World considers a Trump presidency, and many shudder

[Publicus]

The swing voter? Yeah, what's wrong with you Publicus not understanding the swing voter?

Normal people reading these wingnut posts must be slapping their foreheads saying, "Ohhhhhh, now I see."

Donald Trump the cure for what ails America?

One absurd post after another. How do you talk people off the ledge of voting Republican? Hey watch that first step, it's a doozy.

Is there something in the water over there in wingnuttia? Probably just the heat, turn off Fox News, try and chill. Jeesh.

So you don't understand a swing voter either! Fortunately in my country we have multiple choices when it comes to voting which means you can "swing" between certain policy makers to effect your vote. The last election i voted for a right candidate from a left party (yes there are left and right emphasis in every party too) and a conservative left indigenous party (there are also extreme left indigenous) to stabilize the probable right wing government. With 2 votes, one for a candidate and another for a party, you can vote tactically, even vote left and right at the same time if you wish.

Pinot you obviously have never thought in this way because as you admitted previously your daddy voted Democrat and his daddy voted Democrat which means you will vote Democrat. No need to think, just copy the family otherwise you may feel disloyal. I never knew who my father voted for because back then it was called a secret ballot.

While no system is perfect, your system is very partisan. You vote for delegates not candidates and I understand after the second ballot are free to vote for someone you may not support. The trading room is not very democratic in my view.

You would be wise to drop the name calling and amateur dramatics. It does your cause no favor because you're only preaching to the converted, not trying to reach the unconverted

Cheers

The last election i voted for a right candidate from a left party (yes there are left and right emphasis in every party too) and a conservative left indigenous party (there are also extreme left indigenous) to stabilize the probable right wing government. With 2 votes, one for a candidate and another for a party, you can vote tactically, even vote left and right at the same time if you wish.

Also called "pinball voting" due to the fact a pinball and machine are carefully and rationally designed to perform in very specific ways each time and every time to include especially the Tilt function. Still the factor of randomness does exist in the pinball itself, in the machine and in the game (not to mention the hunched over player).

You vote for delegates not candidates

Wong again as it seems some people who are wrong can insist on being wrong and remain rather adamant to be wrong. Here is another correction of the wrongheadedness from a different aspect, if you will.

In prep for a quadrennial national party convention in the USA, a party member gets signatures from registered party voters to be convention delegate. The successful delegate pledges to a particular candidate. A party member may sign only one set of delegate selection documents...almost always for the person who supports the particular candidate of the signers. (The documents are often signed in someone's kitchen, at a regular local party meeting venue such as a Moose Hall. Yep.)

In a party primary or in a party caucus, rank and file party members vote directly for the chosen candidate. The candidate gets qualified and pledged party convention delegates in proportion to the votes the candidate receives.

At the national convention, the candidate has the delegate. The candidate gets all pledged delegates won by the candidate in the aggregate. Delegates are pledged to the candidate of their choosing on the first ballot only. In modern times, there rarely is more than one ballot at either party convention in choosing its nominee. One strongly can expect this will also be the case in each party in this election process.

After the convention voting is concluded, meaning a candidate has passed the established threshold number of delegates to secure the nomination, each party entertains a traditional motion from the floor made by the winner's home state delegation, to make the winner the party's nominee by acclamation (unanimous default).

It is also the case further, in respect of the US House of Representatives in the Congress in Washington, to which Members are elected from districts in each state, the whole of the group of Members of the House from the state are called "The Delegation". For instance, all of the members of the US House elected from California, Republicans and Democrats alike, are referred to as "the California Delegation" to the US House.

Elected Party Delegates. An Elected Nominee. Elected Representatives. An Elected Delegation. The Elected Delegation. Same same.

Live and learn from over there Down Under.

Then again, probably not. Must have something to do with the gravitational forces of the planet as affected by the moon as well, down there especially and in particular.

Others however can learn these central matters of representative and delegated party politics and government and they do in fact learn. Nothing inherently wrong with political parties btw. Ain't perfect, but then neither is pinball voting.

"Also called pinball voting"? Did you make that up? References please.

I'm very happy to be able to vote directly for candidates and a party meaning the system ensures minorities get a voice as well. Unlike the American system even one citizen one vote is undermined by the Electoral College and no other democratic country uses such an undemocratic system. Do you remember Al Gore winning the election but George Bush becoming President?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-steven-friedman/antidemocratic-electoral-college_b_1744138.html

• Howard Steven FriedmanStatistician and health economist for the United Nations; Teacher, Columbia University

Thanks for the condescension which is effectively counterproductive to anyone opposite taking anything you say seriously.

When I read a reference such as above I wonder how much you really are able to critique and examine dispassionately (apart from just giving across technical's). Maybe you're just too emotionally partisan to ever be able to manage independent thinking without prejudice and freedom from bias

It is well established in real life politics and government, and by academia via volumes of research over many decades, party affiliation and identification is 'nominal politics' while one's philosophical or ideological commitments are one's 'real politics.'

