The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Gordon Shumway**

shasolenzabi wrote:
Look, the only reason Hilary looks as if she has the nomination all wrapped up is the Corporate media which put money into her campaign wants us to believe it is so. Bernie was the winner that CNN debate, CNN as a Time-Warner owned operation switched their polls to reflect the chosen one, not Bernie.

Social Media knows Bernie won, People on the vast Social Media networks are pro-Bernie, so the polls may lie as per the mandate of the Media moguls who want Hilary as she will leave them alone tax wise. Bernie would close loopholes and make them pay their fair share of taxes they dodge.

The corporate corruption, handouts, and other bad policies will make this nation a Oligarchial Corporatocracy which is a Fascist state BTW. Bernie seeks to end that.

Stop believing the Mainstream Media as they are pro-corporatist mouth pieces.

Ok, you just keep believing that. What evidence do you have to support the idea that the Sandman has any shot in the world of beating Clinton? His polls in IA and NH? They come in 1st and third as far as self identified white liberals in the us. Way to go he can win a minority of a minority. He might win Iowa. He is currently tied or behind in NH (a state he should win, it's next to his own and demos). Then what? South Carolina, Nevada, and a feth ton of other states where he will struggle to get more than 20% of the vote. I am not the mainstream media (strange how Sanders supporters sound like right wingers these days). I am am man who can look at numbers objectively.

Unless Clinton gets dragged in front of a federal court by FBI Feds, she will be the nominee, and if she is, Biden left himself open to swoop in to save the day (evidently you didn't watch his speech because it was carried by the lame stream media). I'm not sure you should take your Facebook page as a credible source of information.

**LordofHats**

Mass Media doesn't favor Clinton because they gave her money, they favor her because she's the establishment Candidate. It's the same reason they favored her in 2008, because no one at the time fathomed anyone else as posing a legitimate challenge and even when Obama started to have undeniable momentum leading into January, media outlets continued backing her because she was the Establishment candidate and Obama wasn't.

It's not about money, it's about how media outlets negotiate and work with the DNC to arrange rights and air time (the same kind of relationship exists with the RNC, in years where the Republican Primary isn't a mess). Their always going to favor the candidate that the party proper favors, not the guy who came out of left field.

**Gordon Shumway**

Except for the fact they don't really favor her at all.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-is-in-a-self-reinforcing-funk/

And if you think Nate Silver is part of the Media establishment, you don't understand why he quit his high profile job at NYT. The fact is media likes a story to sell add copy. Fights sell add copy. There isnt really much of a fight on the left right now, so they have to make one. Sorry to break it to you Burnites, but Sanders is only even remotly in the news because the media wants him to be in the news because it helps them sell clicks and ads. The twitters and facebooks follow the headlines and act as a megaphone. Welcome to the 21st century. "Take a bow to the new revolution...Meet the old boss, same as the new boss". Somehow people still don't get irony in The Who lyrics.

The media favors those who will make them money. Period. If you think Murdock or Ailes, or the CEOs of GE or Viacom, or Disney or Time Warner really care about political ideology more than their bottom line, you are deluding yourself. They are all in the business of entertainment. And we are entertained by football and circuses and murder. Sanders will be an asterisk martyr. Perot, meet Nader, meet Sanders. Except Sanders will have no outcome on the general.

**Ouze**

Jeb! is starting to have some money issues.

**jasper76**

Gordon Shumway wrote:
\Sanders will be an asterisk martyr. Perot, meet Nader, meet Sanders. Except Sanders will have no outcome on the general.

If you're looking for an analogy to previous elections, I'd use Kucinich. Sanders is basically running on Dennis Kucinich's 2008 platform, just minus the gun control, and plus some charisma.

**Ouze**

Ron Paul comes to mind, as well.

**dogma**

shasolenzabi wrote:

Social Media knows Bernie won, People on the vast Social Media networks are pro-Bernie...

Yes, some people on the various social media networks support Sanders. These people also tend to be particularly forthright regarding this fact, as is generally the case when a nonstandard candidate achieves some success. This does not mean that Sanders is the more popular candidate overall, indeed there is a school of thought which dictates that a large activist base tends to indicate a lack of popular support as activists don't have any reason to exist in support of a popular candidate.

shasolenzabi wrote:

Stop believing the Mainstream Media as they are pro-corporatist mouth pieces.

