The 2016 US Election (Part I)

[bilateralrope]

I am still curious just how far they would go to block Trump even if he does end up getting a delegate majority.

Change the rules on him ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republica ... ries,_2016

However, per Rule 42, Rules 26–42 are "Standing Rules for this convention (2012) and the temporary rules for the next convention (2016)". While the current candidates operate under these temporary rules, it is unclear whether they will remain in place for the 2016 convention.[6][7][8][9] As of March 16, 2016, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has not taken a position on the potential rule change, while others in the party advocate for it.[10]

Because it looks like changing the rules during the primary is an option.


If they do manage to stop Trump winning the nomination despite him having more delegates than anyone else, the fallout is bound to be entertaining.

[The Romulan Republic]

"Entertaining" isn't the word I would use.

The Fuhrer has warned that their will be riots if the take the nomination from him, and while I despise his use of threats of violence to advance his political career, in this case, he's probably correct.

On the other hand, the prospect of the Republican Party self-destructing going into the general election is certainly an amusing one.

[The Romulan Republic]

http://www.ibtimes.com/bernie-sanders-f ... ly-2338452

Bernie Sanders wants to lead a political revolution — at the Democratic National Convention. As Republicans debate the possibility of a brokered convention disrupting Donald Trump's march toward the GOP presidential nomination, Sanders is hoping to keep Hillary Clinton from becoming the Democratic nominee with a new effort to win over delegates who are already pledged to her campaign.

Despite being trounced by Clinton in five states Tuesday, the Sanders campaign told reporters this week that not only do they expect the second half of the primary to add to their delegate count, they also believe Clinton’s pledged delegate lead might start to erode if pledged delegates see Sanders doing well and decide to support him instead of Clinton. But the odds of this new strategy working out, election law experts say, are about as likely as a Republican-led Congress embracing Sanders’ socialist vision for America.

“It’s not a realistic strategy. It’s a sign of desperation on the part of the Sanders campaign,” said Daniel Tokaji, an election law expert and professor at the Ohio State University. “Given the results of Tuesday, it is practically impossible to prevent Hillary Clinton from getting the majority of the pledged delegates.”

Sanders senior strategist Tad Devine made the case Wednesday on a call with reporters that, despite pledged delegates getting their spots based on Democratic votes in primaries and caucuses, they are free to switch which candidate they represent based on personal preference. He pointed to the Jimmy Carter campaign in 1980 and said that before Carter won the Democratic nomination, the campaign was “deeply concerned about the defection of pledged delegates.”

“We don’t have a plan at the moment to be calling all the Clinton delegates, you know, once they get selected and try to persuade them individually to be for Bernie Sanders,” Devine said when pressed by a reporter. “But we do believe that if we can succeed in the second half of the process as much as Hillary did or even more so, that there will be enormous pressure on people who are going to be delegates at this convention to do the right, responsible thing.”


Delegates Awarded to Democratic Candidates | InsideGov
This might sound confusing, but here's how the nomination process works: Typically, people think of superdelegates, who are party leaders or elected officials, as the ones who can choose which candidate to support based on personal preference. On the Republican side, pledged delegates are bound to vote for the candidate they represent through the first round of voting at the party’s summer convention. Only if voting continues for multiple rounds can those delegates switch their allegiance and make deals with other candidates. That's how GOP leaders hope to keep Trump off the ballot in November.

On the Democratic side, it's a little different. Election law experts said the Sanders campaign is correct that Democratic delegates are “pledged” and not “bound” like Republican delegates. But they added that the scenario of pledged delegates switching sides is extremely unrealistic.

“Technically they're not bound on any ballot. The rules say they are selected ‘in good conscience,’” said Joe Sandler, an expert on election law who served as general counsel for the Democratic National Committee for 15 years and was general counsel to several Democratic National Conventions. “The idea being that delegates are selected to fill a slot that’s representative of how the state voted.”

The official wording in the DNC’s 2016 delegate selection rules handbook is: “Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.”

Each state has its own process for selecting pledged delegates, but there are three categories of Democratic delegates that apply everywhere: those selected at the Congressional district level, those selected at the statewide level and delegates who are party leaders or elected officials. All these are separate from superdelegates, who are automatically delegates based on their status.