You sir have the real politics that define you as a very right of center conservative. Your nominal politics are simultaneously your real politics -- a reactionary rightist world view.

The newly emergent very right conservatives consistently and doggedly criticise people because of their nominal and real politics opposite their own. They have calculated an equation for themselves that conveniently but transparently excludes them from any mainstream nominal politics, i.e., no particular party affiliation or identity.

Supporting both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are moreover a state of severe confusion and contradiction that afflicts the very conservative right. Being unable to self-identify the fact is a flaw and a failure of these folk. Refusing with a great determination to accept the reality when it is pointed out to them is a headstrong and obstinate, rigid, intractable self-righteousness of the first order.

This is indeed what many among us who are critical of pretentious political types have found, some from dayze as political science majors to doing campaign entry level work known as 'door drops' to being campaign organisers on up to being election campaign strategists in competitive contests local, state, national.

Just How Independent Are Independent Voters?

'Closet Partisans'

Research over the years suggests that most independents are what John Petrocik, a political science professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia, calls "closet partisans."

Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University in Atlanta, agrees that being an independent is often an important part of a voter's personal identity. "People want to think of themselves as independent, that they don't just vote automatically," he says.

"As soon as you press them, they very quickly admit that they prefer one party or another."

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/26/149402358/just-how-independent-are-independent-voters

THE MYTH OF THE “INDEPENDENT” VOTER

A new poll finds that just 5 percent of voters are truly “independent” – ideologically centrist and unaffiliated with either political party.

http://republic3-0.com/myth-independent-voter-stefan-hankin/

Perhaps some here are in the five percent, however, if so, it is well disguised, hidden, or just not the case. After all, you for one haven't any clue as to what a delegate is. That's PolySci 101. Or before then if one had already had a measure of political involvement.

par·ti·san

a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person. (emphasis added for obvious reasons)

synonyms: supporter · follower · adherent · devotee · champion ·

[more]

prejudiced in favor of a particular cause:

"newspapers have become increasingly partisan"

synonyms: biased · prejudiced ·discriminatory

Previous posts have already pointed out the obvious contradiction between supporting simultaneously in one way or another Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders when there is not any substantive connection of content whatsoever between the two. Purely partisan form over content. Two angry guys frankly, each originating from a different place however, going to a radically different destination.

All I see and hear over there is a right wing bandwagon.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Publicus

[CWMcMurray]

The swing voter? Yeah, what's wrong with you Publicus not understanding the swing voter?



Previous posts have already pointed out the obvious contradiction between supporting simultaneously in one way or another Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders when there is not any substantive connection of content whatsoever between the two. Purely partisan form over content. Two angry guys frankly, each originating from a different place however, going to a radically different destination.

All I see and hear over there is a right wing bandwagon.

To be honest you come across as more than a little bit condescending and dismissive of anyone that disagree ls with you

While I truly believe Bernie is the best candidate it does not mean that I can not prefer Trump as a second choice of Bernie doesn't end up with the Democratic nod

Yes their politics may be very different but on the problems of corporate interference in Politics , the problem of US factory jobs being outsourced to Overseas and the need to take on drug companies to allow for reduction of costs they agree

I feel the above items to be some of the most important

In addition, I do think a Trump election would cause the Republican Party to have a bit of a melt down, which is not a bad thing

Also if Hillary gets the Democratic nomination and looses, I think that would be good for the Democratic Party in the long run as well.

As in all the polls Bernie beats Trump soundly by far more support than Hillary but Hillary controls the DNC and the corporate donors so it is her turn regardless of what is best for the country

So if a Hillary loss forces the DNC to review what they are doing that is also a good thing

Especially if it lets them realize that Bernie or a Bernie like candidate would be better for then Democratic Party in the next election

As I think if Trump is elected, 4 years from no there is a very good chance for a Democrat to be elected....

But I hope it would not not not be Hillary again.

Maybe we need someone like Trump to be elected to make it possible for some one like Bernie to get the Democratic nomination so they can be elected

So please stop dismissing people or labeling them as 'secret closest racist right wing nutjons' just because you don't agree with them

That is offensive

Edited March 15, 2016 by Scott

[NovaBlue05]

If the people want to take back their Govt, they need to do it where the real power is and that's Congress. Go to the elections and vote anti-incumbent across the board for the next couple of election cycles. Once the entrenched vermin in the leadership positions and others are gone, it can be rebuilt. If they relapse, rinse and repeat as necessary.

[LawrenceChee]

It's an irony that some posters like to send in some MBA type essay to prove their points and in slamming everyone's point except their own believe only their points is valid

It's devilish close to being a closet communist ...even the CCP is getting the hang of it and moving away from that model

This is a free forum ...Twitter type comments have a better chance people actually read them

Who the hell has the time to read through all the links !

[Publicus]

Previous posts have already pointed out the obvious contradiction between supporting simultaneously in one way or another Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders when there is not any substantive connection of content whatsoever between the two. Purely partisan form over content. Two angry guys frankly, each originating from a different place however, going to a radically different destination.

