USA presidential elections 2016

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 30 May 2016, 07:44

John Pilger putting words together in an uncomfortable order again.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/27/ ... s-for-war/

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 30 May 2016, 11:53

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 55751.html

Are you referring to the LP? I'm certain that members stripping naked on stage is going to increase their credibility.

The LP certainly have a historic opportunity to advance a 3rd party candidate but their wacky libertarian views will kill them at the GE.

For a start, they think that Social Security should be privatized - that will go down well with the average voter I'm sure!

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 30 May 2016, 12:19

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/l ... iam-223703

Even so, Johnson and Weld now head a deeply divided party, and many of the Libertarian faithful gathered in Orlando were resistant to being dragged anywhere near the mainstream. . It took both Johnson and Weld, who were approved in separate votes, two ballots each to win their nominations; Weld won a squeaker with 50.6 percent of the vote.

Delegates also booed Johnson multiple times at the final presidential debate Saturday night — for suggesting the government have a role in issuing drivers’ licenses, for saying he would have signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and for talking about curbing carbon emissions.
“We’re at a threshold here,” Johnson implored the crowd, “a real threshold to grow this party.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/l ... z4A8Ymhipq
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

AutomaticEarth · Post by **AutomaticEarth** » 30 May 2016, 19:02

Lord Beria3 wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 55751.html

Are you referring to the LP? I'm certain that members stripping naked on stage is going to increase their credibility.

The LP certainly have a historic opportunity to advance a 3rd party candidate but their wacky libertarian views will kill them at the GE.

For a start, they think that Social Security should be privatized - that will go down well with the average voter I'm sure!

Not sure if you was referring to my previous post, but if you was then yes I was referring to the Libertarian Party. I mentioned them as they are looking to be on the ballot in 50 states, but not sure what effect this will have. You've got a point about Social Security though. That won't go far.

Saying that, at least one one commentator is forecasting that Trump could win by a landslide:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/don ... 51686.html

He (Trump) has been underestimated up to now. I would not bet against him.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 30 May 2016, 21:21

Yes, I have been predicting since January that Trump will win in November - back when it was considered an absurd idea!

I have also thought that if he plays his cards well then he could win by a Reagan style landslide. Seems that this idea is starting to gain ground.

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 30 May 2016, 21:27

He will win unless that useless corporate puppet Clinton gets out of the way and lets Sanders stand against him. Sanders would beat him.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 30 May 2016, 23:26

Yes.

Barring a last minute miracle of sense on the part of the Democratic Super Delegates, Clinton will be the Democratic Presidential Candidate. In which case Trump will win

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 31 May 2016, 19:03

Agreed.

Post by **clv101** » 31 May 2016, 19:18

Seriously you three? I think you're out of touch with the US electorate.

In my opinion Clinton's got it in the bag in a Trump vs Clinton election. There's no way Trump has the support to take the key states from Clinton.

I guess we'll know in a few months.

AutomaticEarth · Post by **AutomaticEarth** » 31 May 2016, 22:09

clv101 wrote:Seriously you three? I think you're out of touch with the US electorate.

In my opinion Clinton's got it in the bag in a Trump vs Clinton election. There's no way Trump has the support to take the key states from Clinton.

Not really - I think the views expressed are credible. The fact that Sanders voters are looking to vote Trump says it all. Clinton is a vote for more of the same. More of the same doesn't cut it these days.

Post by **clv101** » 31 May 2016, 22:16

I think you have to take what's being said at the moment wrt Sanders with pinch of salt, by November I expect he'll be a distant memory with folk returning to Clinton in order to beat Trump. There's a lot of clear air between the primary race and the election.

I'm very happy to eat humble pie if Trump wins, and I actually think a Trump presidency might be better for world in general if not for a lot of Americans. But I can't see him winning popular majorities where he'd need to.

AutomaticEarth · Post by **AutomaticEarth** » 31 May 2016, 22:53

clv101 wrote:I think you have to take what's being said at the moment wrt Sanders with pinch of salt, by November I expect he'll be a distant memory with folk returning to Clinton in order to beat Trump. There's a lot of clear air between the primary race and the election.

I'm very happy to eat humble pie if Trump wins, and I actually think a Trump presidency might be better for world in general if not for a lot of Americans. But I can't see him winning popular majorities where he'd need to.

You could be right CLV, and btw I was not disrespecting your post. I'm coming from the angle that Clinton could be severely damaged by the ongoing email scandal, plus the fact that a lot of Americans need to hold their noses when they vote

Why do you think that a Trump presidency would be better for the world in general? Is it because Trump would be looking to pull back from NATO, plus (maybe) shut a load of bases around the world? Clinton has a very bellicose stance on NATO and Russia, which would not be a good situation for us IMHO.

vtsnowedin · Post by **vtsnowedin** » 31 May 2016, 23:37

clv101 wrote:....
...

I'm very happy to eat humble pie if Trump wins, and I actually think a Trump presidency might be better for world in general if not for a lot of Americans. But I can't see him winning popular majorities where he'd need to.

I'm trying to find words that describe just how much I disagree with that statement.None that the PowerSwitch forum would wish to print come to mind.
The best I can do is:
You are about to be thrown into a pit that has a King cobra and a Black Mamba on the floor of it. Which side do you hope they throw you down too?

Post by **clv101** » 01 Jun 2016, 07:12

I only said 'might'.

On whether Trump or Clinton would be better for the world have a read of these two articles:

http://johnpilger.com/articles/silencin ... es-for-war

http://johnpilger.com/articles/a-world- ... e-silence-

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 01 Jun 2016, 07:59

Hawking on Trump
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... te-change/