Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 28, 2016, 02:02:20 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
96695 Posts in 2320 Topics by 1081 Members
Latest Member: Concerned Citizen
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  2016 Presidential
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] Print
Author Topic: 2016 Presidential  (Read 89595 times)
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1350 on: August 07, 2016, 08:38:41 AM »

http://pamelageller.com/2016/08/boom-clintons-vaunted-lead-over-trump-suddenly-evaporates.html/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1351 on: August 07, 2016, 08:52:43 AM »

https://www.facebook.com/masonweaver/videos/10209645300386196/
Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 394


« Reply #1352 on: August 07, 2016, 04:42:17 PM »

Wikileaks performed a poll with more than 117,000 people participating.

"While Trump scored 50% of the overall vote, Clinton won just 22%. Green Party candidate Jill Stein followed Clinton with 16% of the vote, and Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson came last with 12%."

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/07/30/wikileaks-poll-117000-votes-trump-wins-with-50/

EDIT: The date from this poll is July 30th, 2016. Still, it speaks volumes as to what people think. Thus far, I am not aware of any media poll having Trump ahead by 28%, much less with the millenial +(wiki audience) crowd.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 05:02:52 PM by DDF » Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1353 on: August 09, 2016, 10:15:33 AM »

The Orlando Shooter’s Father, the Taliban Fan, Is Behind Hillary . . . Literally

Each morning, you think 2016 election cycle can’t get any more surreal, or bizarre, or disconcerting . . . the news cycle jostles you awake and says, “Oh yeah? Get a load of this!”

What the heck? I mean, really, what the heck?

Clinton held a rally in Kissimmee, FL, a suburb of Orlando, the site of June’s terror attack. She began her rally by paying tribute to those who were slaughtered by Mateen while the terrorist’s father, Seddique Mateen, sat right behind her, prominently displayed and in full view of the camera.

There he is, right behind Hillary’s shoulder:
 
This is no mistaken identity; Mateen spoke to reporters afterwards about why he wants Hillary Clinton to be president. He showed reporters a sign he made for her, declaring she was “good for national security.”
 
Yes, that father:

Florida corporations created by [the shooter’s father] Seddique Mateen, the Provisional Government of Afghanistan Corp. and The Durand Jirga Inc., are related to that border dispute.

And Seddique Mateen announced his candidacy for president of Afghanistan in 2015, one of several YouTube videos posted by Mateen related to the issue. A Washington Post translation of one video has the elder Mateen praising the Taliban: “Our brothers in Waziristan, our warrior brothers in (the) Taliban movement and national Afghan Taliban are rising up,” he said.

The obvious rejoinder: “She says she’ll keep the pro-Taliban folks who are close to terrorists out of our country . . . but she can’t even keep them out of her own rallies. Maybe she should try building a wall.”

Donald Trump might be the luckiest son-of-a-gun to ever run for president. If he can’t make some noise over this and make up five points quick, he should just close up shop and let Pence-Cruz handle it from here.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1354 on: August 09, 2016, 10:28:09 AM »

Right .   A "gold star" father who can say whatever he wants and it is gospel that can't be questioned"

He denies Sharia law exists, was a supporter of Clintons for years, and is a immigration lawyer for God's sake.

So what label do you call the father of a murderer?

And the murder's old man  turns it around and turn the travesty  into a political *gun issue!!*  angry

You won't hear much of this on CNN which has become a 24 x 7 vehicle for the clinton campaign and 24 x bashes Trump.  Nearly every time I turn past the station they are bashing Trump.  I have never seen anything  like it .......

How ironic.  The Republicans done in by a Muslim immigrant lawyer for their candidate trying to protect us from Muslim murderers.  I don't see this creepy "gold dad" calling out the murderers.  
And now this "dad" being used by the DNC to promote gun laws?

Again our country is being given away for for votes to the world.

 angry angry angry
« Last Edit: August 09, 2016, 10:39:19 AM by ccp » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8186


« Reply #1355 on: August 09, 2016, 10:48:29 AM »

Yes, surreal.  They think the shooter is one of the victims and the family of the shooter too.  I have no idea if this parent is at all to blame for the actions of his adult kid.  He is just one person who could have, should have known and didn't stop it.

Gun issue, good grief.  That's what mass murderers do is check the local gun ordinance before shooting and check federal gun laws before buying.  Gun laws suppress our ability to stop these shootings.  What about pipe bombs, IEDs, poison gas, and driving a semi truck into a crowd.  Sue Cummings diesel?
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1356 on: August 10, 2016, 11:15:01 AM »

http://atimes.com/2016/08/trump-lacks-experience-but-his-detractors-lack-common-sense/
Logged
bigdog
Power User
***
Posts: 2175


« Reply #1357 on: August 10, 2016, 12:16:35 PM »


http://warontherocks.com/2016/08/averting-the-coming-republican-foreign-policy-brain-drain/

"...Republicans stand to lose a generation of intellectuals and practitioners skilled in global affairs. Given the massive loss of the best and brightest, the future portends a steep brain drain within Republican foreign policy establishment, for at least three reasons."

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1358 on: August 10, 2016, 01:08:47 PM »

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/video-biden-threatens-shoot-obama-tries-take-guns/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd5_jRFdQ-I

« Last Edit: August 10, 2016, 01:15:42 PM by Crafty_Dog » Logged
DDF
Power User
***
Posts: 394


« Reply #1359 on: August 12, 2016, 10:24:26 AM »

I'm certain that ABC leans left, so where CNN and others are getting their numbers in favor of Hillary, I'd like to know.

Who are you Voting for?

Donald Trump (70%, 40,817 Votes)
Jill Stein (18%, 10,247 Votes)
Gary Johnson (7%, 4,176 Votes)
Hillary Clinton (5%, 2,780 Votes)
Darrell Castle (0%, 152 Votes)
Total Voters: 58,172

http://abcnewsgo.co/2016/08/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/

This obviously won't account for voters who get "cold feet" come election day, but none of the other polls stating that Hillary is ahead account for that either. Polls can also easily be manipulated by only calling a small number of voters per state, and then calling in the conservative or liberal district one chooses. Online polls are open to everyone.

Just putting this here for everyone's entertainment.
Logged

It's all a matter of perspective.
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1360 on: August 12, 2016, 10:33:18 PM »

https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/08/10/fyi-gallup-had-dukakis-up-by-17-at-this-point-in-1988/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1361 on: August 13, 2016, 11:47:27 AM »

"https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/08/10/fyi-gallup-had-dukakis-up-by-17-at-this-point-in-1988/"

Thanks CD.  This gives me vague and distant hope for a "miracle".

 I fear GM was right all along.  I am resigning myself to the worst.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8186


« Reply #1362 on: August 13, 2016, 12:44:02 PM »

"https://pjmedia.com/election/2016/08/10/fyi-gallup-had-dukakis-up-by-17-at-this-point-in-1988/"

Thanks CD.  This gives me vague and distant hope for a "miracle".

