Hillary Is Still The Frontrunner


http://imgur.com/TfNcTwl.jpg


Quote:

......debate shows that despite all the media claims to the contrary Hillary Clinton is still easily winning the contest for the democratic presidential nomination. Compared to antics of the previous two Republican presidential debates, Tuesday night’s debate between the democrats proved to be a pretty tame affair. Even the political media’s reviews where pretty boring and predictable with most pundits and journalists declaring that Hillary won the debate after Bernie Sanders failed to perform, Martin O’Malley sleepwalked through the night, and Jim Webb and Lincoln Chaffee reminded everyone that they aren’t really mainstream democrats at all.......... ............As anyone following FiveThrityEight’s fun endorsement tracker (or other similar tools) could tell you, Hillary has only extended her lead in terms of support from democrats in elected office and other measures of party support in recent months. And while Bernie Sanders has finally succeeded in getting some support from his fellow members of Congress, Hillary remains the almost unanimous choice of her party’s major office holder

How can she not get the democrat party nod into the 2016 Presidential Election?

Can she be beaten, or can she only beat herself?

What are her weaknesses, if any?

Outside of being a woman, with the allure of being the next 'first' , what are her legitimate defining strengths that will get her elected to the post of the most powerful person on the planet?

http://imgur.com/JXefLEF.png


Who are these people?

Are they just 'token' competition to quell all the coronation talk?

crikey hillary really being programmed here

---

The return of the neo-cons:

Remember the neo-conservatives? They were the leading intellectual authors of the Bush foreign policy doctrine. They were also the architects of the Iraq invasion in 2003. They remain influential figures in Washington, and they may attach themselves to a President Hillary Clinton!

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/betweenthelines/neo-cons-and-realists/6895576

Hey Panther, tidy up your thread title.

The Hilda beast has the nomination sewn up, she always did. Many people are tired of the responsibility of Liberty and Freedom, they just want to be safe. She can be their new master who can give them free stuff as well as protect them from their personal boogie men!

Now if she could just get that orange jump suit she so richly deserves someone else would be the Democrats nominee.

Hilary went through a harrowing experience the other day in Atlanta.

Trying to drum up support among Black America, she was howled down for 30 minutes by Black Lives Matter.
Not something a First Lady or even a Presidential candidate or even a Donald Trump is used to.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 31^st, 2015 at 1:16pm:

Hey Panther, tidy up your thread title.

Wutz yer probelm........Looks fien ta me.  ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU8uk5IVx3I


http://imgur.com/DwJe8Fg.jpg


Clinton Lied, & Four Brave Americans Died!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8INIH0JfNA8


What difference does it make???

I'm glad you started this thread Panther.
I will be happy to contribute any stories & opinions I come across damaging to the Clinton cause.

bogarde73 wrote on Oct 31^st, 2015 at 1:48pm:

I'm glad you started this thread Panther. I will be happy to contribute any stories & opinions I come across damaging to the Clinton cause.

Facts would be better ....... Opinion based on known fact would be beneficial to all 6 parties, wouldn't it. http://imgur.com/6whPFXX.gif

Hillary Rodden Clinton ......  AKA Billary ..... as honest & truthful as a bent nail!

From her own, moist lips.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbnKGopT0Uc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYKAzJcU-DA


Facts, yes facts that can't (shouldn't) be ignored ...... or will the democrat idol worshipers ignore them to get "the first woman president in American history" elected .... they did it for Barry ..... & that worked well ....... so, why not for Billary?

