US Presidential Contenders

[Rusty Edge]

Constitutionally disqualified.

Personally, I have more doubts about Cruz than Obama, but scholars seem to agree that the definition of the term natural-born citizen 230 years ago would include him.

[vonbach]

Oh Barry Sotoro and his fake birth certificate yeah. They actually forgot to take off the
watermark when they photoshopped it.

[Rusty Edge]

I will admit I am truly enjoying the [Sleezebag] steamroll. The more they attack the more they try to ignore him the
stronger he gets. 

You may well be right, but that remains to be seen. 
The last two polls have him getting stronger, then weaker. I suspect one of them is wrong.
The stronger poll of 32%-5.1% = 26.9% is slightly below his current 30 day average of 27.53%
The weaker poll of 17%+5.0% = 22%, well below.

Now it could be that the 17% result is so erroneous that it skews the 30 day average.

Or it could be that people are flipping from [Sleezebag] to Carson on the basis of Carson's remarks about Muslims being unqualified to be president.  If wild remarks can work for [Sleezebag], why not for Carson, too?

Me, I'd like to wait for another poll to confirm a trend one way or another.


Even so, becoming president is not exactly a national popularity contest. It's also a matter of fund-raising, strategic planning, and organizing. First you have to get the nomination, then you have to win the electoral college. If it were easy, everybody would do it.

Well, it appears that the steamroller is gathering steam, as vonboch said.  The IBT/TIPP poll is at odds with the Gravis marketing poll from the same day. It looks like a fluke. The other poll follows the trend. http://election-polls.org/?order=30day#polls

Gravis- [Sleezebag] 34.7%  Carson 17.2%
IBD-     [Sleezebag] 17%    Carson 24%
30 Day avg.- [Sleezebag] 27.78%  Carson 16.66%

[vonbach]

Well, it appears that the steamroller is gathering steam, as vonboch said.  The IBT/TIPP poll is at odds with the Gravis marketing poll from the same day. It looks like a fluke. The other poll follows the trend. http://election-polls.org/?order=30day#polls

Gravis- [Sleezebag] 34.7%  Carson 17.2%
IBD-     [Sleezebag] 17%    Carson 24%
30 Day avg.- [Sleezebag] 27.78%  Carson 16.66%

Every time I hear politics being discussed people are  talking about [Sleezebag].
Not in a bad way either. He's basically saying what most ordinary Americans
have  wanted for years. Someone summed up his tax plan as
"He likes money and wants you to have more of it." The only thing that will stop a
[Sleezebag] presidency is massive obvious vote fraud or an assassins bullet.

[Green1]

Well, it appears that the steamroller is gathering steam, as vonboch said.  The IBT/TIPP poll is at odds with the Gravis marketing poll from the same day. It looks like a fluke. The other poll follows the trend. http://election-polls.org/?order=30day#polls

Gravis- [Sleezebag] 34.7%  Carson 17.2%
IBD-     [Sleezebag] 17%    Carson 24%
30 Day avg.- [Sleezebag] 27.78%  Carson 16.66%

Every time I hear politics being discussed people are  talking about [Sleezebag].
Not in a bad way either. He's basically saying what most ordinary Americans
have  wanted for years. Someone summed up his tax plan as
"He likes money and wants you to have more of it." The only thing that will stop a
[Sleezebag] presidency is massive obvious vote fraud or an assassins bullet.

Unfortunately, this is what I am seeing too. He is appealing to the drones who secretly want to be like him talking from the hip and a disdain for immigrants and militant 3rd wave feminism/ political "correctness". As much as he is kind of buffoonish, this appeals to A LOT of people who will overlook stuff just because they are sick of it. (and kind of rightfully so - but that is for another thread)

Although, I do not think the Clintons are going to take it laying down. I predict a nasty, mudslinging election.

Sad we will not get someone a bit more progressive and socialist in. But, hasn't these things always been a choice between the shiniest of two turds?

[vonbach]

He is appealing to the drones who secretly want to be like him talking from the hip and a disdain for immigrants and militant 3rd wave feminism/ political "correctness".