Sandler said the Democratic delegate selection process is set up so that delegates are inherently loyal to a particular presidential candidate.

“The practical reality is that not only do these folks sign a pledge to support a candidate, but we have candidates’ right of approval,” Sandler said. “In all of those systems, the presidential candidates get a list of those seeking to be delegates, and they can disapprove of those they’re not sure are committed to them.”

This means that before delegates are finalized in each state, both Clinton and Sanders will be able to look over the list and make sure their delegates are people who have worked for their campaigns, donated to them or otherwise shown they will be loyal. Sandler added that because Clinton and Sanders each have plenty of supporters, he expects them to have no problems filling their delegate spots with people who are overwhelmingly friendly to their cause.

Another hurdle to the Sanders’ campaign plan is that some Democratic state parties put delegates on the ballot, meaning those people have to work hard and campaign to win their spot.

“When you’re going through the process to run for a delegate, whether its for Bernie or Hillary, it takes a lot of time and effort to run as a delegate, to bring hundreds of people to vote for you,” said Matt Fenlon, executive director of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, where delegates are elected. “You’re going to be committed to your candidate.”


Democratic Winners and Upcoming State Primaries and Caucuses | InsideGov
As of this week, Clinton holds a 300-delegate lead over Sanders and has won twice as many nominating contests. Many have said it will now be very difficult for the Vermont senator to overtake the former secretary of state — he would need to go from losing the average state by double digits to winning the average state by that margin, according to a FiveThirtyEight analysis.

Once Clinton gets a majority of the delegates, both Tokaji and Sandler said they could not imagine pledged delegates would switch allegiances to vote for Sanders. But ahead of contests Tuesday in Arizona, Idaho and Utah, where Sanders could do well, his campaign is looking forward.

“Our process is dynamic; it is not a static process,” Devine, the Sanders strategist said. “You have to understand it, and you have to try to take advantage of the opportunities.”

To tell the truth, this makes me lose a lot of respect for the Sanders campaign. This is the kind of dirty, undemocratic horse shit I'd expect from the Clinton campaign, and its profoundly hypocritical. Its also the kind of thing that could divide the party and piss off voters going into the general election, which makes it self-destructively selfish and short-sighted.

Now, in fairness, this article seems somewhat biased against Sanders, and nowhere is it said that Sanders himself has endorsed this approach (its just his strategist Tad Devine speculating/hoping this will happen). But Sanders should disavow this right the fuck now.

[Raw Shark]

I'm staring to think that the most promising result of this election is that everyone sees how stupid the whole superdelegate idea is. If nothing else, progressives can hope for that.

[Gaidin]

I'm staring to think that the most promising result of this election is that everyone sees how stupid the whole superdelegate idea is. If nothing else, progressives can hope for that.

Six one way half dozen the other considering Republicans have states more equal than others. They're both just rigging it to make it a bitch to have a floor fight.

[Flagg]

"Entertaining" isn't the word I would use.

The Fuhrer has warned that their will be riots if the take the nomination from him, and while I despise his use of threats of violence to advance his political career, in this case, he's probably correct.

On the other hand, the prospect of the Republican Party self-destructing going into the general election is certainly an amusing one.

Try 'Donald "Il Douche" Trump' and not "The Fuhrer", please. Especially since it seems like a good amount of his supporters are full on white supremacists.

PBS Newshour did a piece on "First Time Voters" who are in their 30's, have never voted, but have been inspired into political activism by Il Douche. In fact, one was this fugly 33 year old hag I wouldn't fuck with a stolen dick, that had never voted, but was so 'inspired' by Il Douche that she was doing fundraising calls. She had a Celtic Cross on one hand (aka Odin's cross, a major White Supremacist symbol) and the numbers "88" (for Heil Hitler, as 'H' is the 8th letter in the alphabet) on the other.

I think that calling him variations of Hitler, Fuhrer, and weasel-dicked fascist thug actually appeals to them, while "Il Douche" is a bit high brow for the dipshits. Plus, they probably think 'Mussolini' is a seafood dish served over linguini with melted butter on the side (for dipping the mussels) at Red Lobster.