All I see and hear over there is a right wing bandwagon.

To be honest you come across as more than a little bit condescending and dismissive of anyone that disagree ls with you

While I truly believe Bernie is the best candidate it does not mean that I can not prefer Trump as a second choice of Bernie doesn't end up with the Democratic nod

Yes their politics may be very different but on the problems of corporate interference in Politics , the problem of US factory jobs being outsourced to Overseas and the need to take on drug companies to allow for reduction of costs they agree

I feel the above items to be some of the most important

In addition, I do think a Trump election would cause the Republican Party to have a bit of a melt down, which is not a bad thing

Also if Hillary gets the Democratic nomination and looses, I think that would be good for the Democratic Party in the long run as well.

As in all the polls Bernie beats Trump soundly by far more support than Hillary but Hillary controls the DNC and the corporate donors so it is her turn regardless of what is best for the country

So if a Hillary loss forces the DNC to review what they are doing that is also a good thing

Especially if it lets them realize that Bernie or a Bernie like candidate would be better for then Democratic Party in the next election

As I think if Trump is elected, 4 years from no there is a very good chance for a Democrat to be elected....

But I hope it would not not not be Hillary again.

Maybe we need someone like Trump to be elected to make it possible for some one like Bernie to get the Democratic nomination so they can be elected

So please stop dismissing people or labeling them as 'secret closest racist right wing nutjons' just because you don't agree with them

That is offensive

Thank you for your comments and remarks.

Donald Trump is not only offensive.

Trump is a uniquely American fascist. Fortunately and predictably however, Trump and his unprecedented and unique brand of fascism is of a pronounced limited appeal in the United States. Americans haven't ever jumped off the political precipice because the vast and centrist political middle absorbs the fringes of society and politics.

When as in the instance of Trump however, as he is so wild and so radical, the moderate and measured American electorate must instead simply reject the whole of the lunatic fringe outright and decisively.

Trump is exploitative and cynically so. Consequently, nothing he says or stands for is credible or has any merit.

It is the case that as the moderate American body politic and the electorate witness the effect of Bernie Sanders on Hillary Clinton, that is what it will accept and she is whom it shall install in the office of President of the United States. That is how American issues, politics, elections have always gone. The Civil War settled the one great exception and the settlement was accomplished by the good guyz in that one too.

The present irony is that Abe Lincoln was a Republican and Donald Trump who has seized what used to be the Party of Lincoln is not --nor has it been the Party of Lincoln for the past couple of generations of the Lee Atwaters and the Karl Roves et al. The present civil war in the Republican party is being fought with electoral ballots which is how it should be.

This too will pass. it will nonetheless be painful en route to November. However, after that the uniquely new American fascist and his uniquely new and transitory American fascism will be wholly and foreseeably demolished.

Thanks again for the post.

[canathai8]

They don't listen, so let them have their Donald F'king Trump, such is the state of their delusion..

They'll get what they deserve

And we'll have four years to say SOM NOM NAAAAAAAAAA ...Led no less by Jingthing

Make a note of how many 'Vote for Trump" posters come back on TV and claim they were not in favor of The Donald - tails between their miserable, urine-stained tails

Signed,

Be careful what you ask for - you might just get it

[Pinot]

I'm singing, "The end of the world as we know it..."

I agree Publicus, this too shall pass.

We are watching the bizarre, painful end of the Republican party. The serial liar and corrupt Mussolini wannabee, controls the Republican party. Something of their own making and so so deserved.

It's funny and it's sad. Funny because Trump is a buffoon, sad because some people think he's Presidential material. and could get elected.

[canathai8]

Let's see: Trump has recently:

1. Dissed a handicapped man on national TV - despite being allegedly obese himself (arguably a handicap all on it own)

2. Said he doesn't know Klu Klux Klan leader David Duke (a bald-faced f'king lie), and doesn't mind their support at all

3. Ridiculed a fellow Republican female candidate for going to the washroom

4. Encouraged his followers to incite violence at rallies

5. Characterized protesters at rallies as worthy of getting shiiiit-kicked - and going out on a stretcher

There are hundreds more examples - but why fk'ing bother?

Can you Trump supporters not smell an inveterate bully?

NOPE !

UN - Fk'ing believable

[LawrenceChee]

I'm singing, "The end of the world as we know it..."

I agree Publicus, this too shall pass.

We are watching the bizarre, painful end of the Republican party. The serial liar and corrupt Mussolini wannabee, controls the Republican party. Something of their own making and so so deserved.

It's funny and it's sad. Funny because Trump is a buffoon, sad because some people think he's Presidential material. and could get elected.

Hahahaha if the republicans are finished then you have only one party ? Descending into communism ?

[CWMcMurray]

Previous posts have already pointed out the obvious contradiction between supporting simultaneously in one way or another Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders when there is not any substantive connection of content whatsoever between the two. Purely partisan form over content. Two angry guys frankly, each originating from a different place however, going to a radically different destination.

