All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[CSTowle]

She knows how to make friends with deep pockets and funnel their money downstream to make more deals, that much is certain. And she's certainly benefiting from the name-brand recognition that comes from being the spouse of a former President, that much is true. So she probably has her goal of being the nominee covered, getting her one step closer this time to her ultimate goal of being President like her husband.

And her supporters are understandably giddy over that fact. But why is it you need to prompt them with questions to get them to talk about what she'd actually do with the power of the Presidency? Why is it the responses are often vague, and tempered with phrases like "it'll be hard for anyone to get anything done" and "we need to be practical about what can be accomplished" (in other words, don't expect much)? Does anyone have any actual enthusiasm for the candidate at all?

Other than the idea that in theory it'll be nice to finally have a woman sitting in the office (and really, if that's the extent of it that's sort of sad), but considering that could be accomplished with a Carly Fiorina or Sarah Palin I'm sure most would agree that's at best a side benefit to what should be the main goal.

So instead it's insults, trying to tear Bernie down by saying he's not pure enough (the only ones with purity tests in this primary are Hillary supporters, I'm still waiting on her to pass an adequacy test and can't be bothered to put her to a test I know she's already failed at), doesn't care enough about minorities or women (nevermind Hillary hasn't stepped up to a fight that didn't directly benefit her since being slapped down on Healthcare 25 years ago and likely never will again, it's cool because she never said she would so yay?), doesn't know how to play the game with behind-the-scenes players, doesn't know how to get in bed with Wall Street and big business so he can funnel their money downstream and corrupt even more of them in the process.

Anything at all but having a plan of her own, of standing up and fighting on her own, of doing anything but slinging as much s##t as she can at everyone in eyesight until they're all as disgusting as she is and she has the advantage because that's where the Clintons live. I hope you folks in the Hillary camp enjoy the next six months, and if it comes to that the next 4-8 years. It'll be on you, but I'll be proud to say I had no part in that mess.

[Tami]

According to Sanders supporters you don't need polls, national ads, or political allies to win a Presidential election

just good intentions and a can-do attitude

Might work in Fantasia, but in the Real World it doesn't work that way. Even fi he somehow made it to the White House, without clear support from the DNC he's going to be a lamest of Lame Duck Presidents ever. [And I only mean lame in the political sense of not being able to get anything done].

[Kevinroc]

The average of the last three polls for New York gives HRC a 13.3 percent lead over New York born Sanders.

In California, it's 9.5

These polls have to be really, really wrong to preserve Sanders' hypothetical chances to stay in the game.

It's all about preserving the narrative of there still being a primary race.

[Brigonos Chomhgaill]

"I wake up every day, right here, right in the politics thread and it's always February 2nd, and there's nothing I can do about it."

[Tami]

What the Dennis Hastert Documents Reveal About Sexual Abuse Allegations

Four boys

The court papers detail accusations by four men, described as "victims" by prosecutors, who say they were molested.

Hastert played victim card

After his illegal bank withdrawals attracted the scrutiny of investigators, Hastert lied about why he was taking out the money and then later had his lawyer contact them to report he was "the victim of an extortion plot" involving a bogus sexual abuse claim by Individual A.

The FBI had Hastert record conversations with Individual A but found that his interactions with the ex-pol "were inconsistent with someone committing extortion."

The former student didn't make any threats to pressure Hastert to come up with money more quickly and revealed that he had wanted a lawyer to broker a legal "agreement" but Hastert refused.

"Individual A said people 'buy their way out of trouble' all the time and there had to be a way to do it," prosecutors said.

This would have made for a very strange episode of Law & Order or a similar program. Even worse that's it's real life.

[Tami]

Sanders vs. Clinton: Who's qualified to be president?

An opinion piece, but one I found interesting.

Does either one of them have a case? The truth is that both of them are perfectly qualified to be president, at least by the standards of those who have occupied the office before. But they would bring very different styles to the office.

Clinton has not only been a senator and a Cabinet secretary (not to mention a particularly involved first lady), but also is without question the wonkiest person running this year. She won't need a refresher on almost any issue area she'll have to confront as president. Sanders, in contrast, is a politician motivated much more by a broad vision than by the details of policy. That's evident not just in his campaign but in his entire career.

[Jabare]

Asher Edelman, who inspired the Gordon “greed is good” Gekko character in Oliver Stone’s Wall Street films, was asked who he supported for president on CNBC’s Fast Money program.