[The Romulan Republic]

Good point.

I'll go with Il Douche, then.

Though the Hitler comparisons aren't really to reach out to his supporters, but to rally the Left and moderates against him.

[Mr Bean]

Good point.

I'll go with Il Douche, then.

Though the Hitler comparisons aren't really to reach out to his supporters, but to rally the Left and moderates against him.

Go ahead, please explain to those Jewish Leftiest and Moderates how Hitler he is...

Some people take the Furher/Hitler thing seriously, I can tell you don't to you it's a punch line.

Hah hah hah Death Camps, come on kids everyone laugh along with me.

[Flagg]

To tell the truth, this makes me lose a lot of respect for the Sanders campaign. This is the kind of dirty, undemocratic horse shit I'd expect from the Clinton campaign, and its profoundly hypocritical. Its also the kind of thing that could divide the party and piss off voters going into the general election, which makes it self-destructively selfish and short-sighted.

Now, in fairness, this article seems somewhat biased against Sanders, and nowhere is it said that Sanders himself has endorsed this approach (its just his strategist Tad Devine speculating/hoping this will happen). But Sanders should disavow this right the fuck now.

This is only what I've been saying for the past 3 pages. He went into the process assuming that he would lead Clinton slightly and that she would be the Wicked Witch of the party, trying to steal the nomination away from him, when in reality he's losing badly and is now trying todo exactly what he was trying to cudgel Clinton with.

To be honest, I dislike him and Clinton, but at least Clinton isn't hiding the fact that she's a political animal out to win the nomination and crush her enemies under her boot heel. I was hoping that there would be someone better this cycle, but TBH as much as I like Warren, she's not been in the Senate long enough, IMO. That's not to say I don't think she's fully qualified and would make an excellent POTUS last week, it's just perception.

But maybe when Clinton wins, she'll appoint Warren as Treasury Secretary and we'll all watch with glee as the Republicans bleed from every orifice as their blood literally boils culminating with their heads exploding like so much 'Kingsman'. I doubt there will be much to clean up.

I'm sure they would pull a filibuster (as I think the Democrats will retake the Senate) but the Democrats can just re-nuclear option the fuckers since the Republicans have done nothing but abuse Senate procedure for 8 years now, both in the majority and minority.

[Raw Shark]

[snip]PBS Newshour did a piece on "First Time Voters" who are in their 30's, have never voted, but have been inspired into political activism by Il Douche. In fact, one was this fugly 33 year old hag I wouldn't fuck with a stolen dick, that had never voted, but was so 'inspired' by Il Douche that she was doing fundraising calls. She had a Celtic Cross on one hand (aka Odin's cross, a major White Supremacist symbol) and the numbers "88" (for Heil Hitler, as 'H' is the 8th letter in the alphabet) on the other.

From what I've heard through my limited direct experience, the women of the white supremacy movement are in short supply, and the ones they have are... nothing to write home about, appearance-wise. On might almost wonder if they sought an advantage in cutting out some of the competition...

But seriously, Trump-Hitler comparisons are, as always, over the top, but in this case neo-Fascistic is IMHO unusually fair compared to how the F-word is usually employed.

I think that calling him variations of Hitler, Fuhrer, and weasel-dicked fascist thug actually appeals to them, while "Il Douche" is a bit high brow for the dipshits. Plus, they probably think 'Mussolini' is a seafood dish served over linguini with melted butter on the side (for dipping the mussels) at Red Lobster.

On the other hand, that sounds pretty delicious right now. Somebody who was literally offering me buttered mussels might get my vote on that alone in the general.

[Flagg]

Good point.

I'll go with Il Douche, then.

Though the Hitler comparisons aren't really to reach out to his supporters, but to rally the Left and moderates against him.

Go ahead, please explain to those Jewish Leftiest and Moderates how Hitler he is...

Some people take the Furher/Hitler thing seriously, I can tell you don't to you it's a punch line.

Hah hah hah Death Camps, come on kids everyone laugh along with me.

Oh shut up, dicksnot.

