Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 08:34pm PT
|
I think that the madness is the sorts of candidates that either party can put up. The list you offered is far from great. Bernie is quite unique insofar as he is both experienced AND not an "establishment" candidate.
Had the list of candidates for both parties included all and only people like Bernie, then we the people could choose among fine points of ideology rather than something closer to "who's going to screw us over marginally less?"
The madness is in the fact that the above question is the one that drives us.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 08:40pm PT
|
That's your hypothesis.. The screwing over less part.
I'm happy with my choice and not worried about getting screwed over.
Then again, I don't believe a big sea change is possible. I'm happy with incremental progress in the right direction.
And even though they I am not voting for him in June, I like Bernie and think he would bring about that incremental change, too.
And I doubt it will change your mind, but you're should read this.
http://www.sfgate.com/nation/article/Charges-seen-as-unlikely-in-Clinton-email-case-6970736.php
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 08:46pm PT
|
It's not madness, it's called democracy.
actually, isn't it called republicy ( yeah yeah, that's not a word but you get my point).
crank - i generally agree with you but I do at times want to offer a word of caution as to how sure you are Hillary will get to January unscathed. My teacher offers a pretty simple idea - it's not about knowing if you are right and the other rong, there's also the questioning of self that MUST ask "how could I know if I was wrong?". Few in my observation practice that - in particular the regressives. and send me a PM - i have an observation to offer you'll probably appreciate.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 08:48pm PT
|
I don't take anything for granted. I'll be walking precincts in Nevada if she's nominated. Actually, I'll do it for Bernie, too, if he pulls an upset.
NeverTrump, never. Ever.
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 08:53pm PT
|
And I should add - questioning yourself as to if you are right does not necessitate that if you do conclude you are incorrect the other is incorrect. We live in a +1 universe. there's the possibility of more. Both could be incorrect.
and though i won't doubt you that you do not take anything for granted - if you believe that in your heart then great. But again, I read your stuff and generally, and quietly, agree - but when it comes to Hillary and your view of her being clean I do raise an eyebrow. That's all.
|
|
MisterE
Gym climber
Small Town with a Big Back Yard
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 08:59pm PT
|
BERNIE NEWS FLASH!
People may not be ready for Bernie, but according to this forum,
they are certainly willing to talk about the possibility!
...or is it just more time-wasting drivel?
The results are uncertain!
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 09:03pm PT
|
I appreciate your view, nature.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 09:10pm PT
|
And I doubt it will change your mind
You're right, because that article makes the same mistakes that most articles do. Not to hijack this thread, but the real issue is FOIA violations and the willful destruction of records in the face of Congressional information requests and a pending FBI investigation.
You get caught shredding documents as the FBI is on the way, and you've committed a felony, even if there is not yet an active investigation.
Much is made of the content of the released emails, but those are a subset of the total emails that resided on her server. She willfully "shredded" a large proportion of the emails that resided there. That fact is the core of the issue, and we'll see if the "legal scholars" and the DOJ will get to the bottom of it.
I'm vastly curious to see how this ultimately plays out, because it will tell me much about the state of "justice" in this nation today.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 09:14pm PT
|
Justice will be served. When it is, just admit you were wrong and move on.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 09:27pm PT
|
just admit you were wrong and move on.
Was I wrong to believe that OJ murdered two people? Was justice served in that entire trial? It's quite ridiculous for you to assert that "how things play out" necessarily means that justice is served.
More than half of this nation think she's a liar, yet about half plan to vote for her anyway. If the Republicans could put up a credible candidate, she would probably not win. As it is, well, Trump??? Who are we kidding?
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 09:45pm PT
|
Nature, to your previous point..
NATE SILVER 12:25 AM
Question
“Would a third party stand a chance given Trump and Clinton’s negative favorability?” — commenter Zach Dasher
Answer
In the abstract, it’s a very good opportunity for a third party candidate to run. The challenges are still manifest, however. For one thing, it’s a little late at this point to be assured of ballot access in all 50 states.