 I fear GM was right all along.  I am resigning myself to the worst.

This is different than 1988, but anything is possible.  Trump seems to be digging himself a hole he can't climb out of.  Needs to win most traditional swing states and needs to bring new states into play.  He is failing and flailing mostly at this point.  It's still August, but impressions are being made that he isn't a serious contender for President in the eyes of too many people.  Very hard to reverse that but he doesn't need to change that many minds.  She can't hit 50% either and is loaded with flaws and problems.

This should be a simple choice between policies leading to economic growth and prosperity versus stagnation, and secure our country and our borders versus letting terrorists multiply and flourish.  Instead he makes it about him and not everyone is impressed.
Logged
objectivist1
Power User
***
Posts: 988


« Reply #1363 on: August 13, 2016, 10:27:58 PM »

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/08/media-in-frenzy-over-trump-claim-that-obama-and-hillary-founded-isis-ignores-dia-document-showing-how-they-did
Logged

"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1364 on: August 14, 2016, 10:57:33 AM »

"This is different than 1988, but anything is possible.  Trump seems to be digging himself a hole he can't climb out of.  Needs to win most traditional swing states and needs to bring new states into play.  He is failing and flailing mostly at this point.  It's still August, but impressions are being made that he isn't a serious contender for President in the eyes of too many people.  Very hard to reverse that but he doesn't need to change that many minds.  She can't hit 50% either and is loaded with flaws and problems.

This should be a simple choice between policies leading to economic growth and prosperity versus stagnation, and secure our country and our borders versus letting terrorists multiply and flourish.  Instead he makes it about him and not everyone is impressed."

Doug you were right too.   The question in 1988 was policy.   Now it is two issues :

Policy and CHARACTER.   I was always concerned about Trump's past character and feared that he could bring down the whole ship.  Yet he was saying things I liked that no other candidate was saying as effectively.  So I gave him some support knowing it is risk.   I still would but with less gusto now.

He is proving he does not really have the insight and adaptability to change .  His answer to every thing is to simply yell louder and harder back to confrontation.  He is still doing it.  He is unable to comprehend that kind of campaign is not working with the swing voters.  He refuses to to take responsibility for his own gaffs and keeps turning it around and doing things like "threatening" to  ban the NYT and basically making himself look even less appealing to independents.

It is remarkable that that his character is even more frightening to swing voters then a known corrupt liar but he obviously comes off as more dangerous.

I don't see how he can turn this around with just policy pronouncements.   His character is out there front and center for 40 yrs.  What is surprising to me is that I could forget the past but he has proven he cannot change and be more "presidential".  Someone who is as smart as he is - well, that is surprising to me.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1365 on: August 14, 2016, 12:16:58 PM »

http://ijr.com/2016/07/657469-damning-emails-show-anti-trump-protests-were-fueled-by-dnc/?utm_campaign=politics_newlikegate&utm_content=health&utm_medium=promoted&utm_source=facebook&utm_term=ijpolitics
Logged
objectivist1
Power User
***
Posts: 988


« Reply #1366 on: August 15, 2016, 04:49:16 PM »

2016 Will End With Economic Instability And A Trump Presidency

Wednesday, 10 August 2016 02:19 Brandon Smith

Political and economic events tend to swing like a pendulum, or move like the tides.  What you think you know today, according to the mainstream mood, can swiftly change tomorrow.  Sometimes this is mere random coincidence, but often it is engineered by the powers that be.  When discerning coming trends, the only assumption I recommend people operate on is that the globalists will play the long game; the short game is only relevant as far as it serves the long game.

What is the long game?  The globalists have openly admitted their goal in numerous mainstream publications, but my favorite example is the January 1988 issue of the Rothschild run magazine The Economist.  The issue pronounces boldly that investors should “get ready for a global currency” by 2018.  I examine this issue in detail in my article The Economic End Game Explained.

The Economist article mentions the sacrifice of “some” economic sovereignty of nation states, the end of the dollar’s world reserve status and the rise of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights basket currency mechanism as a “bridge” to a single global currency.  None of these changes can be accomplished without certain parts of the world suffering severe financial instability first.  Not only is this a mathematical inevitability, such crisis is also a useful tool for elitists to mold the public’s collective psychology.

So, let’s make this crystal clear — the long game is the total and OPEN centralization of economic and geopolitical power into the hands of a select few financial elites.  Not the pulling of strings behind the curtain.  Not shadow governance.  OPEN governance of the world by the elites, accepted or even demanded by the people.

There are a lot of assumptions floating around economic conditions and election developments right now that do not take into account this long game.  The first being that globalists “are losing their grip on the situation.”

I would have to disagree.  In terms of political leaders (East and West) and surface economic indicators, the elites have more control than ever.

The argument of the “bumbling globalists” became rather popular the days after the initial success of the Brexit referendum.  This was of course based on the assumption that the Brexit is damaging to the globalists rather than helpful to them.  I outline why the Brexit is a perfect scapegoat for a fiscal downturn engineered by the elites in my article Brexit: Global Trigger Event, Fake Out, Or Something Else?, published before the Brexit vote took place.

Since the referendum, central banks and politicians around the world have begun calling for a single monetary and fiscal policy initiative meant to “head off any ill effects of the Brexit.”  That is to say, the open calls for one economic authority to rule them all have now begun.

The numerous warnings by the financial elites of a coming crisis event have most people in the mainstream and even many alternative analysts scratching their heads.  For those that hyper-focus on stock markets, all seems to be well.  Of course, these people only have an attention span that lasts until the next market ticker opens for the day.  They aren’t looking at the bigger picture.

To be fair, though, the mainstream media is really laying on the fake-out propaganda thick.

July and August have produced considerably strange behaviors from stocks so far, with a record number of days positive, followed by a near-record number of days negative.  I would consider this a form of volatility that should not be overlooked.  The media have so far shrugged off these developments and only noted that stock valuations are still high despite the Brexit “surprise.”  Their assertion has been that the Brexit “had no effect;” completely ignoring the fact that such events can have long term consequences rather than immediate consequences.

Oil prices have plunged back towards lows last seen at the beginning of the year, something I stated would eventually occur after the predictable failure of the OPEC meeting in Doha.  Low global demand continues and production has not slowed in any meaningful way.

There has been a steady correlation the past year between oil and stocks.  The current decoupling is unlikely to last very long and stocks should track down to oil by September as speculators give up trying to hold crude offshore in a useless effort to drive prices higher.  The mainstream has said little to nothing about this decoupling or its eventual consequences.

The past two months of employment numbers have been an epic farce, with the media playing up the supposed number of jobs added while mentioning nothing about the nearly 95 million working age Americans removed from the rolls and no longer counted as unemployed.  That’s almost one third of the U.S. population, and around half of all working age Americans that have no job.