Considered one of the Godfathers of Wall Street, Edelman explained that the democratic socialist from Vermont is the straight-forward choice, given his economic platform.

When you have the top one percent getting money, they spend 5-10 percent of what they earn,” said Edelman. “When you have the lower end of the economy getting money, they spend a 100, or 110 percent of what they earn. As you’ve had a transfer of wealth to the top, and a transfer of income to the top, you have a shrinking consumer base, basically, and you have a shrinking velocity of money.”

[Shawn Hopkins]

"I wake up every day, right here, right in the politics thread and it's always February 2nd, and there's nothing I can do about it."

Have you even TRIED to find true love?

I'm beginning to be disappointed in Bernie Sanders. Not enough to not vote for him, but enough to ask some questions. Such as: How much money has he raised for Democrats down-ballot? They can't all be corrupt. And Bernie can't start the revolution alone. He needs allies, and for that he needs to cut a few deals.

Sweet fuck-all. Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat, he's a "Democratic candidate."

[Mister Mets]

none, and he has no big name party allies

Tusli Gabbard was one of the DNC Vice-Chairs, and is considered one of the party's most promising members of Congress.

I'm beginning to be disappointed in Bernie Sanders. Not enough to not vote for him, but enough to ask some questions. Such as: How much money has he raised for Democrats down-ballot? They can't all be corrupt. And Bernie can't start the revolution alone. He needs allies, and for that he needs to cut a few deals.

A Socialist candidate is going to be less likely to try to raise money for downballot candidates.

Although this does tie into Sanders' views on what people should spend money on. When he was Mayor of Burlington, he was against charity of any kind, because that was government's job.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...-drop-dead.php

[Tami]

I don't think Wyoming has very many Democrats. Watching the returns and its' more interesting than I thought it would be.

[Jabare]

anyone else aware of these Krystal Ball videos from 2014?





I've come across 3 so far? Surprised MSNBC ok'd this

[Tami]

Surprised with MSNBC as well.

As expected, Sanders won Wyoming, but it was a lot closer than I expected.

Looks like the delegates are going to be split nearly 50-50 7/6 split.

[Brigonos Chomhgaill]

It would be hard not to be surprised by any result from Wyoming, as the polling was nonexistent for the state. Basically everyone from CNN to the AP just went "fuck it, it probably breaks down the same as Kansas" because they both have cowboys.

[Tami]

It would be hard not to be surprised by any result from Wyoming, as the polling was nonexistent for the state. Basically everyone from CNN to the AP just went "fuck it, it probably breaks down the same as Kansas" because they both have cowboys.

Based on the WP primary page, many counties in Wyoming only have like 2 democrats each, and many of those counties split 50-50. Not used to numbers that small.

[The S0/\/\@7ic Si/\/\[]Dl370n]

Sort of a GamerGate style, Reddit-era meanness and a greater tendency for harassment. An Obama Boy was just an aggressive mansplainer, he wouldn't go straight to calling a woman he disagreed with a cunt or clitrash. They both actually existed, too. You don't really believe there are no sexists among liberals or that someone trying to be the first female President or her supporters would never face a sexist attack, do you?

No.

"Obama Boys" and "Bernie Bros" are an exercise in using a broad brush to paint an entire group as doing something while pretending the other "side" isn't engaging in the same thing:

https://pivotamerica.com/ironically-...xist-comments/

...or an example of pretending that this behavior isn't applicable to supporters of every candidate past or present and that this isn't a common phenomenon of primaries and general elections, all the while using a few trolls from one "side" to engage in this labeling (Seriously, who gives a fuck about Reddit?) to either attack an opposing candidate in a form of guilt-by-association or to deflect legitimate criticism.

Sure "Obama Boys" and "Bernie Bros" and "Bernistas" exist. But, as the link above points out, "Bros" and "-nistas" exist for EVERY candidate. The question is who ends up recieving the labeling vs. the other.

The above one of the many methods of guilt-tripping people in regards to supporting a particular candidate, outside of issues and policy.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/reade...409-story.html

What really pisses me off is when this labeling and broad-brushing is perpetuated by a campaign itself or it's surrogates:

http://www.ibtimes.com/bernie-bros-o...-clash-2300707

That ends up effectively being a campaign attacking an opposing candidate's supporters instead of focusing on that candidate.