And, unless you're looking at the raw data from the entirety of a network like Facebook, social media is merely a window into an echo chamber.

**Ensis Ferrae**

dogma wrote:
shasolenzabi wrote:

Social Media knows Bernie won, People on the vast Social Media networks are pro-Bernie...

Yes, some people on the various social media networks support Sanders. These people also tend to be particularly forthright regarding this fact, as is generally the case when a nonstandard candidate achieves some success. This does not mean that Sanders is the more popular candidate overall, indeed there is a school of thought which dictates that a large activist base tends to indicate a lack of popular support as activists don't have any reason to exist in support of a popular candidate.

10k plus supporters in Arizona rallies, 20k plus in Oregon doesn't really indicate that this is a mere "activist" crowd to me. The fact that he's beating Obama's 2008 fundraising "records" should indicate that there IS popular support.

**dogma**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

10k plus supporters in Arizona rallies, 20k plus in Oregon doesn't really indicate that this is a mere "activist" crowd to me. The fact that he's beating Obama's 2008 fundraising "records" should indicate that there IS popular support.

Oh, there is, but my point is two fold:

A) Social networks are poor means of gauging support for a given candidate, unless you have access to raw data.
B) Sanders likely has less support than his supporters would like to believe.

**yellowfever**

Our government is so corrupt from the top down in all areas on both sides I don't even know what to think anymore.

**BrotherGecko**

Truly it has become so corrupt that symbols of modern corporate coruption have decided to simply skip the middle men and run themselves.

**DutchWinsAll**

BrotherGecko wrote:
Truly it has become so corrupt that symbols of modern corporate coruption have decided to simply skip the middle men and run themselves.

And yet his supporters think he's an "outsider" for some reason

**shasolenzabi**

Ghazkuul wrote:
shasolenzabi wrote:
Look, the only reason Hilary looks as if she has the nomination all wrapped up is the Corporate media which put money into her campaign wants us to believe it is so. Bernie was the winner that CNN debate, CNN as a Time-Warner owned operation switched their polls to reflect the chosen one, not Bernie.

Social Media knows Bernie won, People on the vast Social Media networks are pro-Bernie, so the polls may lie as per the mandate of the Media moguls who want Hilary as she will leave them alone tax wise. Bernie would close loopholes and make them pay their fair share of taxes they dodge.

The corporate corruption, handouts, and other bad policies will make this nation a Oligarchial Corporatocracy which is a Fascist state BTW. Bernie seeks to end that.

Stop believing the Mainstream Media as they are pro-corporatist mouth pieces.

Like I said, Im a registered republican. But at the moment unless Jeb gets the go ahead I think im going to vote for Bernie, at least he doesn't have a corrupt past as long as a football field. Yes im talking about Hillary The Clinton foundation, the e-mails and so on its just ridiculous that dems want her as the candidate. Just because she is popular doesn't mean you nominate her, its her actions and policy you need to look at and her actions so far look terrible.

Looks like Jeb may be out, so vote Bernie then! We need someone not beholden to the Wall Street Gangs.

Hilary has been given substantial donations by Time-Warner, which does own CNN. There was an article where they were said to have donated 400K to her, no idea what the others did, but whoever owns Washington Post also is heavy on the Hilary support.

**Ouze**

Why do you think Jeb! may be out? I mean, aside from his mediocre campaign, nonexistent charisma, dwindling donor base, and so on - was there a story that he was thinking about calling it quits yet? I mean, there is obviously going to be that story, and probably pretty soon, but did it break yet?

**shasolenzabi**

Ouze wrote:
Why do you think Jeb! may be out? I mean, aside from his mediocre campaign, nonexistent charisma, dwindling donor base, and so on - was there a story that he was thinking about calling it quits yet? I mean, there is obviously going to be that story, and probably pretty soon, but did it break yet?

Articles keep popping up on news feeds, one mentioned his cut backs to paid staff for the campaign, that is never a good sign for any candidate.

**d-usa**

shasolenzabi wrote:
Ouze wrote:
Why do you think Jeb! may be out? I mean, aside from his mediocre campaign, nonexistent charisma, dwindling donor base, and so on - was there a story that he was thinking about calling it quits yet? I mean, there is obviously going to be that story, and probably pretty soon, but did it break yet?