The Bureau of Labor’s claim when cornered by this statistic and the fraudulent nature of their primary employment percentages?  “Those people don’t want to work, therefore they should not be counted…”

The better than expected jobs reports have so far allowed markets to levitate.  I would assert, however, that stocks are merely treading water at the deceptively calm center of a hurricane.

The reality is, they cannot hide an economic collapse forever.  Negative financial effects are going to touch ground somewhere, and the data is going to sneak through.  Case in point; U.S. productivity is now at 37 year lows despite government statistics claiming fully recovered employment.  You would think that in such a happy labor environment portrayed by the BLS productivity would grow.  This is not the case.  Perhaps a total unemployed population of over 100 million people may be contributing to the implosion of U.S. productivity...?

Outside of the U.S., European banks are on the verge of a breakdown, and central bank stimulus measures and rate cuts are adding minimal extra boost to markets.  They aren't currently falling much, but they aren't rallying much either.  In essence, equities are becoming stagnant due to artificial support from central banks and there is little incentive for investors to participate any longer.

In light of the latest manipulations of economic data and the jawboning of stocks since March, some alternative analysts have pronounced that the central banks plan to prop up markets “indefinitely,” or at least until Hillary Clinton can win the election.

This is an unfortunate assumption by the alternative crowd…

I remember before the Brexit vote a vast majority of independent economists and liberty analysts argued that the elites would “never allow” the U.K. referendum to pass — that they had the power to rig the vote however they pleased.  If this is the case (and I agree it is the case), then clearly the elites WANTED the Brexit to pass.

It would serve alternative analysts well to recall specifically the rigged polling numbers in the weeks leading up to the Brexit which showed a definite win for the “Stay” crowd.  Interesting how that all turned out, isn’t it?

I am consistently reminded of the Brexit surprise when I look today at the polling numbers on the U.S. election.  The erratic and inconsistent polling shows Trump climbing, then suddenly sinking days later, then climbing again without any clear catalysts.  Many polls contradict each other, just as the polls did before the Brexit, and, the same kind of circus atmosphere is present, if not more prevalent.

It may be possible, if not certain, that this is all a game.  The Brexit outcome was predetermined, which is how elites like George Soros scored successful investment bets on the referendum passing, and the reason why the Bank for International Settlements gathered central bankers from around the world as the vote was taking place.

I believe that the U.S. presidential election has also been predetermined; with a Trump win.  Some people might be confused by this concept.

Trump’s campaign has been consistently compared to the Brexit campaign by globalists in the media, as well as by mainstream pundits.  They call it a "dangerous" trend of rising populists.

The propaganda surrounding the Brexit asserts that the referendum will eventually lead to global economic crisis; and already, central banks and politicians are attempting to tie the Brexit to anything that might go wrong fiscally in the near future.

The propaganda surrounding Trump is the same; that Trump is unfit to lead America and that his economic policies will end in global financial ruin.

One constant connects the Brexit referendum and Trump — both are supported by conservative movements with anti-globalist leanings.

I submit that there is in fact a wider economic crisis on the way, and that the elites plan to use the Brexit and Trump as scapegoats for this crisis.

I have stated this before, but I think the idea needs repeating:  The globalists need the economy to turn unstable in order to create a rationale for a centralized economic authority and a single global currency system.  This is why they have consistently called for a “coordinated global central banking policy” after the Brexit.  This is why they continue to warn of a fiscal crisis even though stock markets remain at all-time highs.

If Hillary Clinton, a well known globalist puppet deep in the bedrock of the establishment, wins the election only to have the economy tank, then the globalists will get the blame.

If Trump is either allowed in office, or is placed in office, and the economy tanks, CONSERVATIVES, the primary enemy of the globalists, will get the blame for the resulting crisis.

To reiterate, the globalists have created the conditions by which an economic crisis can be triggered at the time of their choosing (within certain limits).  They are then either supporting the success of seemingly conservative based movements and candidates, or simply refusing to interfere with them.  This is being done so that the globalists can then blame the crash they created on conservative movements.

This allows them to demonize not just conservatives, but the conservative philosophy in general; labeling it a poisonous ideal akin to fascism.  Their solution?  Erase all elements of conservatism and sovereignty from society for the sake of the “greater good” of the collective.

This is part of the long game.

As I noted after the U.K. referendum, I believe the Brexit to be part of a “one-two-punch combination,” and that the second punch has not arrived yet.  My view appears to be supported by the number of financial elites warning investors to pull out of markets today before it is too late.  Obviously, they know something the rest of the financial mainstream does not.

This sets up the elites as “prophets” rather than criminals, as economic perception turns negative and the public begins looking for answers.

In the meantime, I believe a softer downturn will begin before the election takes place, most likely starting in September.  This will give a boost to the Trump campaign, or at least, that is what the polls will likely say.  I would also watch for some banking officials and media pundits to blame this downturn on Trump’s rise in the polling data.  The narrative will be that just the threat of a Trump presidency is “putting the markets on edge.”

Many claim the Federal Reserve will not raise rates in 2016 with the election threatened by a Trump candidacy.  I believe the Fed will in fact raise rates, as they always do going into major recessions.  If they do not raise rates before the election, they will most certainly raise rates in December if Trump is in the White House.

I realize that many will argue that Trump will “never be allowed to win,” just look at how the media demonizes him.  But this is what people argued before the Brexit, and they were wrong.  I suggest that this demonization campaign is much like the doom and gloom used by globalists before the UK referendum — it is not meant to stop the event.  It is not meant to prevent Trump from getting into office, it is meant to make Trump and conservatives a scapegoat for an impending crisis once he is IN office.

While I certainly am not advocating Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office, I have to point out that a Trump presidency serves the globalist long game better than a Clinton presidency.

First, the elites need an international financial crisis to encourage the public to support a single central bank policy and authority.  They can blame such a crisis on Trump and the Brexit and divert attention away from themselves.

Second, the elites need to remove the philosophy of conservatism as an obstacle to global collectivism and the destruction of national sovereignty.  Again, conservatives will be blamed as participants and co-conspirators in the fiscal crisis, and painted as so devilish that no future generation would want to be a associated with conservative thought.

Third, the elites need to kill the dollar’s world reserve status.  And yes, even this could be blamed on Trump as Saudi Arabia moves away from the dollar as the petro-currency and multiple nations begin to protest Trump’s “isolationism” by dumping the dollar.  In October, China (with the approval of the IMF) begins spreading SDR-based liquidity around the world, launching the next phase of the end of the dollar as world reserve right before the U.S. election climax.

Fourth, the elites need internal conflict within the U.S. and/or martial law in order to justify international intervention.  A Trump presidency will most likely be met with accelerated violence from social justice activists and general riots from the entitlement class.  I believe Trump will use martial law measures, though he probably will not label this "martial law".  There may even come a day when globalist “leaders” will assert that Trump cannot be allowed access to a nuclear arsenal, and that he must be stopped.

