It's absurd. I wonder if the 3% truth emerged by accident.
@InfiniteBoredom the untrustworthiness is more to do with changing positions.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
It's absurd. I wonder if the 3% truth emerged by accident.
@InfiniteBoredom the untrustworthiness is more to do with changing positions.
Truth-o-meter of all the candidates.
I thought Hillary was a liar.
Turns out both her and Bernie are pretty similar in the "false" departments. Seems she states more complete truths than him.
Last edited:
So Trumpy doesn't really have the best words?
He does. He's the minister of "truthiness".
Nothing to do with 'Benghaziiiiii!!!' and 'Emails!!!'?
She's a difficult character to warm to, and ideally I'd want Warren to be running, but she's no less untrustworthy than most politicians, even Bernie Sanders, it seems.
Most of those lies are him saying he has big hands
Big foot... Big sock
Trump discovering the hard way, the perils of dissing Mitt Romney when visiting Utah.....
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3683983-155/new-poll-shows-ted-cruz-with
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3683983-155/new-poll-shows-ted-cruz-with
How a brokered convention works. Essentially, Trump's best bet is to get the nomination after the first round of voting. If he doesn't get it then, a much larger number of delegates become unbound and will probably go for Cruz or Kasich. If after two votes, there is still no nominee, then a third vote may well introduce other candidates like Ryan, Romney, et al.
How a brokered convention works. Essentially, Trump's best bet is to get the nomination after the first round of voting. If he doesn't get it then, a much larger number of delegates become unbound and will probably go for Cruz or Kasich. If after two votes, there is still no nominee, then a third vote may well introduce other candidates like Ryan, Romney, et al.
Some Republicans have said that even if Trump does not get that number but is only 100 or so away, they will have to give him the nomination. Think that's true, anything else would have them panned even more.
Also someone posted a rule that said you have to win a certain number of states to be nominated. Is that not true?
Applied only to the 2012 convention, it was written to cut out Ron Paul.
Yeah i'm pretty sure it is 8 states minimum.
There are a few separate threads for UK politics - the election thread was started just four months before the election and got to 165 pages. The Labour Leadership election/ Jeremy Corbyn threads (equivalent of one of the US primaries and discussions about Hilary Clinton) are about 140 pages in total too, all since last summer.
Plus, US politics is just so much more entertaining. From the outside looking in, it is very much like a particularly ridiculous reality TV show...with potentially horrifying real world consequences. So much of what happens seems insane, when you look at the Republican race, cable news journalists and various 'issues' that pop up.
How a brokered convention works. Essentially, Trump's best bet is to get the nomination after the first round of voting. If he doesn't get it then, a much larger number of delegates become unbound and will probably go for Cruz or Kasich. If after two votes, there is still no nominee, then a third vote may well introduce other candidates like Ryan, Romney, et al.
Thanks for posting this! Very interesting! So he still has to win at least 50% of the remaining delegates, with all the bashing going on it looks like a brokered convention is going to happen.
I don't think he can legally be given the nomination unless he reaches 1237. That's why the number exists in the first place, it's exactly 50% + 1 of all available delegates.
Interesting footnoot at the bottom of that picture that says the RNC will meet to decide the rules for the convention soon. Wonder if they'll throw any curveballs.
All this talk of a brokered convention has me thinking about watching the movie "The Best Man" with Henry Fonda and Cliff Robertson.
of course. but as we know the entire exercise is about turning out voters for the GE. To take away the nomination from the guy who has the most delegates will rip the party apart even more than it already is.
No, Lincoln was third in the number of delegates but he was elected to be the president I think. It's entirely up to Trump to make the deals necessary. He has the biggest bargaining chip with the number of delegates and if he's a good negotiator, then let him do it. Isn't that what he's telling others?
A contested convention may rip the party apart, but it's there because no one has the majority in the first place.
Looks very confident as of late. She's in full running mode now.
Lots of speculation that Trump may be boo'd when he speaks later today, which would be humiliating for him.
Hope so. The crowd is a weird one though. They boo'd Biden yesterday when he said there's no political will on both sides to reach an agreement, yet gave Hill standing ovations after she defended the Iran deal.
I know the history. We are talking of the now. Trump's biggest chip is his voters. I see no way anyone else will be the nominee tbh
Trump having a meeting with top Republicans today to try and sort this whole mess out, I guess he has realised he needs them as he's not looking like getting a full majority.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-meet-with-top-republicans-in-washington.html
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-meet-with-top-republicans-in-washington.html
He doesn't have a majority vote. Obviously, republican party can't change the majority rules for Trump. I heard they did introduce a rule of 8 state majority vote to marginalize Ron Paul, but if the delegates are unbound and they want to vote for someone else, they will.
I thought the organizers had reached a deal with those who have come out publicly against Trump - they would protest outside...but not inside, to ensure, there is a 'united' Jewish voice inside AIPAC.
Plus, I expect him to amend his - I'll be neutral stance.
Man, feck AIPAC. I wouldn't lose any more respect for Trump if he maintained his quasineutral stance on the matter, despite the crowd's reaction.
We're not talking about the nutjobs that have previously interrupted Trump's speeches. This is AIPAC members who reject Trump.
It's perfectly acceptable to not get a thumbs up from the NRA - not so from AIPAC. Can't think of anyone in Congress who stepped out of line, maybe Keith Ellison? Probably not even him.
Bernie has come as close as possible, while not actually doing anything provocative (and you would think being related to Holocaust victims would be worth something to AIPAC...) Their double standards with Romney and screening a recorded message are amazing.
No I know - I saw there were around 300 Rabbis and their supporters who had publicly stated their distrust of Trump (not only because of the 'neutral' comment...but equally because of his demonization of minorities). AIPAC requested that they limit the protests.
AIPAC has disowned the email since it was made public.
So, the protest leaders plan to either not show up, or walk out when he starts to speak, as opposed to disrupting him.
They've banned any critical reporters from covering the event. https://theintercept.com/2016/03/18...many-journalists-and-activists-denied-access/
It's not the left that exclusively uses safe spaces -- and unlike college debating societies, AIPAC has real power.
To lighten things up a bit, our friends at The Simpsons actually predicted the Trump Presidency many years ago. So we already know who the successor will be should Trump prevail.....President Lisa Simpson.
Oh great...a frigging Tree Hugger.
Keep Bernin' that candle 
- Status