So far 300 of her personal emails on the personal server are classified

4 are Top Secret

General Petrause was prosecuted and found guilty based on just 1 Top Secret email. Clinton has 4 so far

The FBI has to make an announcement soon whether the Attorney General should prosecute. This is where most of the damage to her candidacy will be done

The Attorney General's office will make an assessment whether there's enough evidence but what carries more weight will be Obama's directive

I know its crazy but Obama has the last say

Maqqa wrote on Nov 7^th, 2015 at 12:58pm:

So far 300 of her personal emails on the personal server are classified 4 are Top Secret General Petrause was prosecuted and found guilty based on just 1 Top Secret email. Clinton has 4 so far The FBI has to make an announcement soon whether the Attorney General should prosecute. This is where most of the damage to her candidacy will be done The Attorney General's office will make an assessment whether there's enough evidence but what carries more weight will be Obama's directive I know its crazy but Obama has the last say

Not really, given the chance, the American People will have the last say. ;)

The time is past whether Obama can actually control what's already been set in motion, & is now being overseen by Congress ..... it's part of what is called 'checks & balances' ;)

Hilary Clinton.....the epitome of EVIL.

Maybe, just maybe, America deserves her.


http://manhattaninfidel.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Hillary-clinton-2017.jpg

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 8^th, 2015 at 9:19am:

Hilary Clinton.....the epitome of EVIL. Maybe, just maybe, America deserves her. http://manhattaninfidel.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Hillary-clinton-2017.jpg

http://imgur.com/LWTKQPT.jpg

Satan spawned her, then because she was too much for him, he cast her out to roam the earth......

That is some sanitized timeline!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-13/hillary-clinton-democrats-us-presidency-timeline/6387140

Where is Vince Foster, cattle futures that earned her $100,000, intimidation of Bills bimbo eruptions....etc!

Mortdooley wrote on Nov 9^th, 2015 at 2:11am:

That is some sanitized timeline! http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-13/hillary-clinton-democrats-us-presidency-timeline/6387140 Where is Vince Foster, cattle futures that earned her $100,000, intimidation of Bills bimbo eruptions....etc!

As compared.......


http://imgur.com/XaVZtaC.jpg

Is that Vince's foot?   ;D ;D ;D

http://imgur.com/Qsg6NHe.gif

Panther wrote on Dec 5^th, 2015 at 5:31pm:

http://imgur.com/Qsg6NHe.gif

Enjoy discussing the Democrat Party's Nominee's here.....Pro or Con.... ;)

This could actually be getting serious for Hillary:

Breitbart:

Monday on Newsmax TV’s “The Steve Malzburg Show,” while discussing the FBI investigation of Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton’s handling of  classified material on an unsecured server during her tenure as secretary of state and possible charges, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey said President Barack Obama would face Watergate-level resignations if he attempted to block a recommended indictment.
Mukasey said, “I have confidence in the FBI. I have confidence in people at the Justice Department, some of them, at any rate, who are involved in this investigation—that is people in the national security division. It’s less a matter of confidence than it is a matter of believing that people, out of self-preservation, would not want to be seen to be sweeping this under the rug.”
When host Malzberg asked if Obama could protect Clinton, Mukasey said, “The fact is that the president can direct the attorney general not to bring charges. The attorney general works for the president and the president can order that … Although I can’t believe that you wouldn’t get people resigning in the wake of something like that, the same way that we did at the time of Watergate.”

the world is sick of do-gooder leaders. she won't win.

Hilary will win and become next US president because she is heavily supported by powerful Jewish lobby.

Washington Times:
The reporter whose case has forced the release of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails accused the Obama administration on Monday of political tampering by asking to delay making the final set of messages public until after the first four states have already voted in the Democratic presidential primary.

Another 11 states are slated to vote March 1, just hours after the State Department has said it wants to release the final 4,000 or so emails — which are likely to include some of the most controversial messages. That means [highlight]nearly 45 million voters won’t have enough time to digest the emails before having to vote[/highlight], Jason Leopold, a reporter at Vice, said in a court filing opposing the State Department’s new schedule.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/25/state-dept-accused-tampering-delay-clinton-emails/

athos wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:16am:

Hilary will win and become next US president because she is heavily supported by powerful Jewish lobby.

Not if Michael Bloomberg runs.

double plus good wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 10:07am:

the world is sick of do-gooder leaders. she won't win.