If Trump turns out to be anti-constitution, and the liberty movement acts to stand against him — we will be accused of working for the social justice miscreants, or we will ironically be accused as agents of the globalists.  If we fight against a globalist intervention or the social justice mobs, we will be accused as fascists by the international community.  Truly, with Trump as president, many doors open for the elites.

That said, this does not mean the elites will be ultimately successful in their endeavors.  There are always unknowns to any grand scheme.  As Mike Tyson famously said, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”  I believe the elites will be surprised by some sizable punches in the mouth.  Until then, though, their current strategy appears to be running on schedule.
Logged

"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 13826


« Reply #1367 on: August 15, 2016, 09:11:00 PM »

http://www.canaryinthemineblog.com/2016/08/09/a-new-governing-aristocracy-made-public-deception-acceptable/


A new governing aristocracy made public deception acceptable
Posted on August 9, 2016 by The Canary   

We live in unprecedented times: With both conventions behind us, roughly three months to the November elections, it is becoming increasingly obvious that the political landscape has radically changed; and not only because both big parties selected highly flawed, even in their own parties relatively unpopular presidential nominees.

Disruptions of traditional American politics goes far beyond that point, and the selection of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as standard bearers of their respective parties, indeed, increasingly looks like only the last step in a decades-long process of declining morality in public policy and politics. It also coincides with a rapidly expanding government, the concomitant growth and ever increasing power of a government-funded administrative “aristocracy,” made up of professional politicians and largely unaccountable government bureaucrats, who no longer listen to the people but believe to have the right to make choices on behalf of the people, while in actuality self-servingly expanding their own interests rather than those of the people.

Administrative “aristocracies” existed throughout history, from ancient Egypt, China and Japan to later European nation states, at times, indeed, similarly to current circumstances in the European Union (i.e. BREXIT) and the U.S. (ratification of the agreement with Teheran by the U.N. rather that the U.S. Congress), more loyal to their “aristocratic” cast members across-borders than to their own nations. This is how, for example, a German rather than British aristocratic family ascended to the British throne creating the House of Windsor or, as recently as in 1921, when a Saudi Arabian “aristocratic” family from Mecca was chosen by the British as rulers of Jordan, creating the Hashemite dynasty that has been in power ever since. Though formal aristocracies lost power in many countries, new administrative “aristocracies” almost always followed. Though, for example, end of aristocratic rule was a declared goal of the French Revolution, Napoleon established elite schools for future government administrators (and politicians), not too dissimilar to how Chinese emperors had ruled their vast empire already in early Chinese dynasties, and thus created a new ruling class (i.e., administrative aristocracy).

Napoleon’s schooling concept has survived in the so-called Grandes écoles of France over a number of French Republics, with the École national d’administration till today seeding governments and the nations administrative as well as business elites, whether from the left or right of the political spectrum. Post WWII, similar administrative “aristocracies” also developed in most other Western European democracies and, when the European Community was established, found its ultimate expression in the Union’s Brussel Bureaucracy, which can be viewed as the principle cause why the BREXIT vote led to the pending departure of the UK from the EU.

Primarily driven by an ever expanding federal government with increasing powers, and by diminished independence of individual states, such a federal administrative “aristocracy” has also been evolving in the U.S. Especially the last 30 years have witnessed exponential growth in the power of this ruling class, at least partially driven by the power of incumbency, offering politicians a high likelihood of reelection, and due to lifetime employment (with practically no legal option of dismissal) for government employees. United by common self-interests of incumbency and ever expanding financial as well as political power, politicians and government bureaucrats now represent our country’s administrative “aristocracy,” not dissimilar to the EU’s administrative “aristocracy” in Brussels. This is why, by income, some of the suburbs of Washington, DC, now are the richest counties in the nation.

Convinced of intellectual superiority, these “aristocratic” bureaucracies create self-perpetuating and self-serving government structures from the ground up by determining what is and what is not politically correct language (and, of course, politically correct thinking); by establishing educational curricula for schools and colleges that “educate” the young, following the old Jesuit dictum, “give me a child until age seven, and I’ll give you the man;” by interpreting laws in thousands of rules and regulations, many never intended by congress; in other words, by removing the administration of the country further and further from the direct will of the people.

Since ideologies throughout history never were able to co-exist with traditional religious believes, it is not surprising that these “aristocratic” bureaucracies are usually agnostic, and often even overtly hostile to the exercise of free religions. The empty space of religion is filled with “modern religiosity,” best defined as abstract concepts of thought, which share with religions the indisputable conviction of absolute and, therefore, indisputable truth; yet, like religions, they are also characterized by absence of all provability and, at times, are empirical illogical.

A good example for such illogical thinking is, for example, the laudable insistence on equality of all religions (i.e., Islam with Christianity and Judaism) while, at the same time restricting the ability of Christians to practice their religion freely. A good example for the results of such illogical thinking is that currently over 50% of U.S. college students allegedly favor socialism over capitalism, even though every student of history would know that in innumerable incarnations socialism has without exception always failed as an economic model, and more often than not, ended up leading to dictatorships and economic misery (see the current Venezuela, the country with the largest oil reserves in the world). This statistical fact is, however, also a good example how radically this new American “aristocracy” has changed America in recent decades. Even President Obama in his first election campaign, only eight years ago, still categorically rejected the label of being a “socialist” for fear of becoming unelectable. Only eight years later, Bernie Sanders, a declared Socialist would, likely, have become the elected Democratic presidential candidate, had the party leadership not undemocratically conspired against his election.

Looking back in history, considering the more recent political climate in the country, it is really quite remarkable that when the Watergate Scandal broke in the 1970s in the second Nixon administration, Republicans were on the forefront of those demanding his impeachment. Contrast that to what happened during the second Democratic Clinton administration, when the truth no longer mattered and relativity of values, suddenly, ruled the day.

Can anybody imagine that an earlier U.S. president would have politically survived a Lewinsky- like Scandal? And, yet in 1997, only a little over 20 years following Watergate, Bill Clinton not only survived, but became one of the country’s most popular ex-presidents. The political value system of the country in those short years had, obviously, radically changed: Doing the right thing for the country was out; and self-preservation of the ruling “aristocratic” class, based on the relativity of human values, was in. Not one Democratic member of the Senate supported Clinton’s impeachment, and many Republican politicians who had pushed for it, saw their political careers destroyed.

After Watergate, the Lewinsky Affair, likely, became the most decisive political event in recent American history because, for the first time, an American president in a televised broadcast literally looked into the eyes of the nation and outright lied, when stating “I have never had sex with this woman.”

Many, maybe even most presidents before Clinton, of course, also have on occasion been less than truthful; but nobody, except of course Nixon (“I am not a crook”), has in recent history so blatantly lied to the American people as Bill Clinton and, yet, gotten away with it, in the process changing American politics for ever by demonstrating that the modern multimedia world practically always offers the opportunity to relativize the truth of the message (to quote Bill Clinton, “it depends what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”).