All I see and hear over there is a right wing bandwagon.

To be honest you come across as more than a little bit condescending and dismissive of anyone that disagree ls with you

While I truly believe Bernie is the best candidate it does not mean that I can not prefer Trump as a second choice of Bernie doesn't end up with the Democratic nod

Yes their politics may be very different but on the problems of corporate interference in Politics , the problem of US factory jobs being outsourced to Overseas and the need to take on drug companies to allow for reduction of costs they agree

I feel the above items to be some of the most important

In addition, I do think a Trump election would cause the Republican Party to have a bit of a melt down, which is not a bad thing

Also if Hillary gets the Democratic nomination and looses, I think that would be good for the Democratic Party in the long run as well.

As in all the polls Bernie beats Trump soundly by far more support than Hillary but Hillary controls the DNC and the corporate donors so it is her turn regardless of what is best for the country

So if a Hillary loss forces the DNC to review what they are doing that is also a good thing

Especially if it lets them realize that Bernie or a Bernie like candidate would be better for then Democratic Party in the next election

As I think if Trump is elected, 4 years from no there is a very good chance for a Democrat to be elected....

But I hope it would not not not be Hillary again.

Maybe we need someone like Trump to be elected to make it possible for some one like Bernie to get the Democratic nomination so they can be elected

So please stop dismissing people or labeling them as 'secret closest racist right wing nutjons' just because you don't agree with them

That is offensive

Thank you for your comments and remarks.

Donald Trump is not only offensive.

Trump is a uniquely American fascist. Fortunately and predictably however, Trump and his unprecedented and unique brand of fascism is of a pronounced limited appeal in the United States. Americans haven't ever jumped off the political precipice because the vast and centrist political middle absorbs the fringes of society and politics.

When as in the instance of Trump however, as he is so wild and so radical, the moderate and measured American electorate must instead simply reject the whole of the lunatic fringe outright and decisively.

Trump is exploitative and cynically so. Consequently, nothing he says or stands for is credible or has any merit.

It is the case that as the moderate American body politic and the electorate witness the effect of Bernie Sanders on Hillary Clinton, that is what it will accept and she is whom it shall install in the office of President of the United States. That is how American issues, politics, elections have always gone. The Civil War settled the one great exception and the settlement was accomplished by the good guyz in that one too.

The present irony is that Abe Lincoln was a Republican and Donald Trump who has seized what used to be the Party of Lincoln is not --nor has it been the Party of Lincoln for the past couple of generations of the Lee Atwaters and the Karl Roves et al. The present civil war in the Republican party is being fought with electoral ballots which is how it should be.

This too will pass. it will nonetheless be painful en route to November. However, after that the uniquely new American fascist and his uniquely new and transitory American fascism will be wholly and foreseeably demolished.

Thanks again for the post.

It seems we must agree to disagree

As I do not think Trump would be the end of the world or is anywhere as bad as you do

And even though more than a bit extreme on immigration still more trust worthy than Hillary

Although perhaps Bernie's momentum will continue to grow and the super delegates will come to their senses..

As if the super delegates voted for Bernie instead of Hillary, he'd now be far in the lead in the delegate count

If so, guessing we will then be on the same side

As actual delegates:

Clinton- 766

Bernie- 551

Number of super delegates so

Far= 490

Edited March 14, 2016 by CWMcMurray

[Publicus]

The swing voter? Yeah, what's wrong with you Publicus not understanding the swing voter?

Normal people reading these wingnut posts must be slapping their foreheads saying, "Ohhhhhh, now I see."

Donald Trump the cure for what ails America?

One absurd post after another. How do you talk people off the ledge of voting Republican? Hey watch that first step, it's a doozy.

Is there something in the water over there in wingnuttia? Probably just the heat, turn off Fox News, try and chill. Jeesh.

So you don't understand a swing voter either! Fortunately in my country we have multiple choices when it comes to voting which means you can "swing" between certain policy makers to effect your vote. The last election i voted for a right candidate from a left party (yes there are left and right emphasis in every party too) and a conservative left indigenous party (there are also extreme left indigenous) to stabilize the probable right wing government. With 2 votes, one for a candidate and another for a party, you can vote tactically, even vote left and right at the same time if you wish.

Pinot you obviously have never thought in this way because as you admitted previously your daddy voted Democrat and his daddy voted Democrat which means you will vote Democrat. No need to think, just copy the family otherwise you may feel disloyal. I never knew who my father voted for because back then it was called a secret ballot.

While no system is perfect, your system is very partisan. You vote for delegates not candidates and I understand after the second ballot are free to vote for someone you may not support. The trading room is not very democratic in my view.

You would be wise to drop the name calling and amateur dramatics. It does your cause no favor because you're only preaching to the converted, not trying to reach the unconverted

Cheers

The last election i voted for a right candidate from a left party (yes there are left and right emphasis in every party too) and a conservative left indigenous party (there are also extreme left indigenous) to stabilize the probable right wing government. With 2 votes, one for a candidate and another for a party, you can vote tactically, even vote left and right at the same time if you wish.

