Cleveland 2016 = Chicago 1968. Bank on it.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
To borrow your frases, Kasich has about as much chance as Ben Carson or a snowball in hell. Quote me on that!
Totally, totally . . . totally different scenarios. There will be no radicalised youth movement fired up by the sixties youth movement and Vietnam and Richard Nixon doing battle in the streets.
At best, you could have a mediocre bunch of geek supporter of Trump or Cruz doing some sort of Brooks Brothers pathetic riot on behalf of one another, or over hyped dramatics fuelled by desperate pundits trying to sell copy.
I hope and pray it would blow up and kill the Republican party as we know it. I believe it will all end up very anti climatic and the Republicans will be stuck with a bogus candidate in Trump or Cruz that will never win.
The last time the GOP had a contested convention in 76, delegates wounded in the pandemonium inside the building weren't allowed to get out because respective factions fear that their replacements would switch.
Never underestimate what politics and passion can do together. It's a potent mix. This time, US is at its most divided since the Civil War, the fecking Civil War!
All it takes is one nut who manage to slip a gun inside, or a bunch of ragtag Trumpkins with their handmade Molotov cocktail. I hope for you lot it doesn't come to that, but history has a tendency to repeat itself.
Because we have literally no idea what'll happen in a contested convention, it's completely unpredictable so there's a hell of a lot of uncertainty. A Trump candidacy could result in the death of the GOP as we know it, and Cruz isn't a great deal better. I think Cruz is a fair way likelier than Kasich, but I can also imagine a lot of backlash to the idea among the people who regard him as a pure bastard. The Democrat situation on the other hand is easier to predict.
Did I hear that there are right wing groups asking for the convention to be designated an open carry area...
This could be tragic (and somehow awesome in a karma's gonna get ya kind of way)
One thing is for certain though no matter who wins (Mrs Bill Clinton, Comrade Sanders, Adolf Trump or Lyin Ted) they certainly will be taking over a divided country and its going to be a tough presidency term and difficult to actually achieve anything
But still, you´re comparing these clowns today to the passion of the sixties radicalised youth movements, albeit naive as it was. Maybe a Trumpkin will throw a punch at a Cruznik, but nothing even remotely close to the following . . .
Nah, the secret service shot that one down (ha ha) one time. Too bad.
The repubs don't need a star since they can energize their voters with Hillary hate. I could also see dems low turnout based on Hillary dislike. It's still winnable for the repubs.
Well the poor whites with rising mortality rate, lower life expectancy, illiterate and bigoted might be their equivalent. The passion they have for Feckface Von Clownstick is alarming and if they see their hopes and dreams snatched away, it ain't going to be pretty.
You can't exclude the possibility of sabotage either. Radicals like the couple in San Bernardino might see the GOP convention as a good opportunity to heighten the tension.
You can't exclude the possibility of sabotage either. Radicals like the couple in San Bernardino might see the GOP convention as a good opportunity to heighten the tension.
1968 is memorable because the police beat the shit out of protestors. That isn't going to happen in Cleveland although I can see some black anti-Trumpers getting shot.
But they lack the organization and zeal of the youth movements. Plus the Trumpkins probably have to be working during the convention time, unlike the students.
I did forget about the possibility of violence against leftist or minority anti Trump protesters. I would say this would be way more likely a source of violence than Trumpkins getting feisty and fisty. I would expect geek-passion running high inside the convention.
Trump sealing it like he probably will, will shut down all this pundit drama.
Does anyone think Cruz can best Clinton? Will the fact that Trump isn't the nominee make everyone so relieved that they will look past Cruz's many fault?
Nothing certain but death and taxes, of course, but their path is very narrow. It requires defending all of their strongholds, some already saw big change in demographics in recent years (AZ, GA), taking the Rust Belt (OH, MI, PA, IL) and on top of that Florida.
Now if Clinton does get indicted, it's a whole different ballgame.
Absolutely not. His sliminess is so apparent when he speaks that he will turn off many.
I think they badly need a star and the Hillary hate to even have a remote chance. Too bad that star is Feckface von Clownstick.
by white pro-trumpers - who will claim they were making america great again?
Personally I think anybody who is deamed to look slightly muslim and is carrying a backpack might as well have a target on their back - almost certainly going to get shot as a terrorist if the pro trump loonies are allowed to have their guns
I can't listen to him for more than 2 minutes at a time. Imagine 4 years of him.
