Shocking news: Hillary Clinton clinches democratic nomination

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by HeHasTheJazzHands, Jun 6, 2016.

  1. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    The issue with the conservative judges is they aren't as by the book as you'd like to believe either, at least the ones we've had haven't been. They're just pandering to conservatives as well. There have been quite a few conservative majority rulings that I wouldn't consider in the best interest of our citizenry or constitutional.
     
  2. wankerness

    wankerness SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,992
    Likes Received:
    136
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2012
    Location:
    WI
    Fair enough. It's unfortunate that with my local/state elections there often ISN'T any alternative to terrible ones.
     
  3. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I'm in the exact same boat unfortunately and it isn't like I could run my own campaign as it would never gain any traction in Texas (I'm extremely left leaning).

    I wish there was a rule present that required a certain number of votes to legitimize an election. For instance, if less than 60% participate a new election has to be held. That would at least allow not voting to hold some significance and then if anyone did win at least it was with a large number of citizens. There are definitely times when I feel like 'None Of The Above' should be an option. :lol:
     
  4. wankerness

    wankerness SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,992
    Likes Received:
    136
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2012
    Location:
    WI
    I just spent an hour or so reading the comments on the AV club article about the Sarah Silverman thing. That is a serious SJW site with probably about 1/50 of the population republican. Yet, incredibly (to me), I'd say a good 80% of the comments were like "YOU TELL EM SARAH" "BERNIE BROS ARE SUCH SEXIST DBAGS" "EVERYTHING BAD ABOUT HILLARY IS A RIGHT WING LIE I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY ARE PERPETUATING THEM." I now almost want to vote for Trump! The smugness of these people is astounding. It's not even "lesser of two evils," it's "you lost, shut up babies, we won your vote far and square!!" And these are people that would normally be labelled extremely liberal! Mind-blowing.
     
  5. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,787
    Likes Received:
    2,406
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Glad I'm not alone in this observation.
     
  6. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    I think what infuriates me the most about all of this is that we get fairly consistent proof that some rather underhanded things happen, which indirectly lends credence to past indiscretions, yet even the undeniable one's get called out as 'whining' or 'right wing lies'. The FBI did for a fact call Clinton's actions reckless, there is actual proof that the DNC, Clinton and party leaders colluded and behaved unethically (and may have indirectly committed fraud due to donations by not being unbiased and fair as it is required), there are emails and tons of video footage showing her inconsistencies, but they just don't seem to care and, more importantly, some still don't even believe that it is true, or they try to deflect blame on literally anyone else (or change the subject). The hypocrisy is what pisses me off the most. If Sanders did this to Clinton he'd be blacklisted, called a sexist pig trying to keep women down and all sort of hateful thing (hell that was happening when he wasn't even doing anything wrong; thus the birth of the Bernie Bro bull....). He'd be driven out of Washington. That is exactly how many die hard Democrats behave when any Republican has any sort of indiscretion that is uncovered. They want blood...but only when it suits them. The difference for myself is that if it turned out Sanders was a POS I'd turn my back on him in a heart beat. I support the ideas, not the party or the politician. On the other hand, the Clinton supporters I've run into online are gigantic hypocrites. I have some die hard Clinton followers in my family and normally they're pretty cheery about the idea of Clinton becoming president, but even they seem a bit gloomy on the subject. They're loyal to a fault either way though and will continue to shower her in support.

    I don't agree with it, but I do understand the people who feel like Clinton is the last option to stop Trump. However, the people who think she is spotless and that the Democrats and Clinton have been honest, fair, and 100% guilt free are just deluding themselves (same with the people who claim the 'everyone does it' shtick). Sure, some of the past controversies could be BS, but quite a bit of their dirty laundry is simply undeniable and literally in your face. Like with what went down in the Nevada primary. There is mountains upon mountains of footage proving that the DNC was doing something wrong, and the emails prove collusion existed with the media, which explains the Debbie interviews and chair throwing nonsense that followed (one of many numerous attempts to discredit Bernie).

    I'm about as livid as it gets right now. I think I need a couple day's break from politics before I get heart palpitations. :lol:

    ---

    I still find it rather bonkers that when I was campaigning for Bernie I'd be told by Hill Supporters that he won't get anything done, that the president can't act unilaterally, that the president isn't what is important congress is and we should focus our efforts there instead (all for the most part true), but yet these same people will sit here and tell me the end of the world is coming if Trump wins. Mind you this is literally the exact same thing Trump supporters are saying about Hillary on more conservative rags. This is also something people say EVERY single election about the party they oppose and it's pretty much never as bad as it is made out to be because the president is not that powerful.
     
