Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow (Post 12010433)

Disappointing that Afghanistan is not a factor in the Presidential race. ISIS - created, armed and supported by the US military back when Hillary was in charge of such things - seem to get a free pass for their bombings in Kabul because, well, the victims are only wogs, right? Not real people, like. If Hillary wins this election, it will send a clear message to the rest of the world that a majority of US voters don't give a damn about human rights or war crimes unless the victims are Americans. Is that really what you Hillary supporters want? That's disgusting.

Originally Posted by amideislas (Post 12010512)

Gordon has always had a particularly vivid imagination.

Originally Posted by dakota44 (Post 12010880)

Along with an apparent lack of facts.

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 12010419)

Sure, specifically it doesn't hurt if they can clinch a state that the campaign is nervous about. There's a lot of little things I suppose. Zargof mentioned the need for the VP pick to not upstage the candidate and basically 'do no harm' which goes back to Palin/Quayle.

The machinations are more complicated. The entire party has been pulled left by Bernie and now Clinton needs to track more back to the middle. Can Kaine pull in a few disaffected white moderate Republicans who are repelled by Trump? This is interesting and concerning because now the minority base supporters are feeling taken for granted because they wanted a Booker or Castro. Bernie's people are still pissed off in general but might have warmed up to a Warren or Franken pick. There's a million calculations and, at the end of the day, it was decided they needed to work on the specific deficit that Hillary has which is white male voters and the white working/middle class in the broader sense. They're looking at the Midwest, rust belt, flyover states, whatever you want to call them --- there's some swing states in there.

EDIT TO ADD: The VP only gets one debate but if they are a good speaker, they can do wonders as a surrogate and campaigner. Just look at Diamond Joe. :heart:

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 12010898)

I presume Warren wouldn't have accepted even if offered - she's too valuable / powerful where she is now?

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 12010897)

What is especially odd about his assertions is that somehow that Trump backed by Putin will suddenly mean world peace.

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12010426)

Yes there are many Republic moderates that Trump has alienated, probably than moderate Democrats who are repelled by Clinton " extreme carelessness" according to the FBI, and the fact that the head of the FBI and CIA have indicted they cannot vet sufficiently those coming in the country.

IF Trump can better reach alienated on the economic situation, and plans to improve things, the election is his. Many believe that Clinton is more of the same and promising more programs and benefits that hardly gives them jobs, and good paying jobs. However Trump seems focused on over the top security issues and probably cant fight the strong political machine Clinton has put together.

Even Trump supporters cannot fathom many things he says, Clinton's best political advantage is Trump himself. I read somewhere that Clinton has more staff in 1 state that Trump has in the whole country.

One advantage Sanders had is he believed in what he proposed, to many Clinton will say anything to be elected and same with Trump. Amazing in an era of anti-establishment beliefs on both the right and left, the most establishment type will probably be elected.

Originally Posted by Gordon Barlow (Post 12010433)

Disappointing that Afghanistan is not a factor in the Presidential race. ISIS - created, armed and supported by the US military back when Hillary was in charge of such things - seem to get a free pass for their bombings in Kabul because, well, the victims are only wogs, right? Not real people, like. If Hillary wins this election, it will send a clear message to the rest of the world that a majority of US voters don't give a damn about human rights or war crimes unless the victims are Americans. Is that really what you Hillary supporters want? That's disgusting.

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 12004109)

Took a look today, and Hillary is now down to 'only' a 67% chance of winning - down from 82% back when I first looked.


Popular vote is showing as:
Clinton: 47
Trump: 43
Johnson: 9



Arizona has gone from pale blue to pink - the only state I can see having changed sides (casual review).

Great site!

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 12010926)

Okay, so help me to understand this cluster ****.

The DNC was hacked and it was found that there were (out of 20,000 emails) some operatives who were throwing out anti-Bernie strategies. The higher-ups squashed said strategies and none were pursued?

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that Bernie had a potential weakness regarding his own personal religious beliefs. Or that, at times, Bernie's campaign was a mess. However, this is a clear conflict of interest and violation of the DNC bylaws --- they are sworn to neutrality until the primaries are over. Anybody making such suggestions IN WRITING should have been at the minimum reprimanded and more appropriately fired or asked to resign.

This speaks to the culture of the DNC and IMO Wasserman-Schultz should be fired. Priebus had a much more difficult task and he managed to keep his shit together.

I still don't know how any of this is the least bit interesting in contrast to the terrifying revelation that Putin is manipulating the election in favor of Donald Trump.

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 12010934)

So you think ISIS was created on Hillary's watch?! Don't you think the whole ISIS thing was a creation of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and the utterly pointless invasion of Iraq?

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 12011030)

Well Debbie is gone after the the convention. Not a moment too soon. Not only this bullshit, but more so the fact she has been useless at her job. On her watch the Democrats have lost seats at all levels of government.

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 12011108)

It may calm the Bernie waters a little bit ... firing DWS was one of his demands.

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 12011130)

Maybe, it could depend on who her replacement is though. If they run the DNC in the same way, nothing really changes.