Articles keep popping up on news feeds, one mentioned his cut backs to paid staff for the campaign, that is never a good sign for any candidate.

It also happens fairly frequently though. I think that McCain had to scale his staff back to a skeleton crew and was running with mostly volunteers before eventually getting the nomination.

**Ouze**

No charges for Lois Lerner.

DOJ closes IRS investigation with no charges

Washington (CNN)The Justice Department notified members of Congress on Friday that it is closing its two-year investigation into whether the IRS improperly targeted the tea party and other conservative groups.

There will be no charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner or anyone else at the agency, the Justice Department said in a letter.

The probe found "substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia leading to the belief by many tax-exempt applicants that the IRS targeted them based on their political viewpoints. But poor management is not a crime," Assistant Attorney General Peter Kadzik said in the letter.

The IRS scandal exploded in May 2013 when Lerner answered a planted question at an American Bar Association event and apologized for inappropriately scrutinizing some groups applying for a tax exemption. Her response fueled a full-on scandal within hours that shook the Obama administration. Congressional hearings were held within weeks and the interim leader of the IRS was forced from office.

The IRS mishandled the processing of tax-exempt applications in a manner that disproportionately impacted applicants affiliated with the tea party and similar groups, leaving the appearance that the IRS's conduct was motivated by political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives.

IRS probed for 'potential criminal activity'

The IRS, which has a broad mandate ranging from tax collection to the implementation of key Obamacare provisions, has struggled to recover from the scandal. Obama nominated John Koskinen, a well-known turnaround manager, to run the agency.

Kadzik found "no evidence" to support a criminal prosecution.

"We found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution," Kadzik said. "We also found no evidence that any official involved in the handling of tax-exempt applications or IRS leadership attempted to obstruct justice. Based on the evidence developed in this investigation and the recommendation of experienced career prosecutors and supervising attorneys at the department, we are closing our investigation and will not seek any criminal charges."

Democrats welcomed the announcement.

"Today, the Justice Department confirmed the same conclusions we had years ago," Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement. "Over the past five years, Republicans in the House of Representatives have squandered literally tens of millions of dollars going down all kinds of investigative rabbit holes -- IRS, Planned Parenthood, Benghazi -- with absolutely no evidence of illegal activity."

But former House Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa, R-California, said the DOJ's decision gives the impression that "government officials are above the law."

"The Justice Department's decision to close the IRS targeting investigation without a single charge or prosecution is a low point of accountability in an administration that is better known for punishing whistleblowers than the abuse and misconduct they expose," Issa said in a statement. "After stating that their investigation confirms that tea party and conservative groups were improperly targeted, they dismiss it merely as a byproduct of gross mismanagement and incompetence -- ignoring volumes of evidence in the public record and efforts to obstruct legitimate inquires."

And Rep. Paul Ryan, the chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means committee and the likely successor to outgoing House Speaker John Boehner, called the DOJ's announcement "predictable" and said his committee will continue its investigation into the IRS's actions.

"Through these investigations we have uncovered serious and unprecedented actions taken by the most senior IRS official in charge of the non-profit unit, Lois Lerner, to deprive conservative organizations of their constitutional rights," Ryan said in a statement. "Despite the DOJ closing its investigation, the Ways and Means Committee will continue to find answers and hold the IRS accountable for its actions."

**LordofHats**

So in other words, at the very least if anything wrong was done, there is not sufficient evidence to take the matter to trial. The Repbulcians, because they're so concerned about government waste, will continue to spend more tax dollars on yet another investigatory boondoggle that will likely embarrass them far more than any Democrat?

Yeah. Sounds about right

**d-usa**

I look forward to the day that the House Special Select Committee on Irsgazi finally uncovers the truth.

**Dreadclaw69**

Actions that disproportionately affect minorities; de facto proof of racism

Actions that disproportionately affect Republicans; it was just bad management

**Kanluwen**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Actions that disproportionately affect minorities; de facto proof of racism

Actions that disproportionately affect Republicans; it was just bad management

I love how people can seriously compare Republican groups being targeted for investigation by an agency whose job it is to investigate groups for tax evasion/fraud to institutional racism.

If that isn't the perfect example of a persecution complex I don't know what is.

**LordofHats**

You'd think that after watching two other investigations become embarrassing witch hunts that make them look bad, they'd be reluctant to start yet another one. Especially in election season.