  7. celticelk

    celticelk Enflamed with prayer

    Messages:
    4,382
    Likes Received:
    330
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Those aren't inconsistent positions given that whoever wins the White House, the House of Representatives is still going to be controlled by Republicans, and a Trump win likely also means a Republican-controlled Senate while a Clinton win doesn't guarantee a Democratic-controlled Senate. Ergo, Clinton's initiatives get stonewalled by Congress and Trump's don't. Sure, you can make the argument that Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell will suddenly grow spines and take action to deflect Trump's more outrageous "policy" proposals in the teeth of their political best interests (since a Trump win would probably signal a sea change in the controlling interests of the Republican Party), but I'm not willing to bet the next four years on it.
     
  8. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,787
    Likes Received:
    2,406
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    You unknowingly bring up an important point.

    We're 6 years out from the Republicans taking BOTH houses of Congress, and the Democrats haven't been able to flip either since (despite the Republicans historic low approval ratings, a successful leadership coup in the House and a near successful coup in the Senate). And even this year, 3 full Congressional elections since the flip, and the Democrats are already admitting defeat.

    Why is this the case and how come there appears to be no substantive attempt to change it? By your own admission, Hillary won't be able to do diddly dick with the Congress she's inheriting so what's with just rolling over about it?
     
  9. celticelk

    celticelk Enflamed with prayer

    Messages:
    4,382
    Likes Received:
    330
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    There's a difference between "acknowledging reality" and "rolling over about it"/"admitting defeat." As for why the Democrats haven't succeeded in taking back Congress: Republican control of statehouses in 2010 leading to gerrymandering of Congressional districts; the documented phenomenon whereby voters rate their local Congresscritter much higher than they rate Congress as an institution; lack of Democratic turnout for off-year elections.

    What, exactly, do you think the Democrats should be doing about control of Congress that they aren't already doing?
     
  10. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,787
    Likes Received:
    2,406
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Accusations of gerrymandering are a white-wash. I'm not saying it doesn't exist but it's more complicated than that; especially in a state like NY where corruption trumps party affiliation, although I'd be inclined to believe it's more widespread than just being here.

    My old Congressman was Paul Tonko. While generally liked in his district and usually a 'shoe-in' for his races, he did a lot of really damaging things to the economy to the rural parts of the district. In my town in particular, he was heavily involved with the moving of a factory from there to a more urban area on the other side of his district, resulting in the loss of over 350 jobs to a town of < 3,000 people, decimating the tax base and leaving us with a leviathan of a building literally falling apart in the middle of downtown. And his partners in cementing the move were none other than Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton.

    By total coincidence :)rolleyes:), when the districts were "gerrymandered", magically Paul Tonko district was moved to not include any of the rural areas that were screwed over in his redevelopment deal. If you look at a map of the way the districts were redrawn, they basically drew Tonko's district to primarily cover urban and metropolitan areas where he'd remain safe.

    My current congressman is Chris Gibson, a Republican who won very handily in an angry anti-"Taxin' Tonko" (mind you, Tonko won with a landslide his whole career up to this point) district. All the Democrats who were put up against him were "out of towners" or from more liberal "downstate" pockets like Rhinebeck, who absolutely could not connect with people living in a poor rural area like this.

    Since then, this district hasn't been even remotely competitive in a Congressional race, including little to no resources spent for Democrats here. I didn't see a single lawn sign for an hour in any direction for the last D that they ran, and when I called to ask if I could get any, they said I would have to go to their office 2 1/2 hours away to get one!

    Call me overly cynical, but that doesn't sound like a party making much of an effort to flip districts, even in a "liberal state" like New York. That's all added to the fact that it was rather transparent that pro-corporate Democrats had a hand in redrawing the district to favor them anyway.

    I have a hard time believing they're being any more effective and any less crooked in a lot of these other races, where they weren't even able to push out the widely panned Tea Party losers who did literally nothing for the whole 4 (and now 6) years they've been there.

    If you want to naively place the blame on gerrymandering by state legislatures, maybe the place the party needs to focus on are in state and local races then?
     