The political “aristocracy” learned this lesson very quickly and, of course, nobody better than Hillary Clinton. She would never have dared to follow through with the absolute insane idea of establishing her own Internet server while serving as Secretary of State, had she not been convinced that she could manipulate the truth, should it be discovered. Piercing her words, as her husband had done so well during the Lewinsky Affair, she, indeed, has successfully avoided indictment by the Justice Department, even though a majority of Americans, likely, believe that she escaped because of special considerations by Obama’s Justice Department. Completely exposed in her deception by the FBI investigation, she, remarkably, still continues to lie in her statements to the public.

That Hillary Clinton was not indicted also explains why investigations of Fast and Furious and the IRS scandal never went anywhere, why six weeks before national presidential elections the first Obama administration could instruct senior administration officials to claim that the U.S. ambassador’s murder in Benghazi was not caused by terrorists but by a ridiculous irrelevant video produced in Los Angeles. This is also why Hillary Clinton is still a candidate for President of the U.S., even though common sense suggests that she should have been indicted, and why President Obama can with a straight face go on national television, telling the American people that sending 400 million dollars in foreign untraceable currencies on an unmarked plane in the middle of the night to Teheran represents just “routine” government relations between two governments, and had absolutely nothing to do with the concomitant release of four American hostages.

It has quite obviously become routine for senior government officials, including America’s current President, without fear of political or legal retributions, to blatantly lie to the American people. This, of course, does not happen by happenstance: it is a reflection of how much our country’s political morality has changed over the last three decades.

Within the ruling “aristocracy,” loyalty to the ruling class supersedes right and wrong, and even loyalty to the country is only, at best, second. This is why Ms. Lerner took the Fifth when questioned before Congress about the IRS scandal rather than inform Congress on who instructed her to discriminate against potential political opponents of the Obama administration. She knew that she could count on being protected, and that there would be no serious follow up investigation by the FBI. This is also why only one person was fired in the Veterans Affairs Scandal, the Justice Department decided not to defend a law suit this person filed about her dismissal, and the Obama administration announced that it would no longer implement a law Congress passed that allowed the Veterans Administrator to fire government employees for appropriate cause. And this is also why Hillary Clinton had no hesitation of appointing Ms. Wasserman-Schultz to the position of Honorary Chair of her campaign on the day she was forced to resign as Chair of the Democratic Party after public disclosure how the party under her leadership subverted the primary election process in favor of Ms. Clinton. One hand, of course, washes the other; the administrative “aristocracy” protects its own!

The public instinctively feels the growing divide between the ruling administrative “aristocracy” of both major parties and the American people. This is unquestionably a major reason why Congress and both parties have reached a nadir in popularity. The only question remaining is whether the public is upset enough about where the political “aristocracy” has taken the country to revolt, and take the risk in the upcoming election to consider the unknown over the unacceptable. If the answer is yes, then Donald Trump will be the next U.S. president; if the answer is no, then Hillary Clinton will not only be the first female president of the U.S. but, assuming the public’s anger with Washington continues to grow and finally boils over during her administration, she may end up being the first president since Richard Nixon not finishing a full term in the White House.
Logged
objectivist1
Power User
***
Posts: 988


« Reply #1368 on: August 16, 2016, 07:50:45 AM »

Trump calls for “extreme vetting” of those who believe “sharia law should supplant American law”

AUGUST 15, 2016 11:12 PM BY ROBERT SPENCER

Common sense. And long overdue. It would be difficult to devise a test that could not withstand a practiced and skillful taqiyya artist, but why should the attempt not be made? Unsurprisingly, the Washington Post is enraged, along with the rest of the mainstream media, and is doing all it can to discredit and defeat Trump.

The obvious fact that they are so deeply threatened by him is the best testimony to his viability as a candidate — better even than his own statements. The political and media elites are frightened to the core, and their globalist and pro-jihad policies are threatened, and that is a very good thing.

Trump081516

“Trump proposes ideological test for Muslim immigrants and visitors to the U.S.,” by Karen DeYoung, Washington Post, August 15, 2016:

Donald Trump called Monday for a Cold War-style mobilization against “radical Islamic terror,” repeating and repackaging calls for strict immigration controls — including a new ideological litmus test for Muslim visitors and migrants — and blaming the current level of worldwide terrorist attacks on President Obama and Hillary Clinton.

In a grab bag of promises to battle the Islamic State organization together with Russia and anyone else who wants to join the fight, the Republican nominee underlined the need to improve intelligence and shut down militant propaganda, recruiting and financing.

But he provided few specifics on how he would expand such efforts beyond those already underway.

“My administration will aggressively pursue joint and coalition military operations to crush and destroy ISIS,” Trump said in a speech in Youngstown, Ohio, using an acronym for the Islamic State. “International cooperation to cut off their funding, expanded intelligence sharing and cyberwarfare to disrupt and disable their propaganda and recruiting . . . It’s got to be stopped.”

The speech was one in a series of prepared remarks the Republican presidential nominee has scheduled, amid criticism of controversial off-the-cuff policy pronouncements that he has later dismissed as jokes or sarcasm. Reading directly from a TelePrompter, a subdued Trump rarely departed from his script.

The principal new initiative was what Trump called “extreme vetting” for “any hostile attitude towards our country or its principles, or who believed sharia law should supplant American law. . . . Those who did not believe in our Constitution or who support bigotry and hatred will not be admitted for immigration into our country.”

“In the Cold War,” he said, “we had an ideological screening test. The time is overdue to develop a new screening test for the threats we face today. . . . I call it extreme, extreme vetting.”…
Logged

"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1369 on: August 16, 2016, 01:01:48 PM »

Of course a leftist publication like Scientific American (i do subscribe and like it otherwise) , I mean anything that is written about university level science is going to, by definition, have a liberal progressive lean . places Trump at the top.  Yet for all of Trump's impulsiveness I just don't sense him as evil like I do for Hillary.   She is truly evil with anyone who gets in her way.  He resorts to somewhat childish name calling but to me he is not evil

In any case:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/of-psychopaths-and-presidential-candidates/
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1370 on: August 16, 2016, 01:40:35 PM »

Based on this it appears that the 3rd party candidates AGAIN screw over the Republicans:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/hillary-clinton-gets-25-point-lead-donald-trump-latest-poll-1576340?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=rss&utm_content=/rss/yahoous/news&yptr=yahoo
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8186


« Reply #1371 on: August 16, 2016, 04:39:29 PM »

A gaffe for a Democrat is when they get caught telling the truth.  Copying this post into the Pres. thread:

"the failure to build up Syrian rebels battling President Bashar Assad "left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled."   - Hillary Clinton  The Atlantic, Aug 10, 2014  Link below

"It is striking, however, that you have more than 170,000 people dead in Syria. You have the vacuum that has been created by the relentless assault by Assad on his own population, an assault that has bred these extremist groups, the most well-known of which, ISIS — or ISIL — is now literally expanding its territory inside Syria and inside Iraq," Clinton said.