People in this country have been calling the other side Nazis, fascists, and their leaders Hitler and Der Fuhrer for decades. Most recently towards Obama, from the same type of hollow headed horse-fuckers who support Donald the fake billionaire. I only take issue with it this time because in pouty-faced Il Douche's case it's a wee bit too apt.

We have a guy who has people giving the "Roman salute" at his rallies, encouraging mob violence against people at his speeches for daring to say shit opposing him (last I checked, campaign speeches weren't just for the ones who agree with you) and the latest, attacking cops (but white, so not shot).

There's more than enough fodder there to call him Der Fuhrer. I just think it's too on the mark, "Il Douche" fits better, and his supporters take Hitler references more as a compliment than a derogatory statement.

But to rally the support of left-wing and moderate Jews (because it's not like 6 million homosexuals, communists, atheists, gypsies, Soviet POW's, poles, and political opponents of all stripes weren't gassed and cremated too, right?) pointing out his similarities to "Uncle Addy", is not the worst way to do it. I just think it also rallies the neo-Nazi fucks who seem to be Il Douche's base just as much.

[The Romulan Republic]

Good point.

I'll go with Il Douche, then.

Though the Hitler comparisons aren't really to reach out to his supporters, but to rally the Left and moderates against him.

Go ahead, please explain to those Jewish Leftiest and Moderates how Hitler he is...

Some people take the Furher/Hitler thing seriously, I can tell you don't to you it's a punch line.

Hah hah hah Death Camps, come on kids everyone laugh along with me.

I believe that their are parallels between Trump and Hitler (and other authoritarian demagogues). And I think its important to remind voters to keep that in mind.

How far those parallels extend... hopefully we'll never find out. I will concede that the Furher label, if taken absolutely literally, is hyperbole, but I would also contend that hyperbole can be a valid rhetorical technique under some circumstances.

To say that I am using it as a "punchline", however, much less that I think death camps are fucking funny, is, of course, absolutely false. And, frankly, a vile low, even from someone who a few pages ago actually had the gall to say that I "look like a child molester" for using the Drumpf nickname.

I understand that insults are an accepted part of debating on this forum, but in my opinion, at least, their is a line across which something is no longer advisable or in good taste. And if you think I cross it by calling You Know Who the Furher, well, I think you bloody well cross it when you say that I find fucking death camps funny and compare me to people who rape God Damn children.

Look, I get a lot of people here don't like me, and that's fine. Its not as if I place any value on your opinion after the aforementioned despicable lies and personal attacks. All things considered, at this point, I'd rather just ignore you and debate people I actually respect, especially since it is likely that you are trying to bait me. But given the severity of the attacks on my character, I feel that I cannot fail to answer them in some manner without jeopardizing both what little self-respect I have and, potentially, my personal security.

[Mr Bean]

There's more than enough fodder there to call him Der Fuhrer. I just think it's too on the mark, "Il Douche" fits better, and his supporters take Hitler references more as a compliment than a derogatory statement.

But to rally the support of left-wing and moderate Jews (because it's not like 6 million homosexuals, communists, atheists, gypsies, Soviet POW's, poles, and political opponents of all stripes weren't gassed and cremated too, right?) pointing out his similarities to "Uncle Addy", is not the worst way to do it. I just think it also rallies the neo-Nazi fucks who seem to be Il Douche's base just as much.

Flagg if you ever met someone who survived the camps, someone who had to explain to you when you were eight what that weird number tattoo on his arm was not someone's phone number then perhaps you might give the tinniest shit about using Hitler for literally anything other than Hitler. You don't give two shits about homosexuals, communists, atheists, gypsies, Soviet POW's, poles, and political opponents of any strip and yes Jews because if you did you might not abuse the term as much as most do.

You don't give a fuck about anyone Flagg, your history has established that here, you at this point a bitter old shit who enjoys arguing with people on the internet as your primary form of social contacts these days. I'd bet good money that if you were even slightly more racist against Muslims or Mexicans you'd be a strong Trump supporter, your the type by your own admission, a hollow headed horse-fucker as you so quaintly refereed to yourself.

[Raw Shark]

Look, I get a lot of people here don't like me, and that's fine.

I like you just fine and mostly agree with you on politics, other than a general disagreement over how to properly spell the word, "there," and your pronounced tendency toward hyperbole.