He really is awful. He doesn't inspire at all. I always hear that he's a great debater but I can't say I've ever seen it. He's just great at saying little and repeating his talking points over and over.
presumably chapter 11 so they can restructure?
not quite like bankruptcy this side of the pond... makes sense though they probably have some good assets longer term (would suck to be a major creditor though)
Trump´s now all furious and having a go at the RNC and slimy geek Rinse Previous for rigging the primaries against him.
There you go Donald, get used to republican tactics of rigging elections as they do with outside money in local elections, gerrymandering, restrictive voting laws, and closing down voting stations. Following the lead of their corporate masters who rig the vaunted Free Market. I hope this fecker Trump destroys this party!
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...ms-rnc-chairman-calls-2016-process-a-disgrace
There you go Donald, get used to republican tactics of rigging elections as they do with outside money in local elections, gerrymandering, restrictive voting laws, and closing down voting stations. Following the lead of their corporate masters who rig the vaunted Free Market. I hope this fecker Trump destroys this party!
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...ms-rnc-chairman-calls-2016-process-a-disgrace
It sounds like an issue that could play some part in future campaigning, for either party. There are parallels with the crises afflicting steel in the UK perhaps.
https://morningconsult.com/2016/04/poll-clintons-unharmed-black-lives-matter-dustup/
The Clintons's favourability actually went up after the BLM's clash. Nice to be vindicated so quickly.
Except for the small, vocal section of activists, their core constituency, AA who are old enough to remember Bill's terms know how to evaluate his response appropriately.
I just love the arrogance here. No matter that studies have shown that the welfare bill lead to skyrocketing poverty, or that the crime bill lead to insane arrest rates.
Suddenly, the political cynic now believes voters (in particular, older voters) know best and "have responded appropriately."
I trust in the people who experienced the time, circumstances and challenges to know who best represent their interest, rather than those who never did.
Black family income rose about $3000 on average under Bill Clinton, gun death fell to a 46 years low, unemployment rate down to 7.3%, and violent crimes dropped. They also got better representation by being appointed to judgeship and cabinet positions in unprecedented numbers. The Clintons are many things, racist not one of them.
Maybe your lily white revolution needs a bit of introspection?
His sister Souljah moment that was seemingly so successful in 92.
Of course there is another side to this . . .
The Clinton Legacy Is Black Impoverishment—so Why Are We Still Voting for Hillary?
http://www.theroot.com/articles/pol...k_america_so_why_are_we_still_voting_for.html
Saying black impoverishment is a Clinton legacy is like the GOP blaming 9/11 on Slick Willie.
Politics is the art of compromise. He could be pig headed like Carter to stick to his guns, got voted out of office and let the Republicans dictate what they will, or compromised like he did, add in the assault weapon ban in the bill, increased money for policing and community development. Ironically, Saint Bernard voted for the same crime bill - without the assault weapon ban. Same goes for the welfare reform. Reagan's dogwhistle of 'welfare queens' was highly effective, so the public at large demanded reforms. Do you temporarily protect the minorities by keeping it, or try to keep office, alleviate the problem as best you can and make it up in other areas? It's like people think Bill Clinton's tenure was all smooth sailing, while the healthcare fight, the welfare reform, the Black Hawk Down episode etc... were all controversial public debate. He did what he could with a Republican Congress.
Are the welfare reform and crime bills partly responsible for AA's ailments nowadays? Absolutely. Are they the root cause of those problem? Nope. Look to Nixon War on Drugs, or Reagan's, GHWB's and W's trickle down economics.
Wow.
It's not my revolution, I'm not white (or American).
And I'm talking about proper research, not stats used in mud-slinging debates where correlation-causation fallacies, or continuation of previously existing trends, are never considered.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...clintons-welfare-law-doubled-extreme-poverty/
http://newjimcrow.com/
I didn't call them racists. I said their "compromises" much beloved by so many, ended up hurting people of colour disproportionately and very hard.
Finally, older voters, white voters, independents, high-school graduates facing diminishing job prospects, all go Republican. Do you "trust in the people who experienced the time, circumstances and challenges to know who best represent their interest, rather than those who never did."
Did turfing out Julia Gillard/Kevin Rudd for Tony Abbott represent the best thing the majority of Australians could do for collective self-interest?
I want to say no. However, some recent polling has shown that Cruz is looked on pretty favourably in key battleground states like Florida and Ohio and does well against Clinton in those states. Even Pennsylvania
However, he just seems way to far right, and presently, some of his scarier views don't seem to be out in the open because in a party debate, you can't bring up his anti-abortion, or anti-gay marriage, or anti-climate change stances and expect to get residual votes because his views are relatively popular within the core of the party. So maybe people aren't yet aware that under his slimy disposition is a pretty slimy person as well. I don't think those issues have been brought to the fore yet, and in a general, although he can stress economics all he wants, he'll be hounded and criticized for his views on social issues.