Iran Deal:
"it’s important to send a signal to everybody who is there that there cannot be a deal unless there is a clear set of restrictions on Iran," adding, "little or no enrichment has always been my position."

Clinton said Obama's political message on foreign policy might be different from his worldview, noting, "Great nations need organizing principles, and 'Don’t do stupid stuff' is not an organizing principle."

Her own organizing tactic? "Peace, progress and prosperity."

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/

http://thehill.com/policy/international/214796-clinton-criticizes-obama-foreign-policy
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1372 on: August 16, 2016, 05:46:25 PM »

http://www.glennbeck.com/2016/08/16/trump-campaign-plays-russian-roulette-in-plain-sight/?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=top-stories&utm_campaign=homepage&utm_term=Glenn%20Beck
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8186


« Reply #1373 on: August 17, 2016, 09:16:07 AM »

Political analyst: Five Ways Hillary Can Still Lose

Hillary Clinton “shouldn’t start preparing her inaugural address just yet,” says Niall Stanage at The Hill. He cites five potential pitfalls:
1) A debate disaster, especially since “Clinton cannot win the expectations game”;
2) more e-mail embarrassments, because “trustworthiness is Clinton’s biggest weak spot in polls”;
3) low turnout, in which “liberals … stay home while Trump benefits from an unexpected surge among his white, working-class base”;
4) more Clinton Foundation revelations, given that she’s managed “to skate past questions about her behavior in office; and
5) a terrorist attack, as “Trump has polled respectably” on which candidate can best combat terrorism.
http://nypost.com/2016/08/16/racially-charged-riots-how-hillary-can-lose-and-other-notable-commentary/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1374 on: August 23, 2016, 06:05:02 AM »

We here have taken Obama-Hillary-Kerry to task for weakness in front of Putin's slow moving invasion of Ukraine. 

Trump has made some very different noises and recently stated

"Trust me, Putin is not going to invade (the rest of) Ukraine."

If Putin does exactly that, and it looks like he will, inter alia this is going to make for some horribly effective campaign spots against Trump.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1375 on: August 23, 2016, 09:21:43 AM »

"Trust me, Putin is not going to invade (the rest of) Ukraine."

Doug,

Agreed.  A foolish statement.  Remember when Carter looked foolish when Russia invaded Afghanistan?  This is the same self set up to look like a dupe.

Similarly, Obama's "line in the sand".

Doug,

You seem to be up on the races.  How bad do the Congressional and Senate races look?  I mean at least if Repubs can at least keep those.  Unless something changes the damage Trump has done to himself is going to result in a electoral landslide.  So say the Presidency is gone and the Sup Ct. ......

Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8186


« Reply #1376 on: August 23, 2016, 10:21:50 AM »

Here's what I think is wrong for the Republicans:

President Obama Job Approval
Approve 51.5
Disapprove 44.6
Net Approval  +6.9

Real Clear Politics poll averages.  That approval should be at minus double digits.  Either we aren't messaging or he is doing things right and we've got it wrong. 

But people also know the country is headed in the wrong direction:

Direction of Country
Right Direction 28.0
Wrong Track 64.3
Wrong Track +36.3

Maybe Obama's approval is personal and won't hand off to his successor.  But right now it is Obama and not Bill who is the best campaigner.  Reagan helped pull GHW Bush over the line.  We haven't herd the last from Michelle O in this campaign either.

Who are the Republican power horses that can step in to support Trump-Pence to match the power of this incumbent President?  There are none in the first place and secondly the best among them are lukewarm at best on the candidate.

Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1377 on: August 23, 2016, 03:08:59 PM »

Doug,

How do you account for Obama's above 50% approval numbers?

1)  an adoring 90% of the media?
2)  DNC phony speech about the greatness of America (after nearly 8 yrs of undermining this country and proceeding at warp speed to erasing national borders)?
3)  the obvious comparisons with Trump in regards to temperament and disposition?  Which plays to the ill informed crowd IMO.
4)  emphasis on racial politics?
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8186


« Reply #1378 on: August 23, 2016, 10:06:01 PM »

Ccp,   All of the above and then some. The poll average probably just tells us where we are right now.  Obama is a known leftist; people lean left.  Left seems normal and common sense when not challenged.

My hope was that the primaries would be 12 months of 17 Republicans taking apart the Obama record and explaining a better alternative.   That didn't happen there, doesn't happen in the media, in the schools, colleges or anywhere else.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1379 on: August 26, 2016, 10:36:36 AM »

HILLARY’S RACE WAR
Disgusting lies, smears and hate.
August 26, 2016
 
Daniel Greenfield
 
13
Share to Facebook92Share to TwitterShare to More58Share to Print
 
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

Hillary Clinton has met with leaders of a racist hate group responsible for torching cities and inciting the murders of police officers.  Deray McKesson, one of the Black Lives Matter hate group leaders she met with, had praised the looting of white people and endorsed cop killers Assata Shakur and Mumia Abu-Jamal. The Black Lives Matter hate group had specifically made a point of targeting white people in “white spaces” for harassment. It would go on to incite the mass murder of police officers in Dallas and other racist atrocities.

Despite all this, Hillary Clinton has never disavowed the racist hate group. Instead she doubled down on supporting the hate group and its icons at the Democratic National Convention.

Now, after Trump’s appeal to the black community, Hillary is desperately trying to divide us by race.

Despite Hillary’s latest hypocritical and self-serving accusations, Donald Trump has never held a meeting with leaders of a racist hate group. Hillary Clinton has. And she has refused all calls by police unions to end her support for a vicious hate group that has championed the release of cop killers and endorsed BDS against Israel.

When an 83-year-old great grandmother is viciously beaten by racist thugs and then set on fire, Hillary Clinton has nothing to say. She has remained silent about the wave of racist violence by her political allies that is sweeping this country and leaving victims battered or dead.

Hillary is trading on accusations of racism to distract attention from her ugly record of pandering to racists to get ahead. As Trump has said, “It’s the oldest play in the Democratic playbook. When Democratic policies fail, they are left with only this one tired argument. You’re racist, you’re racist, you’re racist!”
It’s not Hillary Clinton who has a consistent track record of opposing racists, but Donald Trump.

Trump’s first entry into presidential politics was a bid to block Pat Buchanan from gaining the Reform Party nomination. Trump accused Buchanan of anti-Semitism, racism and Nazi sympathies.

Hillary Clinton claimed that Trump had refused to disavow racist leader David Duke. But Trump had already rejected Duke back when he was considering a presidential campaign in 2000. "So the Reform Party now includes a Klansman—Mr. Duke, a Neo-Nazi—Mr. Buchanan, and a Communist—Ms. Fulani. This is not company I wish to keep."