Also called "pinball voting" due to the fact a pinball and machine are carefully and rationally designed to perform in very specific ways each time and every time to include especially the Tilt function. Still the factor of randomness does exist in the pinball itself, in the machine and in the game (not to mention the hunched over player).

You vote for delegates not candidates

Wong again as it seems some people who are wrong can insist on being wrong and remain rather adamant to be wrong. Here is another correction of the wrongheadedness from a different aspect, if you will.

In prep for a quadrennial national party convention in the USA, a party member gets signatures from registered party voters to be convention delegate. The successful delegate pledges to a particular candidate. A party member may sign only one set of delegate selection documents...almost always for the person who supports the particular candidate of the signers. (The documents are often signed in someone's kitchen, at a regular local party meeting venue such as a Moose Hall. Yep.)

In a party primary or in a party caucus, rank and file party members vote directly for the chosen candidate. The candidate gets qualified and pledged party convention delegates in proportion to the votes the candidate receives.

At the national convention, the candidate has the delegate. The candidate gets all pledged delegates won by the candidate in the aggregate. Delegates are pledged to the candidate of their choosing on the first ballot only. In modern times, there rarely is more than one ballot at either party convention in choosing its nominee. One strongly can expect this will also be the case in each party in this election process.

After the convention voting is concluded, meaning a candidate has passed the established threshold number of delegates to secure the nomination, each party entertains a traditional motion from the floor made by the winner's home state delegation, to make the winner the party's nominee by acclamation (unanimous default).

It is also the case further, in respect of the US House of Representatives in the Congress in Washington, to which Members are elected from districts in each state, the whole of the group of Members of the House from the state are called "The Delegation". For instance, all of the members of the US House elected from California, Republicans and Democrats alike, are referred to as "the California Delegation" to the US House.

Elected Party Delegates. An Elected Nominee. Elected Representatives. An Elected Delegation. The Elected Delegation. Same same.

Live and learn from over there Down Under.

Then again, probably not. Must have something to do with the gravitational forces of the planet as affected by the moon as well, down there especially and in particular.

Others however can learn these central matters of representative and delegated party politics and government and they do in fact learn. Nothing inherently wrong with political parties btw. Ain't perfect, but then neither is pinball voting.

"Also called pinball voting"? Did you make that up? References please.

I'm very happy to be able to vote directly for candidates and a party meaning the system ensures minorities get a voice as well. Unlike the American system even one citizen one vote is undermined by the Electoral College and no other democratic country uses such an undemocratic system. Do you remember Al Gore winning the election but George Bush becoming President?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-steven-friedman/antidemocratic-electoral-college_b_1744138.html

• Howard Steven FriedmanStatistician and health economist for the United Nations; Teacher, Columbia University

Thanks for the condescension which is effectively counterproductive to anyone opposite taking anything you say seriously.

When I read a reference such as above I wonder how much you really are able to critique and examine dispassionately (apart from just giving across technical's). Maybe you're just too emotionally partisan to ever be able to manage independent thinking without prejudice and freedom from bias

"Also called pinball voting"? Did you make that up? References please.

And here I'd thought you were a wizard....

POLITICAL PINBALL

Political Pinball is a political game, monetary operated (with tax payer money) in which points (votes) are scored by a politician manipulating voting balls (the people) on a biased media controlled playing field inside a green colored cabinet (United States). The primary objective of the game is to gain as many votes as possible. Votes are gained by the player (politician) coercing the ball to strike the targets (Example: Illegal Immigrants) that the player wants manipulated to gain the most votes. There are two "Flippers" one for the left and one for the right.

http://www2.ljworld.com/weblogs/swampyvilles-the-banshees-cry/2012/aug/8/swampyvilles-what-is-political-pinball/

Lawyers for the state urged a federal appeals court not to halt Wisconsin's voter ID law again in a brief filed on Tuesday, saying such a move would give voters the “pinball treatment.”

http://www.wpr.org/doj-urges-federal-appeals-court-not-block-voter-id-again

A pinball strategy would most likely be employed in a future presidential contest, Smith said; that’s where the political stakes are highest, and where campaigns would have the money to pursue it.

http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/pinball-recounts-could-mean-electoral-disaster-strategist-says-8955

In the primaries, politics is a lot like pinball as it moves in unexpected ways, lifting one candidate’s chances of getting the nomination, bypassing others. In the national election, it’s more like a bowling bowl, rolling down a straight and narrow stretch headed either to the gutter or a strike.

http://www.goldcoastchronicle.com/politics/political-pinball-two-day-later/#sthash.QdfBvUCB.dpuf

Trump is a gutter ball.

I can document that one too if anyone would just ask.

For the funovit...

By The Who

Ever since I was a young boy,

I've played the silver ball.

From Soho down to Brighton

I must have played them all.

But I ain't seen nothing like him

In any amusement hall

That deaf dumb and blind Trump

Sure plays a mean pin ball!