  11. wankerness

    wankerness SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,992
    Likes Received:
    136
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2012
    Location:
    WI
    Gerrymandering is a gigantic deal in Wisconsin. I don't have any idea if it is elsewhere. I think right now we're sort of a national laughingstock, though. It's like some kind of weird dystopian right-wing nightmare on a state level.

    https://www.thenation.com/article/the-gops-war-on-voting-is-working/

    The general decline is worse than indicated by the article. It's all very efficient. ALEC hands bills to the legislature and they pass them. The only time they get checked is on plainly stupid s*** with bad optics, like changing the mission statement of the UW system to that of a vocational school. That veterans thing referenced in the article got enough attention that he added that veteran ID to the list of acceptable IDs...AFTER the election, of course.

    The Department of Natural Resources is headed by a former home builder who got pissed off that they put a snake on the threatened species list and cites that as her inspiration for getting into politics. It's a fairytale story of regulatory capture, really. She unfavorably compared DNR scientists to McDonald's employees when she was a manager, who were able to respond to an unexpected busload of patrons.

    Other great things Walker has done include:

    -Removed collective bargaining rights for government workers (except police officers and firemen because they donated to him)
    -Slashed the very good and successful state university system budget by 25% to stick it to tenured professors or something (Walker dropped out of Marquette)
    -Allowed mining in northern Wisconsin despite the DNR protesting because f nature and f people who like to do outdoor recreation
    -requires people on food stamps to be tested for drugs

    Also, he wants to cut $4.5 million per year out of the state parks' budget.

    Both of my parents are music educators, and my mother runs a non-profit for concert series as well. Despite doing this for decades, they don't really feel secure anymore. My sister-in-law also just got her doctorate and is looking for music professor jobs, and she's probably going to have to move to another state to get a job with any security.

    It's going to take a very, very long time for this state to get un-f***ed.
     
  12. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    12,983
    Likes Received:
    1,148
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    Hillary will win the election, one way or the other. I don't think Trump is going to be able to out-cheat her. Neither of these candidates are worth considering. Vote for whomever you want, not just because you should anyway, but because it won't matter going toward who wins and we need to use our voice to tell the powers that be that this kind of bull.... is not okay.
     
  13. Drew

    Drew Forum MVP

    Messages:
    26,348
    Likes Received:
    1,876
    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Somerville, MA
    Well, two things.

    1) The House is probably out of play this year - there just aren't enough Republican seats up in competitive districts - but the Democrats have a realistic shot at flipping the Senate this year.

    2) The House will probably REMAIN out of play until at least 2020, barring some major demographic shifts in the country. States redistrict every 10 years, after each new census, and that process is overseen by the state government. In 2010, the Republican party controlled a majority of governorships and state legislatures, and was able to redraw district maps in such a way to favor Republican candidates. For the Democrats to bring the House back into play, they either need to gain control of enough state governments to get the opportunity to redraw district maps in 2020 to favor their own party, or just hope that demographic changes in the country occur such that previously Republican-friendly maps become more Democratic-friendly.

    Really, I'd rather see the redistricting process taken out of the hands of elected politicians, but that's probably a pipe dream.
     
  14. celticelk

    celticelk Enflamed with prayer

    Messages:
    4,382
    Likes Received:
    330
    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Who says they're not? This ties into one of the other problems that I mentioned: off-year election turn out for Democratic voters is, in relative terms, lower than for Republican voters. Lots of those races are settled in non-presidential-year elections, and so Democrats are already fighting uphill to win them.
     
  15. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Everything that's been uncovered, and covered up, these past weeks has totally reinvigorated my political resolve: the things going on in and outside the DNC, covering up of protests, faux unity chatter, slogan laden speeches, Wikileak leaked emails and voicemail, fraud lawsuits, lack of honest media coverage about all of these things, and so much more, have really put the fire under my belly to get them all thrown out as quickly as possible. Even poor Bernie looked so deflated anytime he was on camera.

    What really grinds my gears is the 'USA' chanting the DNC incited, and other ridiculous chants, to drown out protesters saying No More Wars. Everyone who spoke on foreign affairs sounded so Republican it is dumbfounding ("We're number one","We're going to destroy them","Patriotism blah blah blah"). To then silence dissent with chants of "USA!USA!USA!" is just gross and borderline fascist sounding. They did a lot more than that, but that's more than enough for the time being. Democrats are currently giving liberals a bad name and so far more look to be on their way out the back door. I don't expect it to make any difference though. Corruption runs deep in politics.

    I'll be happy to post videos and articles to different things if people are interested, but I don't want to drown out my point with a tldr post. :lol:
     

Share This Page