Posted by The Taint on 5/16/2016 4:24:00 PM (view original):
Liars gotta lie!

Alex, I'll take politics for $500.

....When polled, the #1 word describing crooked Hillary.....

Remember to frame your answer in the form of a question MR. TAINT, in order to qualify for points. There can only be one correct answer. GO!

Posted by Bernie10025 on 5/16/2016 5:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 5/16/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Bernie10025 on 5/15/2016 8:53:00 PM (view original):
Many of the cheerleaders in that picture with Bush 41 look kind of unpleasant, but I'd really enjoy meeting the one directly to his right.

Hillary supporters have a very good reason to feel insecure. Maybe they were already insecure people, which is why/how they empathize with her (I don't know how else one could). She stands for nothing. Everybody feels it. She just spent $1 million to hire online trolls to fight against Sanders supporters on chatboards.

I feel the exact opposite. I know exactly what Hillary stands for. I don't agree with a lot of it. But at least I know what her policy preferences are, what she would work for as POTUS, what her vision for America is.

I have no idea what the hell Trump stands for. Trump doesn't know what Trump stands for. He changes his mind about that several times a week.

Yes, there's no doubt that a large block of people will vote for Hillary because no matter what she says, they presume (probably with some accuracy) that if elected, she'll uphold the Democratic platform/represent Obama's 3rd term.

This is why I like the analogy to the 1968 election. Hillary Clinton is Hubert Humprhey and Sanders is Eugene McCarthy. My grandparents supported McCarthy and were so upset that Humphrey was nominated that they voted for Eldridge Cleaver!

But even if we view Hillary cynically and assume she'll uphold the rank-and-file Democratic/Obama policies, there are major problems. Vital policy issues are changing too much to really estimate how she'll handle things.

For example, what about trade? It's suddenly in vogue for Democrats to backtrack on all their trade policies from the Clinton administration -- NAFTA, etc. Hillary's history in politics and voting record strongly support these trade policies, now attacked by Trump and Sanders. Ok, so she has flipped her position (e.g., TPP) to agree with them. I don't think that even if you view Hillary Clinton as described above, you can be certain (even vaguely) of her policy position on trade. Too many twists and votes in the opposite direction. Is her new position the main "Democratic" stance now? Also, she and BIll work as a team, and he obviously has a very strong record which comports with hers, until she changed her position during this campaign.

What about national security policy? Firstly, as a purely political/electoral consideration, she has said almost nothing about the War on Terrorism, etc. Secondly, I think everybody agrees that Obama's policy (insofar as the public discourse on terrorism, refusing to talk about Islam) is wrong. Every leader in the Western world has been more direct about this, and also many in the non-Western world. So how could one predict where Hillary stands? What is the conventional Democratic position now?

In fact, the only thing I've ever heard Hillary say (other than condemning the latest attacks) about what she wants to do with national security policy is that she wants to focus R/D on encryption. That's about as notable as saying that she's against al Qaeda or ISIS. We've already been spending enormous sums on encryption. So really I think the only "meat" in this statement is that she's signaling to people (who don't know anything about encryption) that she's actually tech savvy.

So my main point is that even if you're convinced that she'll assume the conventional Democratic or Obama stances on many issues, there are centrally vital policy areas which are changing too much (including with respect to politics -- the proper "Democratic" and "Republican" approaches) to project how she'll act.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-sanders-democrats-20160516-snap-story.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+quicksnailsfeed+%28quicksnailsfeed%29

There you go. Superdelegates/Hillary <--> Humphrey vs. McCarthy in '68

Trump leads Clinton 43 percent to 30 percent, with 26 percent undecided, according to 588 registered Utah voters Dan Jones & Associates surveyed May 2-10. It has a 4 percent margin of error.

Trump bests Sanders 43-37 percent, with 20 percent undecided, the poll shows.

In March, a poll showed Utah would vote for a Democrat for president for the first time in 52 years.

But now that Trump has forced fellow Republicans Ted Cruz and John Kasich out of the race, and influential party leaders are backing the presumptive GOP nominee, Utahns appear to be falling in line.

^^^^ Utah is back to solidly Red. Remember when the haters were saying Utah would go blue?? You know, when they thought general election polls mattered during a four way race during primary season

The latest poll from Reuters/IPSOS finds a very tight general election race nationwide.