Btw, one hopes you don't go left and right at the same moment while driving.

[Publicus]

I'm singing, "The end of the world as we know it..."

I agree Publicus, this too shall pass.

We are watching the bizarre, painful end of the Republican party. The serial liar and corrupt Mussolini wannabee, controls the Republican party. Something of their own making and so so deserved.

It's funny and it's sad. Funny because Trump is a buffoon, sad because some people think he's Presidential material. and could get elected.

Hahahaha if the republicans are finished then you have only one party ? Descending into communism ?

Communism Lawrence in its context refers to an absurd system of economics.

Dictatorship is what Your Boyz in Beijing have and which you implicitly defend. It also is the defining feature of the party-state of the People's Republic of China. The one party state.

If you visit Taiwan and Hong Kong you might want to talk to some people in those places you don't already know.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Publicus

[boomerangutang]

Here's a recent tweet from Trump:

"Bernie Sanders is lying when he says his disruptors aren't told to go to my events. Be careful Bernie, or my supporters will go to yours!"

Trump is telling two lies and a threat in one little tweet. What a lovely man.

[Ulysses G.]

Here's a recent tweet from Trump:

"Bernie Sanders is lying when he says his disruptors aren't told to go to my events. Be careful Bernie, or my supporters will go to yours![/size]"

Trump is telling two lies and a threat in one little tweet. What a lovely man.

Trump is not lying, but he is not being completely honest either. Black Lives Matter and other leftist scum are organizing the violence. Bernie Sanders is not in control of his supporters.

[Jingthing]

Trump please do send your thugs to Sanders rallies.

[NeverSure]

The reason that people have been unable to stop Trump is that they haven't figured out the obvious way to do it.

Compare him to HITLER!

LOL.

[NovaBlue05]

The reason that people have been unable to stop Trump is that they haven't figured out the obvious way to do it.

Compare him to HITLER!

LOL.

Hitler has gotten more traction in death during the last 15 years from the American leftwing than he did in all those years of storming across Europe

Edited March 14, 2016 by NovaBlue05

[NeverSure]

Trump supporters rioting in Athens:

Trump supporters rioting in Baltimore:

Trump supporters rioting in London:

Trump supporters rioting in Liverpool:

[partington]

The reason that people have been unable to stop Trump is that they haven't figured out the obvious way to do it.

Compare him to HITLER!

LOL.

Isn't the way to stop him to simply point at his hair?

Inherited hundreds of millions of dollars: could have spent as much as he wanted on vanity cosmetic surgery, and yet ended up with that (an orangutan's pubic hair) on the top of his head.

Additionally he goes about with it in public, voluntarily, pretending that it looks normal.

Doesn't that tell you everything you need to know about his character and ability?

[NeverSure]

^^^ Hitler had strange hair, too... See the similarities?

[lannarebirth]

Here's a recent tweet from Trump:

"Bernie Sanders is lying when he says his disruptors aren't told to go to my events. Be careful Bernie, or my supporters will go to yours!"

Trump is telling two lies and a threat in one little tweet. What a lovely man.

Actually, he's not. Bernie certainly isn't sending any of his supporters to Trump's events, but it is true that many of the protesters/disrupters at Trump's events are Bernie Supporters. They were manipulated by the Soros funded organization, moveon.org. Not unlike Thaksin's 300 Baht/day army of the people. It remains to see how it will play out; whether it hurts/helps Trump or whether it hurts/helps Bernie. What is clear though is it certainly didn't hurt Clinton, whom is the candidate Soros supports. In the world of dirty politics Soros/Clinton may score a twofer here.

Edited March 14, 2016 by lannarebirth

[lannarebirth]

Trump supporters rioting in Athens:

athens_plus1.jpg

Trump supporters rioting in Baltimore:

Baltimore.jpg

Trump supporters rioting in London:

london-riots2_lpmtmmnc.jpg

Trump supporters rioting in Liverpool:

Riots-in-Toxteth-Liverpoo-007.jpg

Good one. Hyberbolic hysteria seldom can withstand the reality test. With 8 months to go the campaign may already be approaching peak rhetoric.

[Ulysses G.]

Trump supporters rioting in Athens:

athens_plus1.jpg

Trump supporters rioting in Baltimore:

Baltimore.jpg

Trump supporters rioting in London:

london-riots2_lpmtmmnc.jpg

Trump supporters rioting in Liverpool:

Riots-in-Toxteth-Liverpoo-007.jpg

Good one. Hyberbolic hysteria seldom can withstand the reality test. With 8 months to go the campaign may already be approaching peak rhetoric.

The only problem is that many of our esteemed members will not realize this is a joke/ sarcasm.

[Linzz]

"Also called pinball voting"? Did you make that up? References please.