This is why jokes about the Republican party being incompetent get so much mileage...

**Tannhauser42**

d-usa wrote:
shasolenzabi wrote:
Ouze wrote:
Why do you think Jeb! may be out? I mean, aside from his mediocre campaign, nonexistent charisma, dwindling donor base, and so on - was there a story that he was thinking about calling it quits yet? I mean, there is obviously going to be that story, and probably pretty soon, but did it break yet?

Articles keep popping up on news feeds, one mentioned his cut backs to paid staff for the campaign, that is never a good sign for any candidate.

It also happens fairly frequently though. I think that McCain had to scale his staff back to a skeleton crew and was running with mostly volunteers before eventually getting the nomination.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he is just scaling back, waiting for the inevitable falls of Trump and Carson, who are ratings/polling juggernauts. Once they're out, he can probably bounce back.

**Easy E**

Gordon Shumway wrote:
Except for the fact they don't really favor her at all.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/hillary-clinton-is-in-a-self-reinforcing-funk/

And if you think Nate Silver is part of the Media establishment, you don't understand why he quit his high profile job at NYT. The fact is media likes a story to sell add copy. Fights sell add copy. There isnt really much of a fight on the left right now, so they have to make one. Sorry to break it to you Burnites, but Sanders is only even remotly in the news because the media wants him to be in the news because it helps them sell clicks and ads. The twitters and facebooks follow the headlines and act as a megaphone. Welcome to the 21st century. "Take a bow to the new revolution...Meet the old boss, same as the new boss". Somehow people still don't get irony in The Who lyrics.

The media favors those who will make them money. Period. If you think Murdock or Ailes, or the CEOs of GE or Viacom, or Disney or Time Warner really care about political ideology more than their bottom line, you are deluding yourself. They are all in the business of entertainment. And we are entertained by football and circuses and murder. Sanders will be an asterisk martyr. Perot, meet Nader, meet Sanders. Except Sanders will have no outcome on the general.

Honestly, just by being discussed and getting to be in the debates, Bernie has all ready completed his primary objective for running. He said it himself, he was running to get people talking about the issues that he cares about which is inequality and corporate power. I think people having been talking about that more than ever lately.

Bernie won! Hilary has had to move tot eh left. The question is if he can keep her there long enough for it to matter once she is elected. I have doubts.

**Dreadclaw69**

Ouze wrote:
Jeb! is starting to have some money issues.

But if he drops out that cuts the 90's vibe of the elections in half

**Gordon Shumway**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Ouze wrote:
Jeb! is starting to have some money issues.

But if he drops out that cuts the 90's vibe of the elections in half

Somebody who has some photoshop skills needs to post a pic of Clinton in a zoomba pants suit, stat!

**Hulksmash**

I don't see Jeb dropping out. I feel like everything he's doing is based on a long term. He'll start picking up more and more momentum as people drop out.

Unless there is a radical shift all of this feels like it plays to his strengths. We'll see.

**Gordon Shumway**

Hulksmash wrote:
I don't see Jeb dropping out. I feel like everything he's doing is based on a long term. He'll start picking up more and more momentum as people drop out.

Unless there is a radical shift all of this feels like it plays to his strengths. We'll see.

He won't drop out as he has a lot of money locked up. He can afford to what a while. The problem is the way the GOP revised their election process means that candidates don't necessarily need to drop out like before. If he still is running against 14? when votes are cast, he might not be able to win some of the early races. His donors will dry up entirely. Hello, candidate elect Trump, Carson, or Cruz. Goodbye, Republican Party. Granted, I still don't think Republicans are sucidal as a whole and the race will come down to maybe Rubio and Bush eventually, but the longer the voters hold the gun to their head, the more they look like a party that would conceivably elect a Trump. That might have already won the election for Dems. There was a good write up the other day in the WaPo about the origins of this trend of getting behind nuts with Palin the other day. Oh, if only McCain knew the ruination he was breeding back then.

**jasper76**

Drop out?? I still think the smart money is on Bush winning the nomination. He isn't just the establishment candidate, but rather the establishment itself.

**LordofHats**

If the Establishment was 100% assured to win, Obama wouldn't be President, and Romney would never have gotten a nomination. Being 'in' with the Establishment is a huge boon but recent elections in particular have shown that it's not the end all.