This is the attitude thats causing the backlash. People aren't drones and we aren't cattle either.
After a bit the arrogance gets a bit old and people are well past sick of it. We've been ignored for far too long.
Or told to shut up and deal with it. Whats going on is were taking our country back.

Sad we will not get someone a bit more progressive and socialist in.

Progressing towards what? This country cant survive more progressives.

[Dio]

He is appealing to the drones who secretly want to be like him talking from the hip and a disdain for immigrants and militant 3rd wave feminism/ political "correctness".

This is the attitude thats causing the backlash. People aren't drones and we aren't cattle either.
After a bit the arrogance gets a bit old and people are well past sick of it. We've been ignored for far too long.
Or told to shut up and deal with it. Whats going on is were taking our country back.

Sad we will not get someone a bit more progressive and socialist in.

Progressing towards what? This country cant survive more progressives.

Why should we the people not create a new government that fufills the needs of the majority rather than the financial and political elite? Why should the common people continue to endure a system that leaves them impoverished with few opportunties toward improvement? Why should we the people continue to tolerate a system that has become bloated with bureaucracy and excessive interference in meeting the demands of the people? Where do we the people obtain the criteria by which it becomes acceptable of groups in our society to say, "We believe the harm done by our government towards it people has become unbearable"? When do we the people rise up against the harm and the despotic nature of our government?

[Dio]

He is appealing to the drones who secretly want to be like him talking from the hip and a disdain for immigrants and militant 3rd wave feminism/ political "correctness".

This is the attitude thats causing the backlash. People aren't drones and we aren't cattle either.
After a bit the arrogance gets a bit old and people are well past sick of it. We've been ignored for far too long.
Or told to shut up and deal with it. Whats going on is were taking our country back.

Sad we will not get someone a bit more progressive and socialist in.

Progressing towards what? This country cant survive more progressives.

Why should we the people not create a new government that fufills the needs of the majority rather than the financial and political elite? Why should the common people continue to endure a system that leaves them impoverished with few opportunties toward improvement? Why should we the people continue to tolerate a system that has become bloated with bureaucracy and excessive interference in meeting the demands of the people? Where do we the people obtain the criteria by which it becomes acceptable of groups in our society to say, "We believe the harm done by our government towards it people has become unbearable"? When do we the people rise up against the harm and the despotic nature of our government?

     The present country we live in was founded upon the principles of revolution. In 1775 the U.S. colonies began a revolution to overthrow the reins of British control. This revolutionary action allowed our present country to come into existence and set a precedence that people can overthrow corrupt governments with sufficient might. With the fact that our government has the potential to reform itself through revolution, the above rhetorical questions raise several points that require analysis.
     The first point that requires analysis is the determination of the wrongs that this system has commited against the majority of people present in our country. These wrongs can receive formal recognition through the enshrinement in a list that clearly states, with considerable evidence to support the claims in other credible sources, the morally incorrect acts that our government has committed against its people. This list should include a list that considers the reasons that these wrongs represent crimes worthy of drastic actions similiar to a revolution.
     The second point that requires consideration is the boundaries and limits by which the people in our country must tolerate the actions of a government. This means that people must have the perception and the motivation to take action against the wrongs that actually occur against the people in our country. This safety valve would prevent random uprisings over fairly trivial matters, yet it would still the people to correct any errors that might arise in a government over its lifespan.
     The third point that requires analysis is the recongition of appropriate methods to overthrow a political system that the majority of people see as corrupt. This requires an understanding of politics, military theory, and various other subjects. This means that it requires an individual with a significant amount of experience in these matters to determine the appropriate course of action. That means the leaders of a revolution would have to recruit the support of powerful political figures in the government and military to procure the required strength to achieve this goal. That means it will require either the support of a strong minority or the support of a majority of people within our society to achieve this goal.
    Another point that furthermore illustrates the above claim is that people should retain the ability to fight against that which they know is unfair. The ability to recognize the wrong in a action becomes ensnared in a variety of moral and political questions that receive analysis in plenty of different sources. It should suffice to say that people must become throughly educated about an issue before they come to a conclusion because hasty generalizations often fail to accurately potray reality. This particular issue requires individuals to analyze an issue within the scope of his or her moral stance before they rush to make a conclusion because the action one group considers correct another might find reprehensible. This particular issue therefore is the foremost reason that the majority of individuals in a revolution must create a solid list of grievances that they all agree have occured based upon the available evidence.
     In final consideration of the above information, it becomes necessary to recognize that a revolution in the modern period would look signficantly different from a revolution in the late 1700's. It would require recognition that the nature of conflict within such a revolution would vary dramatically. Regardless of the above, the fundamental desire to free themselves of an oppressive government remains the same. It therefore appears that this particular action remains possible within our current state of affairs.