But more importantly, it’s hard for a third-party candidate to build a winning coalition. You might think, “well, there are plenty of independents,” but independents don’t necessarily agree on all that much. Some of them are more Trumpian, some are more Bloombergian, and some are “closet partisans” who are independent in name only. So most of the time, a third-party candidate is going to take votes unevenly from the two major parties. And whichever major party she takes fewer votes from will tend to win with a fairly clear plurality.
MB, I'm not eager to give you another platform to express views on Hillary's e-mails that you've made numerous times before. You've cleverly set up a scenario where a) she's accused of wrongdoing, or b) she's not accused of wrongdoing - and you say the system was rigged. You're never wrong!
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 10:05pm PT
|
I'm a huge fan of Nate Silver. But it wasn't so much my point but rather an observation made that I see validity in. If a third party can gain traction and none of the three make it to 270 then the 14th amendment (that right?) let's the House decide. If it's a moderate Romney 3rd party then welcome President Mitt.
Lot's of small chances in this ridiculous election cycle.
I've said before and will say again if Billary gets the popular delegate vote for the nomination then I'll be quiet and strongly support her in the general. I'll be pissy if she gets it with the superdelegates. She is in the lead but the states that favor Sanders are still out.
Cruz has policies worse than Drumpf. Both will destruct the regressive party. I'm enjoying that. Drumpf I think is more likely to start WWIII.
And as much as the f*#ktards that think the world view of what is going on in this country doesn't matter I give a GFYS - it does. Progress will happen and it marches on no matter the 1937 attitude of some.
|
|
MisterE
Gym climber
Small Town with a Big Back Yard
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 10:08pm PT
|
Anyone else kinda want to watch the whole shebang burn itself from within?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 10:10pm PT
|
Not really.
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Mar 22, 2016 - 10:14pm PT
|
Watching Rome burn probably wasn't fun for most,
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2016 - 07:27am PT
|
nature posted I've said before and will say again if Billary gets the popular delegate vote for the nomination then I'll be quiet and strongly support her in the general. I'll be pissy if she gets it with the superdelegates. She is in the lead but the states that favor Sanders are still out.
Superdelegates are counted in the total count so Clinton would have to win 2026 pledged delegates for them to not matter. With 1889 pledge delegates outstanding, she will need to get roughly 50% of them to accomplish this which seems incredibly likely. Still, if that didn't happen and she only gets to say 1900, she will still be well ahead of Sanders and there's no reason to pretend that using superdelegates to push her over the top would be illegitimate.
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2016 - 07:52am PT
|
I'm perfectly capable of arithmetic.
You just don't get it.
Three words - "We The People".
If we the people decide that Senators Sanders deserves more delegates and she gets the nod then there is a problem.
The superdelegates are NOT "We The People".
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2016 - 07:54am PT
|
Superdelegates are counted in the total count so Clinton would have to win 2026 pledged delegates for them to not matter. With 1889 pledge delegates outstanding, she will need to get roughly 50% of them to accomplish this which seems incredibly likely. Still, if that didn't happen and she only gets to say 1900, she will still be well ahead of Sanders and there's no reason to pretend that using superdelegates to push her over the top would be illegitimate.
Also, Bernie ran as a Democrat knowing full well that the party used superdelegates and that many would be pre-committed to Hillary. If he didn't like the system put in place by the Democratic Party, he should not have run as a Democrat.
Curt
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2016 - 07:59am PT
|
Cruz, Drumpf... Man, I feel bad for conservatives who aren't idiots...
No such people exist anymore.
Curt
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2016 - 08:03am PT
|
Nature posted The superdelegates are NOT "We The People".
Eh, sort of. We the people are perfectly capable of organizing entirely new political parties and we the people get to vote for whomever we want in the actual election. Primaries aren't democratic elections for public office. They are elections within private organizations who can organize however they like.
My actual point is that within the current rules Clinton can hold a commanding lead with a majority of the pledged delegates and STILL not clinch the actual nomination. In this case, the people would have spoken, overwhelmingly favored Clinton and what...you're suggesting that she shouldn't then be the nominee because of superdelegates? I can understand feeling this way if Sanders had a majority of pledged delegates and superdelegates trumped tipped the election the other way but that isn't the scenario I described.
Additionally, Sanders has made it clear that he would happily use superdelegates to get the nomination if he were able.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!