Not so sure... They are in trouble because they spent big on an Australian company presuming Chinese demand would continue to grow... Can't see any parallels with the dumping / state subsidy claims
New York Republican Presidential Primary Siena Trump 50, Kasich 27, Cruz 17 Trump +23
New York Democratic Presidential Primary Siena Clinton 52, Sanders 42 Clinton +10
getting closer..
New York Democratic Presidential Primary Siena Clinton 52, Sanders 42 Clinton +10
getting closer..
Has an interviewer ever asked Cruz how he intends to combat his slimy persona?
Except most if not all of those consequences blown up under Republicans's watch. Take mass incarceration for example. The federal prison system holds only 10% of the prison population. It's the private prison system that lobbied the Republican states legislature to drum up their draconian state laws to put more and more people into those prison, P.O.C disproportionately so.
Same goes for extreme poverty. One thing that can't be denied is that under Clinton's presidency, the economic and racial status of poc improved. You can make the argument as the articles above that it's his policies that lead directly to the problems nowadays, or you can read up on the history of the time to know that those policies will be enacted regardless. It's not his fault that Gore couldn't beat an imbecile from Texas, and said imbecile reversed to the laisse fairez economics that wiped off the surpluses, widen income inequality, degrade public infrastructure, all of which affect blacks disproportionately.
The black voters who are voting for Clinton now are not uninformed. They saw their loved ones affected by the War on Drugs and the violence of drugs proliferation in their communities. They saw their income went up, access to education, credit, public housing went up under Clinton, they saw less gun violence in their neighborhood, they saw their purple elected to high offices previously unheard of in the government. Then they saw everything went tits up under Bush and much of Obama's time as he tried to fix the former's mess. From what I've read, none of them expect sweeping change in fortune with Hillary Clinton in office, but they expect tentative improvements that over time will make a difference. They bought into that, instead of 'political revolution'. (And I know you aren't white btw)
Long story short? They know they are fecked regardless in the system, but the Clintons helped alleviating that to some degree, do they don't hold the fall out against them.
I don't know why you brought Australia into the conversation, because it's a whole different ballgame, but here goes.
Australia's politics is much different from the US. For a start, despite Tony Dumb-Dumb rhetorics, Liberals aren't that much different from Labour. The latter under Howard expanded social welfare to unprecedented level, fueled by the mining boom and sales of government assets to private sector, which went tits up eventually when China's demand started declining and they've got nothing more to sell. Immigrants gaming the system is something the public also take great offense to, and Liberals benefitted from their hard line towards this group. Now, this is unfair on a lot of those escaping warzones, but Australia do have an immigrant problem. I have first hand knowledge of Vietnamese, Chinese and Indian communities engaging in all sort of shady businesses from growing weed, selling crack, cocaine or smuggling, illegal prostitution. I know of literal welfare queens who breed like rabbits, use the money granted to them through governments program (Centrelink, Baby Bonus) to live comfortably while small businesses struggle paying the minimum wage of 16.87 (highest in developed countries if I'm not mistaken). Of course, not all are like that, but the standard of living and infrastructure in these suburbs of immigrants who show little signs of assimilating are alarming. It's a welfare state showing signs of crumbling under its own weight, and Liberals benefit from the Labours inactions. On top of that, Julia Gillard's refusal to endorse LGBT rights and other progressive causes (asylum) drew ire from leftist groups, and their 3 coups in 5 years didn't help. There were a fair bit of fear mongering about Abbott's reign, but the cvnt got dumped very quickly and as far as I can tell, there's no big difference in the daily life. The same can't be said of the US.
Poverty rate among African-Americans
Median income
Unemployment
Murder rate
Either Billy Boy got extremely lucky that he took office precisely when HW's policies were just beginning to bear fruit for African-Americans, and left office precisely when his were ballsing things up for Dubya's tenure, or he actually did quite a good job.
Jamelle Bouie also wrote a well balanced piece on the crime bill's legacy the other day - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...s_crime_bill_were_messier_than_they_seem.html
Median income
Unemployment
Murder rate
Either Billy Boy got extremely lucky that he took office precisely when HW's policies were just beginning to bear fruit for African-Americans, and left office precisely when his were ballsing things up for Dubya's tenure, or he actually did quite a good job.
Jamelle Bouie also wrote a well balanced piece on the crime bill's legacy the other day - http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...s_crime_bill_were_messier_than_they_seem.html
- Status