[Yitzi]

He is appealing to the drones who secretly want to be like him talking from the hip and a disdain for immigrants and militant 3rd wave feminism/ political "correctness".

This is the attitude thats causing the backlash. People aren't drones and we aren't cattle either.
After a bit the arrogance gets a bit old and people are well past sick of it. We've been ignored for far too long.
Or told to shut up and deal with it. Whats going on is were taking our country back.

Sad we will not get someone a bit more progressive and socialist in.

Progressing towards what? This country cant survive more progressives.

Why should we the people not create a new government that fufills the needs of the majority rather than the financial and political elite? Why should the common people continue to endure a system that leaves them impoverished with few opportunties toward improvement? Why should we the people continue to tolerate a system that has become bloated with bureaucracy and excessive interference in meeting the demands of the people? Where do we the people obtain the criteria by which it becomes acceptable of groups in our society to say, "We believe the harm done by our government towards it people has become unbearable"? When do we the people rise up against the harm and the despotic nature of our government?

I suspect vonbach agrees 100%, and the only question is whether the progressives are trying to solve the problem, or contributing to or causing it (or both).

[vonbach]

I suspect vonbach agrees 100%, and the only question is whether the progressives are trying to solve the problem, or contributing to or causing it (or both).

Pretty much.
Progressives are the cause of this. At this point we are two countries and we simply cant go on like this.
We weren't asked about any of the issues gay marriage, abortion, multiculturalism,  whatever.
We aren't consulted we are dictated to. We are long past the point of the original revolution.

Why should we the people not create a new government that fufills the needs of the majority rather than the financial and political elite?

What majority? The one they are importing from the third world or the original one they are replacing?
Its the old Communist line of "de-electing a population and installing a new one."
You realize that under UN law whats being done to white populations is genocide?

That means it will require either the support of a strong minority or the support of a majority of people within our society to achieve this goal.

The IRA fought a major military power to a standstill with 20 shooters. The USA has a 60 million people with firearms.
Most of them used to shooting at man sized targets at long range.

[Buster's Uncle]

Hillary Clinton and her rivals all want the same thing tonight at the Democratic debate
Yahoo! Politics
Hunter Walker  ‎October‎ ‎13‎, ‎2015



LAS VEGAS – All the Democrats — including Hillary Clinton — who will be on stage for their first 2016 presidential primary debate Tuesday night say they want to introduce themselves to American voters.

Clinton is a former first lady, senator and secretary of state. She’s also the current frontrunner in the Democratic presidential field. Still, her campaign thinks people aren’t necessarily familiar with the platform she’s running on.

“We think it’s a great opportunity for Hillary because she has laid out a very detailed progressive policy agenda over the course of this campaign,” Clinton campaign spokeswoman Christina Reynolds told Yahoo News on Tuesday afternoon. “She’s laid out her vision for America, she’s talked about what she believes is the fundamental challenge facing the next president and what are the challenges that … keep families up at night. She’s talked about what she would do to solve them. Now, if you’re not a voter in one of the early states, you may have missed some of that.”

Reynolds went on to explain how people may have “missed” the Clinton agenda.

“You may not have been paying attention yet or, you know, the news has been caught up in political clutter,” Reynolds said. “So this is really an opportunity for millions of people to hear for the first time who she’s going to fight for and what she’s going to do as president.”

Since Clinton launched her campaign in April, her team has sought to brand her as a “champion for everyday Americans,” specifically families. In the intervening months, the headlines have been dominated by stories about the questions relating to Clinton’s use of a private email server while she led the State Department and other campaign intrigue. Reynolds suggested the debate will be a chance for Clinton to have a more policy-focused discussion, including highlighting her past record.