[Flagg]

BLARGLE BLARGLE BLARGLE VENDETTTTTAAAAAAA (No Spellcheck)!!!

Yeah. Go away.

[Flagg]

Good point.

I'll go with Il Douche, then.

Though the Hitler comparisons aren't really to reach out to his supporters, but to rally the Left and moderates against him.

Go ahead, please explain to those Jewish Leftiest and Moderates how Hitler he is...

Some people take the Furher/Hitler thing seriously, I can tell you don't to you it's a punch line.

Hah hah hah Death Camps, come on kids everyone laugh along with me.

I believe that their are parallels between Trump and Hitler (and other authoritarian demagogues). And I think its important to remind voters to keep that in mind.

How far those parallels extend... hopefully we'll never find out. I will concede that the Furher label, if taken absolutely literally, is hyperbole, but I would also contend that hyperbole can be a valid rhetorical technique under some circumstances.

To say that I am using it as a "punchline", however, much less that I think death camps are fucking funny, is, of course, absolutely false. And, frankly, a vile low, even from someone who a few pages ago actually had the gall to say that I "look like a child molester" for using the Drumpf nickname.

I understand that insults are an accepted part of debating on this forum, but in my opinion, at least, their is a line across which something is no longer advisable or in good taste. And if you think I cross it by calling You Know Who the Furher, well, I think you bloody well cross it when you say that I find fucking death camps funny and compare me to people who rape God Damn children.

Look, I get a lot of people here don't like me, and that's fine. Its not as if I place any value on your opinion after the aforementioned despicable lies and personal attacks. All things considered, at this point, I'd rather just ignore you and debate people I actually respect, especially since it is likely that you are trying to bait me. But given the severity of the attacks on my character, I feel that I cannot fail to answer them in some manner without jeopardizing both what little self-respect I have and, potentially, my personal security.

Dude don't even. He's rage posting a hard-on vendetta against me. I mean to say I'm racist against Havok, whom I consider a dear friend is fucking out there. Dollars to donuts he's off his meds, self medicating with alcohol, or mixing his meds with alcohol. In any case, it's sad.

[Flagg]

Look, I get a lot of people here don't like me, and that's fine.

I like you just fine and mostly agree with you on politics, other than a general disagreement over how to properly spell the word, "there," and your pronounced tendency toward hyperbole.

Yeah, I don't think this had anything to do with TRR. But I think he got what he wanted as he pretty much took a giant dump and emptied the room, ending conversation...

[Raw Shark]

No, I meant exactly what I said and directed it at the specific annoying habits of exactly who I said it to. Do you actually read posts, or just spew shit everywhere like some kind of automated fertilizing machine, Flagg?

[Flagg]

TRR, he said you look like a child molester? I got a fucking WARNING for making a joke (it was in horrible taste, I still feel bad about it, and I deserved the warning) about a member in testing that alluded to that years ago. I guess standards have slipped.

[Flagg]

No, I meant exactly what I said and directed it at the specific annoying habits of exactly who I said it to. Do you actually read posts, or just spew shit everywhere like some kind of automated fertilizing machine, Flagg?

Dude, I was talking about what someone else said, not you. This kerfluffle wasn't about TRR, is what I was getting at. Sorry, it was a tablet post and was too lazy to fuck around for 5 minutes editing out your reply. Should have made it clearer what I was responding to, my bad.

[Thanas]

OH FOR FUCK'S SAKE.

I am this close to temp-banning everybody in this fucking thread.

Now here is what I am going to do instead. I am going to lock this thread and reopen it tomorrow. Maybe people will be fucking able to chill and be at least somewhat civil. Any punishment will be handed down then as I don't trust myself to be even remotely able to judge anything after reading this dung heap.

[Dalton]

This thread has become a festering pustule on the ass of this board, and rather than take the time to split out the stinking, rotting garbage I am keeping this 75-page shit-filled behemoth locked and just start a new one. Seriously, I've seen just post after post of whining, bitching, complaining, flames, insults and Hitler comparisons. Get a grip. Simmer down. And knock it the fuck off.

Thread permanently locked.