA Times daily tracking poll yet. This poll is in a seven day rolling average, and Trumps numbers have gone up during the first 3 days of the DNC, not down. I would have expected the numbers to have gone down by now. I do think you will see them shrink by tomorrow but we shall see.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/

Trump's RNC bump didn't start until after the RNC convention. If Hillary gets one it probably won't show up until after the DNC convention.

Well and it depends on the poll. Rasmussens poll just out now shows no bump for Trump at all in the past week. I've never seen more variance among major polling groups in any election cycle.

Correction...Rasmussens poll I just referenced was not a full week rolling average but was done Tuesdsay and Wednesday of this week so it would incorporate the DNC convention. The LA Times is a 7 day rolling average with a huge sample of likely voters.

[Savage Husker]

Both candidates suck, one talks out of both sides of their mouth, the other with a foot in their mouth, but this broad is the real life version of Claire Underwood and her track record speaks for itself. The ineptitude of this individual is glaring. Passed along from a friend:

 

If you're under 50 you really need to read this. If you’re over 50, you lived through it, so share it with those under 50. Amazing to me how much I had forgotten!

 

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

 

Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as “my worst mistake.” Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.

 

Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovery of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.

 

Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

 

Many younger votes will have no knowledge of “Travelgate.” Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.

 

Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.

 

Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.

 

Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the #$%$ eruption” and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle were:

 

She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.

 

She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.

 

After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.

 

Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

 

Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.

 

After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen.

 

What a swell party – ready for another four or eight year of this type of low-life mess?

 

Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next.

 

But to her loyal fans (supporters) - I guess in her own words “what difference does it make?”

[knapplc]

Both candidates suck, one talks out of both sides of their mouth, the other with a foot in their mouth, but this broad is the real life version of Claire Underwood and her track record speaks for itself. The ineptitude of this individual is glaring. Passed along from a friend:

 

If you're under 50 you really need to read this. If you’re over 50, you lived through it, so share it with those under 50. Amazing to me how much I had forgotten!

 

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

 

Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as “my worst mistake.” Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.

 

Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovery of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.

 

Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

 

Many younger votes will have no knowledge of “Travelgate.” Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.

 

Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.

 

Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.

 

Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the #$%$ eruption” and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle were:

 

She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.

 

She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.

 

After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.

 

Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

 

Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.

 

After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen.

 

What a swell party – ready for another four or eight year of this type of low-life mess?

 

Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next.

 

But to her loyal fans (supporters) - I guess in her own words “what difference does it make?”

 

The sad thing is, even if every line of that is true, Hillary is a better choice than Trump.

[huKSer]

 

Both candidates suck, one talks out of both sides of their mouth, the other with a foot in their mouth, but this broad is the real life version of Claire Underwood and her track record speaks for itself. The ineptitude of this individual is glaring. Passed along from a friend:

 

If you're under 50 you really need to read this. If you’re over 50, you lived through it, so share it with those under 50. Amazing to me how much I had forgotten!

 

When Bill Clinton was president, he allowed Hillary to assume authority over a health care reform. Even after threats and intimidation, she couldn’t even get a vote in a democratic controlled congress. This fiasco cost the American taxpayers about $13 million in cost for studies, promotion, and other efforts.

 

Then President Clinton gave Hillary authority over selecting a female attorney general. Her first two selections were Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood – both were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. Next she chose Janet Reno – husband Bill described her selection as “my worst mistake.” Some may not remember that Reno made the decision to gas David Koresh and the Branch Davidian religious sect in Waco, Texas resulting in dozens of deaths of women and children.

 

Husband Bill allowed Hillary to make recommendations for the head of the Civil Rights Commission. Lani Guanier was her selection. When a little probing led to the discovery of Ms. Guanier’s radical views, her name had to be withdrawn from consideration.

 

Apparently a slow learner, husband Bill allowed Hillary to make some more recommendations. She chose former law partners Web Hubbel for the Justice Department, Vince Foster for the White House staff, and William Kennedy for the Treasury Department. Her selections went well: Hubbel went to prison, Foster (presumably) committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

 

Many younger votes will have no knowledge of “Travelgate.” Hillary wanted to award unfettered travel contracts to Clinton friend Harry Thompson – and the White House Travel Office refused to comply. She managed to have them reported to the FBI and fired. This ruined their reputations, cost them their jobs, and caused a thirty-six month investigation. Only one employee, Billy Dale was charged with a crime, and that of the enormous crime of mixing personal and White House funds. A jury acquitted him of any crime in less than two hours.

 

Still not convinced of her ineptness, Hillary was allowed to recommend a close Clinton friend, Craig Livingstone, for the position of Director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of about 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, suddenly Hillary and the president denied even knowing Livingstone, and of course, denied knowledge of drug use in the White House.

 

Following this debacle, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office after more than thirty years of service to seven presidents.

 

Next, when women started coming forward with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Bill Clinton, Hillary was put in charge of the #$%$ eruption” and scandal defense. Some of her more notable decisions in the debacle were:

 

She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit. After the Starr investigation they settled with Ms. Jones.

 

She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor.

 

After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.

 

Hillary’s devious game plan resulted in Bill losing his license to practice law for 'lying under oath' to a grand jury and then his subsequent impeachment by the House of Representatives.

 

Hillary avoided indictment for perjury and obstruction of justice during the Starr investigation by repeating, “I do not recall,” “I have no recollection,” and “I don’t know” a total of 56 times while under oath.

 

After leaving the White House, Hillary was forced to return an estimated $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork that she had stolen.

 

What a swell party – ready for another four or eight year of this type of low-life mess?

 

Now we are exposed to the destruction of possibly incriminating emails while Hillary was Secretary of State and the “pay to play” schemes of the Clinton Foundation – we have no idea what shoe will fall next.

 

But to her loyal fans (supporters) - I guess in her own words “what difference does it make?”

 

The sad thing is, even if every line of that is true, Hillary is a better choice than Trump.

 

 

And Johnson is better than either

 

EDIT: I am a Republican, not a Libertarian. I am voting for the best person for the position, not the party or its policy. Iif any other Republican running for President won the nomination I would be voting Republican. This is the first election that character "trumps" policy for my choice.