“I think this will be an opportunity to remind people that she has spent her career fighting for children and families,” Reynolds said.



Hillary Clinton arrives at a labor rally in Las Vegas on Monday. (Photo: John Locher/AP)


Given Clinton’s high profile, her campaign’s claim they want to familiarize people with her more at the debate might seem surprising. However, it’s obvious her lesser-known rivals need to make an introduction if they hope to catch up to her in the polls.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is Clinton’s top opponent. He has surged in state and national polling, and even managed to edge past Clinton in New Hampshire, but his press secretary, Symone Sanders (no relation), told Yahoo News that “his name ID is still a little low in a lot of communities.”

“We are looking forward to the debate tonight. It is an opportunity for the senator to introduce himself to the American people,” Symone said, adding, “Tonight, this is a chance for the senator to go out on that stage and be Bernie Sanders and let America know who Bernie Sanders is and what he stands for. And we believe that, once America gets to know Bernie Sanders, they’re going to love him and they’re going to want to vote for him.”

Former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb and two ex-governors, Maryland’s Martin O’Malley and Rhode Island’s Lincoln Chafee, are bringing up the rear in the polls — far behind Clinton and Sanders. They all clearly need to introduce themselves to voters too. The Webb and Chafee campaigns did not respond to requests for comment from Yahoo ahead of the debate, but O’Malley press secretary Haley Morris confirmed the former executive’s team wants people to “get to know the governor.”

“It will be the introduction where he can introduce his record of getting progressive results in Maryland and also make his case for his … bold and progressive vision of the progressive goals that he’s set for the country,” Morris said, adding, “When you go through the priorities for the Democratic Party, whether that’s raising the minimum wage, or tackling climate change, or, you know, taking action to fix our inhumane immigration system, these are all examples where the governor can say, ‘I don’t just hold these progressive principles, but I know what it takes as a leader, as someone with 15 years of executive experience, I know what it takes to forge consensus and get that done.”



Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Public Policy Conference in Washington earlier this month. (Photo: Jose Luis Magana/AP)


Morris said O’Malley has been laying “groundwork” in the early states and, now that he’s getting in front of a national audience, “the fight is just getting started.”

Still, for now, the spotlight is clearly on Clinton and Sanders. As they both hope to introduce themselves and their platforms, one of the major questions is whether Sanders, who has thus far refrained from attacking Clinton, will go on the offensive. His press secretary, Symone Sanders, said that, like Clinton, he wants to focus on policy.

“You’re not going to see much of a change because, you know, we’re going to give you quintessential Bernie Sanders,” Symone said. “Bernie has never ran a negative attack ad in his life, and we’re not going to start tonight on the debate stage. What we are going to do is we’re going to differentiate on the issues so Bernie can tell the American people where he stands.”

Symone said she expects Sanders to focus on what has long been his main theme — the fight against income inequality — as well as climate change.

“Bernie is speaking to the life-and-death issues that everyday Americans are dealing with,” said Symone. “These are the conversations that people are having at their dinner tables, the things that folks are talking about with their friends. These are the issues that, quote unquote, keep them up at night.”

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/hillary-clinton-and-her-rivals-all-want-the-same-204126385.html


I found out three of these people existed yesterday...

[Buster's Uncle]

How a team of Obama veterans helped Bernie Sanders pull in a record number of donations
Yahoo! Politics
Alyssa Bereznak  National Correspondent, Technology  October‎ ‎07‎, ‎2015



Sen. Bernie Sanders at a campaign rally in Springfield, Mass. (Photo: Michael Dwyer/AP).



On the last Tuesday in September, an important deadline loomed for the men and women who would be president. The Federal Election Commission requires those running for office to report how much their campaigns have raised each quarter, and the last-minute fundraising appeals that ensue often reach a dramatic pitch as politicians seek to raise a figure that proves they have staying power.