I'm very happy to be able to vote directly for candidates and a party meaning the system ensures minorities get a voice as well. Unlike the American system even one citizen one vote is undermined by the Electoral College and no other democratic country uses such an undemocratic system. Do you remember Al Gore winning the election but George Bush becoming President?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-steven-friedman/antidemocratic-electoral-college_b_1744138.html

• Howard Steven FriedmanStatistician and health economist for the United Nations; Teacher, Columbia University

Thanks for the condescension which is effectively counterproductive to anyone opposite taking anything you say seriously.

When I read a reference such as above I wonder how much you really are able to critique and examine dispassionately (apart from just giving across technical's). Maybe you're just too emotionally partisan to ever be able to manage independent thinking without prejudice and freedom from bias

It is well established in real life politics and government, and by academia via volumes of research over many decades, party affiliation and identification is 'nominal politics' while one's philosophical or ideological commitments are one's 'real politics.'

You sir have the real politics that define you as a very right of center conservative. Your nominal politics are simultaneously your real politics -- a reactionary rightist world view.

The newly emergent very right conservatives consistently and doggedly criticise people because of their nominal and real politics opposite their own. They have calculated an equation for themselves that conveniently but transparently excludes them from any mainstream nominal politics, i.e., no particular party affiliation or identity.

Supporting both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are moreover a state of severe confusion and contradiction that afflicts the very conservative right. Being unable to self-identify the fact is a flaw and a failure of these folk. Refusing with a great determination to accept the reality when it is pointed out to them is a headstrong and obstinate, rigid, intractable self-righteousness of the first order.

This is indeed what many among us who are critical of pretentious political types have found, some from dayze as political science majors to doing campaign entry level work known as 'door drops' to being campaign organisers on up to being election campaign strategists in competitive contests local, state, national.

Just How Independent Are Independent Voters?

'Closet Partisans'

Research over the years suggests that most independents are what John Petrocik, a political science professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia, calls "closet partisans."

Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University in Atlanta, agrees that being an independent is often an important part of a voter's personal identity. "People want to think of themselves as independent, that they don't just vote automatically," he says.

"As soon as you press them, they very quickly admit that they prefer one party or another."

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/26/149402358/just-how-independent-are-independent-voters

THE MYTH OF THE “INDEPENDENT” VOTER

A new poll finds that just 5 percent of voters are truly “independent” – ideologically centrist and unaffiliated with either political party.

http://republic3-0.com/myth-independent-voter-stefan-hankin/

Perhaps some here are in the five percent, however, if so, it is well disguised, hidden, or just not the case. After all, you for one haven't any clue as to what a delegate is. That's PolySci 101. Or before then if one had already had a measure of political involvement.

par·ti·san

a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person. (emphasis added for obvious reasons)

synonyms: supporter · follower · adherent · devotee · champion ·

[more]

prejudiced in favor of a particular cause:

"newspapers have become increasingly partisan"

synonyms: biased · prejudiced ·discriminatory

Previous posts have already pointed out the obvious contradiction between supporting simultaneously in one way or another Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders when there is not any substantive connection of content whatsoever between the two. Purely partisan form over content. Two angry guys frankly, each originating from a different place however, going to a radically different destination.

All I see and hear over there is a right wing bandwagon.

Supporting both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders are moreover a state of severe confusion and contradiction

I have already told you my position, that I largely support right wing economics which underpins my viewpoint. However I am free to pick and choose what emphasis I prefer within that framework including left wing policy to address social injustice if necessary. I am not in favor of anarchy nor oligarchy. I am fortunate to live in the country I do.

The obvious contradiction between supporting simultaneously in one way or another Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders when there is not any substantive connection of content whatsoever between the two

The link between Sanders and Trump as I have said before but you never listen is they both appear to be free of special interest favors and big bank donor-ship. You think that is of no consequence?

Cruz is in the same boat as Hillary on that score. I admire Sanders for remaining outside that. Saying that makes me non partisan because partisans such as you cannot give credit or recognize anything positive outside your own party preference. I am not really interested in Republicans or Democrats per se. There is a looming debt crisis that you never address because you seem to spend all your time fixated on Trump and various personalities and not the economy. Most of your posts which you call analysis seem to be largely off topic lofty verbiage and references to dictionaries. Often, ( as other posters also) sensationalist nonsense punctuated by emoticons looking down your nose at people who hold different opinions to you. You need to do better, even if only for the sake of objectivity.

Hillary is dangerous to the economy. Goldman Sachs say Sanders is dangerous but do not mention Hillary. What does that tell you? They wouldn't would they because of her virtual managing directorship and over 20 year relationship. They are currently paying off millions in penalties and recompense but no one is in jail. They fear Sanders and Trump. Why do you think Goldman Sach's supports Hillary? She has been paid $675,000 for speeches praising the bank without a mention of the role they played in the 2008 financial crisis. Guess they wouldn't pay her that sort of money if she criticized them. She will not release transcripts of her speeches to Goldman Sachs because they are "private". Well she can't can she because she supports the poor (and the rich at the same time). Yesterday she comes out picking holes in the TPP but she voted for it. This is how you win elections, garner support from every direction, get rich from donations and never get prosecuted.

i hope you now can see the link between Sanders and Trump. While they are opposite in politics, they share a similar independence with their souls not being bought with pecuniary rewards from NY banks for political favor. Please refer to my previous posts in future which would have answered your statements and saved us both time.