Democrat frontrunner Hillary Clinton has a slim 4-point lead over GOP presumptive nominee Donald Trump. Clinton has 41 percent support against 37 percent for Donald Trump, within the poll’s margin of error.

#trendingtrump

Posted by RCBracco on 5/15/2016 8:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 5/15/2016 6:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by RCBracco on 5/14/2016 9:48:00 PM (view original):
It probably depends on your generation but as far as I am concerned the greatest SS ever was Ernie Banks. That was before he became the greatest first basemen ever.

Not according to WAR!

I did not expect everyone to agree. When you grow up with a hero you could care less what sibernetics (sic) say. I also say peace not "war"

I was joking. Its all preferential. Why can't Ernie Banks be considered the best SS of all time? I can't think of any reason. But I am sure some people would start reaching for WAR and OPS+ to tell you why he wasn't.

While many Republicans inside Washington see Paul Ryan as the leader of the Republican Party, voters see things differently. According to results from the most recent election tracking poll, a majority of Republican and Republican-leaners who say they are registered to vote trust Donald Trump more to lead the Republican Party than they trust Paul Ryan. Nearly six in 10 trust the presumptive Republican presidential nominee to lead the Republican Party over the House Speaker; nearly 4 in 10 trust the Speaker more.

^^^ this is why Ryan will cave to Trump. Leverage.

In this week's poll, Americans are nearly split between their choice of Trump or Clinton; her margin over Trump narrows from 5 points last week to 3 points this week. (NBC News / Survey Monkey Poll)

Posted by RCBracco on 5/17/2016 7:47:00 PM (view original):

Why won't Trump release his taxes? This is the question dogging the candidate over the last few weeks, especially since just last week he came out and said that he refuses to do so until after the election. Rumors of paying no taxes, offshore accounts, little to no charitable donations (going against his claim that he donates A LOT) and earning significantly less than the hundreds of millions he claims have been the most accepted reasons.

The Washington Post has presented another idea - Mafia ties. Today they published an article that outlines a long and, at times, very close relationship between Trump and a former Mafia figure, Felix Sater.

Sater is a Russian born businessman who emigrated to the U.S. as a child and led a colorful life in business. The Washington Post reports that he started his career as a stock broker but lost his trading license after a vicious attack at a bar which led to him serving a year in prison. Following his release, he linked up a friend who ran a "Mafia-linked" brokerage firm, which led to a new charge of racketeering in a massive $40 million stock fraud in 1998. He managed to dodge prison time by providing witness testimony in another case.

After this well known set of legal battles, he linked up with Trump. In 2001 he joined a real estate company called Bayrock which had offices in Trump Tower. He began to have many one on one meetings with both Trump and his son, discussing real estate deals both in the U.S. and overseas. The relationship got so close that when Trump's children, Donald Jr. and Ivanka, went to Moscow in 2006, Sater was asked to be a private tour guide.

Sater worked on numerous projects with Trump, including the failed oceanfront Trump International Hotel and Tower in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, which stopped construction in 2009. Shortly after the project went belly up, Sater left Bayrock. He was given Trump Organization business cards and office space just two floors below Donald Trump in Trump Tower. The cards reportedly said his title was "senior adviser to Donald Trump.” (Did he work with John Miller?

Sater used to go into meetings with investors and say:

“Anybody can come in and build a tower, I can build a Trump Tower, because of my relationship with Trump.”

Trump denies knowing Sater and said that he had no idea that he had Mafia ties or any legal trouble. Really? When the ties were made public, Trump told the New York Times “we do as much of a background check as we can on the principals. I didn’t really know him very well.” But he was a tour guide for your kids in Moscow? He visited Mar-A-Lago?

First it was the racist butler calling for President Obama to be killed. He knew Trump for over 30 years, worked as his former butler for 17, but Trump really doesn't know him. Then David Duke, KKK leader, endorsed Trump and he pretends to not know who he is. Now a Mafia linked businessman worked with Trump for 6 years, showed his kids around Moscow and even flew to Colorado with him, but Trump doesn't really know him either.

Truth and Trump clearly have no relationship.

This rivals the "How many people did the Clintons have killed on the way to The White House?" post.

Good job?

DOUG!!!!

Dig that one up and post it for bracco.

Remember to frame your answer in the form of a question Mr. RCBracco. There can only be one correct answer.