Starting at about 9:30 p.m. that evening, online donations through Sen. Bernie Sanders’s website, store and the ActBlue fundraising site reached the phenomenal clip of about two contributions per second. They stayed at that high and steady pace until the clock struck midnight. When all was said and done, online fundraising efforts like this helped the campaign raise a whopping $26 million for the quarter — just $2 million fewer than Democratic primary frontrunner and establishment favorite Hillary Clinton.

Sanders also reported more than 1 million contributions — more even than Barack Obama had pulled in during the early part of his groundbreaking 2008 presidential run. It was a major milestone for the Vermont senator’s Cinderella story campaign, proving he has both the voter base and the financial wherewithal to compete with Clinton.

If Sanders’s record-setting number of donors served as a wake-up call to establishment Democrats about the strength of the insurgent Sanders campaign, it was no surprise to those inside his operation.

Since May, a small guerilla-marketing team whose members have been part of some of the most successful insurgent campaigns in the Democratic Party have been working to translate grassroots enthusiasm for Sanders into dollars.

At its helm is Scott Goodstein, a former music marketer who made a living hyping bands like Korn prior to his political career. In 2007, after “drinking beers and talking” with Obama’s main digital strategist at the time, he and his friend, videographer Arun Chaudhary, were hired by the famously innovative campaign to help create a groundswell of support online and in local communities.

In 2009, after Obama’s election, Goodstein took everything he learned from the campaign and launched Revolution Messaging, bringing on a “lean-and-mean” group of digital marketing veterans to help. Tim Tagaris, who cut his teeth on Sen. Chris Murphy’s successful campaign against Republican Linda McMahon, and on Ned Lamont’s netroots-fueled fight against one-time Democratic vice presidential nominee and incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman, came on as a partner. He hired Michael Whitney, who had worked for Howard Dean’s pioneering 2004 presidential campaign as well as the cause-and-petitions site Change.org. Chaudhary joined up after leaving the White House, where he had been Obama’s first videographer.

Since July, Revolution Messaging has been tasked with overseeing social media, online fundraising, web design and digital advertising for Sanders, sending a steady stream of text messages, emails and issue-based ads urging supporters to donate or volunteer. The team also nurtures and helps grow the communities on Sanders’s already popular Facebook and Reddit pages.

“After seeing the immediate response the first few hours after [Sanders] said that he was running for president, nothing would surprise me,” Tagaris, who heads up the email fundraising team for Sanders, told Yahoo News after the third quarter fundraising numbers were revealed.

The effort is not all that different from the scrappy, ultra-efficient operation that Goodstein and many members of his current workforce ran for Obama’s campaign in 2008. But to equate the two campaigns is to overlook both the way Internet use has evolved over the past eight years, and the unique personality of Sanders as a candidate.

Since the 2008 election, the economy has migrated to Internet-based services, the mobile industry has exploded and a generation of young people weaned on the art of personal branding is more skeptical of pandering than ever. It’s these pivotal changes in the digital world and the people who live in it that explain Sanders’s appeal and the passionate response his campaign has been enjoying.



Sanders greets supporters after speaking during a campaign rally. (Photo: Michael Dwyer/AP).


Goodstein recalls that when he joined Obama’s campaign in January 2007, the iPhone had not yet been released and text messaging was still something people labored over on their flip phones. Now, he says, more people are comfortable donating money online, ad gateways have become more sophisticated and news breaks much quicker. Even organizing large rallies has become cheaper and easier to do on the fly.

“It’s a different world,” he told Yahoo News. “We’re excited that we achieved the millionth contribution a lot quicker [than with the Obama campaign], but it’s also because the Internet has grown up.”

For Sanders, the high number of donations thus far can be credited to a support base that’s deeply engaged in specific issues — especially the influence of what he so disdainfully refers to as “the billionaire class.” It’s also come from seizing smart opportunities for fundraising. When on two occasions super-PACs representing fellow Democratic contenders Martin O’Malley and Hillary Clinton used negative tactics against Sanders, Goodstein’s team acted swiftly to launch targeted web ads and send out emails to the campaign’s master contact list, imploring subscribers to contribute to prevent the wealthy from influencing the election. When the O’Malley-connected super-PAC first ran a YouTube ad criticizing Sanders in March, the campaign raised much more than it usually did in a normal week. And when the Huffington Post reported that a Clinton-connected super-PAC had been circulating negative emails about Sanders, his campaign raised a record-breaking $1.2 million in less than 48 hours.