[Linzz]

"Also called pinball voting"? Did you make that up? References please.

And here I'd thought you were a wizard....

POLITICAL PINBALL

Political Pinball is a political game, monetary operated (with tax payer money) in which points (votes) are scored by a politician manipulating voting balls (the people) on a biased media controlled playing field inside a green colored cabinet (United States). The primary objective of the game is to gain as many votes as possible. Votes are gained by the player (politician) coercing the ball to strike the targets (Example: Illegal Immigrants) that the player wants manipulated to gain the most votes. There are two "Flippers" one for the left and one for the right.

http://www2.ljworld.com/weblogs/swampyvilles-the-banshees-cry/2012/aug/8/swampyvilles-what-is-political-pinball/

Lawyers for the state urged a federal appeals court not to halt Wisconsin's voter ID law again in a brief filed on Tuesday, saying such a move would give voters the “pinball treatment.”

http://www.wpr.org/doj-urges-federal-appeals-court-not-block-voter-id-again

A pinball strategy would most likely be employed in a future presidential contest, Smith said; that’s where the political stakes are highest, and where campaigns would have the money to pursue it.

http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/pinball-recounts-could-mean-electoral-disaster-strategist-says-8955

In the primaries, politics is a lot like pinball as it moves in unexpected ways, lifting one candidate’s chances of getting the nomination, bypassing others. In the national election, it’s more like a bowling bowl, rolling down a straight and narrow stretch headed either to the gutter or a strike.

http://www.goldcoastchronicle.com/politics/political-pinball-two-day-later/#sthash.QdfBvUCB.dpuf

Trump is a gutter ball.

I can document that one too if anyone would just ask.

For the funovit...

By The Who

Ever since I was a young boy,

I've played the silver ball.

From Soho down to Brighton

I must have played them all.

But I ain't seen nothing like him

In any amusement hall

That deaf dumb and blind Trump

Sure plays a mean pin ball!

Btw, one hopes you don't go left and right at the same moment while driving.

OK thanks. From one of your links:

"NOTICE THAT THE OWNERS (SPECIAL INTERESTS) RIG THE POLITICAL PINBALL MACHINE SO THAT THE OUTCOME WILL BE IN THEIR FAVOR!"

The concept is foreign to me. Looks like you might be more familiar with it because it really applies to the American political system. It will be interesting to see what the Republican's do with their machine.

[keemapoot]

^^Linzz, it sounds as though you and I share many of the same views, along with a few other posters here. I don't wish to speak for others, but I suspect Lannarebirth may be among them.

It is a difficult line to balance in the American political party system when you share Republicans view of economic issues, and Democrats views of social issues. Normally, we are somehow loosely thrown into the "liberterian" or "independent" category in many people's views, but some of us don't fit comfortably in those either. When I voted for Republicans, it was because of fiscal policy, and I held my nose at many social issues. Vice versa for Democrats.

Party hacks and dogmatic adherents from both parties are plentiful on this forum, and many who say they are not, but their posting history suggests otherwise.

[Linzz]

^^Linzz, it sounds as though you and I share many of the same views, along with a few other posters here. I don't wish to speak for others, but I suspect Lannarebirth may be among them.

It is a difficult line to balance in the American political party system when you share Republicans view of economic issues, and Democrats views of social issues. Normally, we are somehow loosely thrown into the "liberterian" or "independent" category in many people's views, but some of us don't fit comfortably in those either. When I voted for Republicans, it was because of fiscal policy, and I held my nose at many social issues. Vice versa for Democrats.

Party hacks and dogmatic adherents from both parties are plentiful on this forum, and many who say they are not, but their posting history suggests otherwise.

Thanks. The eyes are far too much on personalities because it's easier to have fun that way. To me it's all pretty much a distraction from the real issues. While many have misgivings about Trump and popular uprisings which is fair, and he does not seem to have formed substantial policy, what is good about it is he shaking the political establishment and vested interest tree and they don't like it because it's a challenge to their power. Trump is popular because he is the consummate anti politician so it really doesn't matter what he says. To so many who hate politicians an anti politician is refreshing and certainly holds appeal especially to those who feel they are not represented by politicians. Interesting times.

[NeverSure]

[keemapoot]

^^He hasn't articulated any policies of substance yet, and probably for good reason. Any party-backed candidate or billionaire can hire the most brilliant policy minds and advisers, but then it just brings him to the level of the others and can be attacked for his policies. By keeping it dumb and appealing to baser instincts and anger, he is able to channel the anger and get support from the disenfranchised.

I for one, am quite curious how he intends to bring back blue collar jobs from China, where they earn $3.50/hr to the U.S. where they earn $20.

Is he capable of putting together a crackerjack team? Of course, and he will if nominated as the party will have little choice.

Edited March 14, 2016 by keemapoot

[NeverSure]