If only Hillary Clinton had been as consistent in rejecting the company of Communists, Nazis and assorted racists as Trump has been.

Instead Hillary Clinton met with Black Lives Matter racist DeRay McKesson who spends his time denouncing “whiteness”. And on the other side of the racial line, Hillary Clinton praised the “courage, tenacity and vision” of Margaret Sanger who had delivered a speech to the KKK and whose Negro Project had promoted racial eugenics. Sanger’s pamphlet, “What Every Girl Should Know”, had described Australian aborigines as “the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development”. If this isn’t racism, I don’t know what is.

But according to Hillary Clinton, killing black babies and promoting hatred against white people isn’t racist. But criticizing what the Democrats have done to black communities is.

In her speech, Hillary Clinton denounced Trump’s criticisms of the Democratic exploitation of black communities as racist. According to Hillary Clinton, when Trump bemoaned poverty, lack of ownership and blight in black communities under Democratic rule, that was bigoted.  It’s the opposite of bigotry. Hillary Clinton is so threatened by Trump’s challenge to Democratic hegemony in the black community that she has been forced to resort to the most “tired” of arguments.

There is no defending the track record of the Democrats in black communities. All that Hillary can do is accuse those who point to the tragedy of the inner city of being racists.

The rest of Hillary Clinton’s accusations are equally absurd.

Hillary Clinton accused Trump of somehow being involved with anti-Semitism. This is the same man who said, “I want to thank my Jewish daughter. I have a Jewish daughter.”  The idea that Trump has anything in common with Richard Spencer, the anti-Semitic bigot who coined the term “Alt-Right”, is absurd. There are members of the Alt-Right using Trump to promote themselves. But Trump has no idea who or what they are. And, unlike Hillary, he has a track record of rejecting them.

But Hillary is rerunning her old “vast right-wing conspiracy” meme. Its purpose is to turn the tables on her critics. But her speech is a bizarre rant which claims that Putin has masterminded some sort of global nationalist conspiracy. But Putin isn’t interested in American nationalism. He doesn’t want a strong America. He wants a weak America. He wants the America of Hillary Clinton stretching out a reset button to one of his lackeys and asking the Russian tyranny to forgive us for George W. Bush.

Hillary Clinton denounces Trump as paranoid, but it’s her speech that is throbbing with unhinged paranoia, vague rumors and guilt by association. Even as she tries to claim the mantle of the optimistic candidate, her campaign runs on conspiracy theories and alliances with the vilest of racists.

The Obama years have been the biggest gift to racists of all shades and colors. During his time in office, both the black and white view of race relations has plummeted dramatically. If racist hate groups of both colors are in ascendance, it’s not because of Trump, but because of Obama.  And four to eight years of Hillary continuing this ugly legacy would see them grow even further.

Why would racists want Trump, who has denounced them, when they can have Hillary?

Why would Putin want a stronger America, when he can have more of the inept fumbling and appeasement of the Obama years?

Why would anyone believe Hillary Clinton’s paranoid conspiracy theories when they make no sense?

If Vladimir Putin had wanted to dictate our foreign policy, he couldn’t have done any better than Obama.

If black and white racists had wanted to divide us by race, they couldn’t have done any better than Obama.  Hillary Clinton’s disgusting accusations are an attempt to divert attention from the real issues that Trump has raised, from black suffering under Democratic rule to Islamic terrorism.

As Trump has said, “People who speak out against radical Islam, and who warn about refugees, are not Islamophobes. They are decent American citizens who want to uphold our values as a tolerant society, and who want to keep the terrorists out of our country.”

Hillary Clinton wants to bring the terrorists to this country. She wants to continue destroying our national security the way that her mentor in the White House has been doing.  And she will tell any lie and launch any smear to crawl her way to power. Now she’s trying to play on racial divisions while trying to attribute her own tactics to Donald Trump.

Logged
objectivist1
Power User
***
Posts: 988


« Reply #1380 on: August 26, 2016, 01:12:41 PM »


Trump and the American Dream 

By CAROLINE B. GLICK - The Jerusalem Post
 08/25/2016   
 
 
According to most polls taken since last month’s party conventions, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton enjoys an insurmountable lead over Republican nominee Donald Trump. Consequently, a number of commentators on both sides of the partisan divide have declared the race over. Clinton, they say, has won.

 There are several problems with this conclusion.

 First of all, the “official campaign,” won’t begin until September 26, when Clinton and Trump face off in their first presidential debate. Clinton is not a stellar debater and Trump, a seasoned entertainer, excels in these formats.

 Second, recent polls indicate that Trump is closing the gap. Whereas until this past week Clinton enjoyed a 6-8 point lead in the polls, in two polls taken this week, her lead had contracted to a mere 1-3 points.

 Third, it is quite possible that Clinton’s problems have only begun. Her peak popularity may be behind her. Since her nomination, barely a day has passed without another stunning exposé of apparently corrupt behavior on the part of Clinton and her closest advisers. This week’s AP report that half of Clinton’s non-official visitors during her tenure as secretary of state were donors to the Clinton Foundation was merely the latest blow.

 The continuous drip of corruption stories will have a corrosive effect on Clinton’s support levels. If the revelations to come are as damaging as many have claimed, their impact on Clinton’s candidacy may be fatal.

 In light of Clinton’s weaknesses, Trump’s main hurdle to winning the election may very well lie with the NeverTrump movement. That movement encompasses much of the Republican establishment – that is, the political class of centrist elected officials, opinion-shapers, former officials and ideologues. Its members have vowed not to vote for Trump even if it means that Clinton wins the White House. The fact that so many prominent Republican voices continue to oppose Trump even after he has been nominated hurts his ability to build support among swing voters.

 As far as the NeverTrumpsters are concerned, Trump carried out a hostile takeover of their party.

 The man who discussed his private parts on national television and brutally and personally attacked his opponents may have won more primary votes than any Republican candidate in the past. But he also won the enmity of more members of the party establishment than any other Republican presidential hopeful.

 In an interview with CNN in late May,  Wall Street Journal columnist (and former Jerusalem Post editor-in-chief) Bret Stephens spoke for many in the NeverTrump camp when he said that he wants Trump to be “the biggest loser in presidential history.”

Stephens explained, “It’s important that Donald Trump and what he represents, this kind of ethnic quote ‘conservatism’ or populism, be so decisively rebuked that the Republican Party and Republican voters will forever learn their lesson that they cannot nominate a man so manifestly unqualified to be president in any way, shape or form.”

In June Stephens told radio host Hugh Hewitt that a Trump presidency would be more devastating for the US than a Clinton presidency. Stephens argued that whereas a Clinton presidency would be “a survivable event” he was unsure that the US could survive a Trump presidency.

 He explained, “The United States survives so long as at least one of its major parties is politically and intellectually healthy. I don’t think the Republican Party... as the vehicle for modern American conservative ideas, survives with Donald Trump.”