“None of this stuff works if there isn’t that energy out there,” Goodstein said. “Clearly people are fired up on these issues, and my team’s doing a good job of smartly figuring out how to harness that energy and make sure that you have the opportunity to engage in a positive way.”

But the steadfast support for Sanders’s campaign is not just derived from frustration with the electoral meddling of elite donors and billionaires. According to Whitney, who heads the company’s email fundraising with Tagaris, email solicitations have been responsible for a significant portion of Sanders’s donations. The loyalty established among the campaign’s followers, he says, is due to their willingness to learn about the policies that are central to the election, and parse through emails from Sanders that are sometimes as long as 2,000 words. These messages address both newsworthy events like the pope’s visit, and issues that Sanders feels passionate about, such as prescription drug reform, or student debt. In the latter email, the staff asked subscribers to reply with what it would mean to them to have no tuition debt, and then re-circulated some of the answers it got to the same list. Sometimes the emails are targeted and include fundraising appeals, but sometimes they are just about messaging and connecting.

“People really feel ownership of this campaign,” Whitney said. “The language that Senator Sanders uses shows everyone is a part of this, and that really encourages people to chip in.”

Goodstein, who enlisted artist Shepard Fairey to create the iconic blue-and-red “Hope” posters for Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008, has embraced the idea of collaboration. He’s put some members of Sanders’s Reddit page to work coding special projects. And in late September, he posted a list of famous actors, musicians and other creatives who have publicly backed Bernie.

“We’re looking to put everybody to work,” Goodstein said. “So if you don’t have a thousand dollars, what kind of craft or skill can you donate?”

Perhaps the paramount asset in Sanders’s successful digital campaign is the consistent presence of the candidate himself. His unmistakable persona, along with his unkempt hair and heavy Brooklyn accent, remain a point of attraction to many voters who distrust an overly groomed political class. Former White House aide Chaudhary, for his part, is now doing shareable Bernie vérité videos that highlight these characteristics for social distribution.

“The real innovation here is the authenticity, and the willingness to speak at length about the issues that people are facing every day,” Tagaris said. “Treating people with that kind of respect has really yielded a tremendous response for the senator.”

Despite the amount of money the Sanders campaign has raised thus far, the candidate still faces a number of financial obstacles. According to Richard Hassen, a professor specializing in election law at the University of Irvine’s law school, Sanders’s sizeable support from small donors does not necessarily mean he’ll be successful in the primaries.

“There are some candidates that tend to attract more broad-based support than others,” Hassen told Yahoo News “Barack Obama did it, Howard Dean did it, Ron Paul did it and Ted Cruz has that going on. But having that base does not guarantee success, as Howard Dean can tell you.”

Because Clinton has the advantageous support of super-PACs, which are less beholden to donation limits, she’s also able to spend a much higher fraction of her donations than Sanders. According to the New York Times, Clinton has spent 90 percent of the $28 million she raised for her campaign between April and July. Sanders, by comparison, has spent an estimated $15 million, mostly on his online fundraising operation and hiring staff. Stephen Spaulding, a senior policy adviser at the nonprofit organization Common Cause, says we’ve yet to see the effects of super-PAC donations in the 2016 race.

“This is the second presidential election post-Citizens United,” he told Yahoo News. “We’re going to see even more outside money, and candidates that are relying on small donors need to build up a defense against this big money. I’m sure they’re planning for those anonymous attack ads from super-PACs that’ll be headed their way.”

Rest assured that Goodstein already has a cache of emails and targeted ads queued up for the next one, ready to mobilize the Sanders base to fight back.

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/how-a-team-of-obama-veterans-helped-bernie-sanders-131204886.html

[Lorizael]

What majority? The one they are importing from the third world or the original one they are replacing?

The "majority" they are "importing" from the third world tends not to support things like gay marriage and abortion, what with them being heavily Catholic.

[Buster's Uncle]

[Buster's Uncle]

Probable quote of the night:

Bernie Sanders: "I think the secretary's right ... the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails!"