This week, The Washington Times published a list of 50 senior Republicans who not only will not support Trump, but have switched sides and are publicly supporting Clinton.

 The problem with Stephens’s view, which again, is widely shared by the intellectual and political establishment of the party, is that it ignores the cause of Trump’s primaries victory.

 On the eve of his 2008 electoral victory, Barack Obama pledged to “fundamentally transform,” America.

 He kept his word.

 And it is this fundamental transformation and the Republican leadership’s failure to stop it that transformed a loud-mouthed, brash billionaire into the Republican nominee. It was this transformation, and the Republican establishment’s failure to block it, that made it impossible for moderates like Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush to win the Republican primaries in 2016.

 Not only has the country been transformed, the Republican electorate has been transformed.

 Today America is steeped in crisis. Foreign audiences concentrate on the crisis of American power overseas. Today, due to Obama’s decision to prefer his failed attempt at rapprochement with Iran over longtime US allies in the region, the Americans have lost their strategic superiority in the Middle East and are on the way to losing whatever residual influence they still maintain over regional affairs.

 Turkey’s ground invasion of Syria on Wednesday is a clear sign of the disintegration of America’s regional position. While the invasion was ostensibly launched against ISIS, the plain fact is that its main target is the Kurds. That is, NATO member Turkey invaded Syria to take out the US’s primary ally in its campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

 And the US is providing air cover to the Turkish invaders while abandoning the Kurds.

 Every advance the US has made in its campaign against ISIS has been achieved on the backs of the Kurds. And yet, Vice President Joe Biden, who was visiting in Ankara the day of the Turkish invasion, openly threatened the Kurds. Biden said the US will abandon them if they refuse to conform with Turkey’s demand that they withdraw to the eastern side of the Euphrates River.

 Biden’s move merely reinforced the growing impression that the US is only dangerous to its allies. The Iranians, for instance responded to the Turkish move by harassing the US Navy destroyer USS Nitze as it traversed the Strait of Hormuz. Rather than sink the Iranian vessels that threatened it, the Nitze responded by shooting off a couple of flares. The State Department then whined about the assault, calling Iran’s act of war “unprofessional.”

And the worst part about the US’s strategic crackup is that it is but one of the crises endangering America today.

 Economically, the US has been steeped in stagnation for eight years. Largely as a result of overregulation, entrepreneurship is producing almost no new jobs. The housing crisis has not ended. People who purchased homes before 2008 remain stuck with underwater mortgages, doomed to remain in towns with no jobs because they can’t afford to sell their homes.

 Obamacare has made healthcare unaffordable for people who have insurance. Co-payments have risen so steeply that for many insured Americans, medical care is now viewed as a luxury item.

 In Rust Belt states, tens of millions of blue collar workers find themselves living in ruined towns. In the past two decades company after company closed its factories, shipped its operations out of the US or went bankrupt in the face of foreign competitors. And their former workers, people who believed in the American Dream, and actually achieved it, now have no dreams and no hope of ever getting back what they lost, much less of seeing their children do better than they did.

 The economic crisis has caused deeper crises.First and foremost the US is now in the midst of a crisis of faith. A Pew poll released this week showed that between 2007 and 2014, church attendance declined from 39 to 36 percent over the seven-year period. A significant number of nonobservant Americans no longer believe in God.

 Those numbers themselves are highly inflated. A multiyear study of church attendance data gathered from the majority of churches in the US by sociologists C. Kirk Hadaway and Penny Long Marler and published in 2005 showed that fewer than half of those who claim to go to church regularly actually do so. Hadaway and Marler assessed that a mere 17.7 percent of Americans go to church on a regular basis. The rest just tell pollsters that they attend because they are embarrassed that they don’t attend.

 In other words, what the Pew survey shows is not a reduction in religious worship but a shift in values. Today fewer Americans view church attendance as normatively superior to nonattendance.

 Loss of faith may well be directly correlated with a diminished view of the value of life. In Appalachia and the Midwest, the economic crisis and the spiritual crisis have also engendered a drug epidemic unprecedented in rural America. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 125 Americans die every day from drug overdoses. That is more than the number of Americans who die in car accidents. The most significant rise in drug addiction rates has occurred in rural America. New Hampshire is the heroin capital of the US.

 Just last weekend, 10 people died of heroin overdoses in one rural county in Ohio. The heroin in question was laced with a tranquilizer generally used on elephants.

 This is the American transformation that Obama has brought about. And the suffering and misery it has engendered are the reason that Trump is now the Republican presidential nominee.

 Trump is no Billy Sunday. He is not a champion of free trade or social conservativism. He isn’t a neoconservative interventionist. Trump is the bar brawler who says things no one else will say. And the people who lack faith in the country’s ability to help them, who have lost hope that things that used to work can work again, adore him for it.

 This brings us to the issue of the lessons that will be learned by Republican voters if Trump loses as the NeverTrumpsters hope and expect.

 If Trump loses, his voters will not realize that they were mistaken to believe in him and support him in defiance of their party’s intellectual class. They will blame the NeverTrumpsters for the election results and boot them out of the party altogether. If the Republican Party even exists in 2020 and 2024, its candidates will make Trump look like a moderate.

 If Trump wins, on the other hand, while it is true that the NeverTrumpsters will not maintain their unquestioned control over Republican policies, they will likely get a seat at the table and retain some influence.

 More important, if Trump wins, the US will have a chance of changing back to the country it was before Obama fundamentally transformed it.

 Clinton, who like Obama and the NeverTrumpsters scoffs at Trump’s dark descriptions of American life today, has pledged to double down on Obama’s foreign and domestic policies. Indeed, she even pledged to destroy what’s left of the coal industry.

 So if Clinton is elected, what Republicans think about illegal immigration and free trade and foreign policy will be irrelevant. America’s fundamental transformation will become irreversible.

 In that event, America as a whole – not Trump, and not even the NeverTrumpsters – will be the greatest loser of November’s election.

www.CarolineGlick.com 
Logged

"You have enemies?  Good.  That means that you have stood up for something, sometime in your life." - Winston Churchill.
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1381 on: August 26, 2016, 02:14:19 PM »

From her mouth to God's ears.  We need a lightening bolt about now.  smiley
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 5881


« Reply #1382 on: August 26, 2016, 02:52:51 PM »

http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

I find it hard to believe one or two polls that show it being close when all the others are not showing this.  And the swing states are not good .
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 13826


« Reply #1383 on: August 26, 2016, 04:15:02 PM »

Donald Trump took any hope of beating the Crooked Hillary machine out onto 5th Ave. and shot it in the head.

Hillary is the next president. Plan accordingly.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1384 on: August 26, 2016, 04:56:39 PM »

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-u-s-department-of-clinton-1472167746
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 37523


« Reply #1385 on: August 26, 2016, 08:18:24 PM »

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/comic/go-with-the-flow/
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!