If the Republican Party is split, which looks possible, she could win by default.

issuevoter wrote on Jan 26^th, 2016 at 4:46pm:

athos wrote on Jan 26th, 2016 at 10:16am: Hilary will win and become next US president because she is heavily supported by powerful Jewish lobby. Not if Michael Bloomberg runs.

Yes, if Bloomberg pulls a billion dollars out of his wallet and runs as an independent, he could be in with a real chance.

You're a funny guy Greg but you really have no idea about all this do you? Now c'mon admit it, you don't follow the US news at all, am I right or am I right?

The Donald continues to blitz the polls nationally and everywhere else but it may have tightened up again in Iowa according to the Quinnipiac poll. There's only a margin of error in it.

Not sure if they split the delegates or it's winner take all. Think it must be a split or Rubio wouldn't be so worried whether he made 3rd.

Oops wrong thread.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 6:56am:

The Donald continues to blitz the polls nationally and everywhere else but it may have tightened up again in Iowa according to the Quinnipiac poll. There's only a margin of error in it. Not sure if they split the delegates or it's winner take all. Think it must be a split or Rubio wouldn't be so worried whether he made 3rd. Oops wrong thread.

The Donald is toast in the actual election.

OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 9:36am:

OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race.

And he's talking about Trump in it, while talking about Bernie Sanders in the Trump thread. 

... wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:22am:

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 9:36am: OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race. And he's talking about Trump in it, while talking about Bernie Sanders in the Trump thread.

Did you see how pitiful and scared trump looks by not debating on thursday? How can he be so afraid of megan kelly? ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 6:06pm:

... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:22am: bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 9:36am: OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race. And he's talking about Trump in it, while talking about Bernie Sanders in the Trump thread.  Did you see how pitiful and scared trump looks by not debating on thursday? How can he be so afraid of megan kelly? ;D

Why be bothered by Trump? It's you that is worried. Your leftist world is crumbling around you.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 6:06pm:

... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:22am: bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 9:36am: OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race. And he's talking about Trump in it, while talking about Bernie Sanders in the Trump thread.  Did you see how pitiful and scared trump looks by not debating on thursday? How can he be so afraid of megan kelly? ;D

You dummy.  Hes got nothing to gain by appearing, and everyone is talking about him NOT appearing more than they would if he did.  Not only does he make news everywhere he goes, now hes making news by where he doesnt go. 

Now take it to the trump thread.

... wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 6:44pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 6:06pm: ... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:22am: bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 9:36am: OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race. And he's talking about Trump in it, while talking about Bernie Sanders in the Trump thread.  Did you see how pitiful and scared trump looks by not debating on thursday? How can he be so afraid of megan kelly? ;D You dummy.  Hes got nothing to gain by appearing, and everyone is talking about him NOT appearing more than they would if he did.  Not only does he make news everywhere he goes, now hes making news by where he doesnt go.  Now take it to the trump thread.

Why is he so afraid of Megan Kelly? What a wimp!

The only reason he makes news is because it's like a hilarious comedic reality show.  You listen to the democrats during their forums and debates, and they talk income inequality, health, education, civil rights. You listen to trump and all one can hear is muslims mexicans muslims mexicans waaah she yelled at me.  Is this really what goes through a trump voter's head? HILARIOUS!!!

double plus good wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 6:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 6:06pm: ... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:22am: bogarde73 wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 9:36am: OMG, alevine has actually worked out that there is a thread for the Democrat race. And he's talking about Trump in it, while talking about Bernie Sanders in the Trump thread.  Did you see how pitiful and scared trump looks by not debating on thursday? How can he be so afraid of megan kelly? ;D Why be bothered by Trump? It's you that is worried. Your leftist world is crumbling around you.

Not really. Thanks to Tony, conservatism is all but dead in Australia.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:31pm:

conservatism is all but dead in Australia.

You're right. 

But the problem for you, is that your label no longer fits. 

The right wing doesn't want to conserve this circus the left built - they want to tear it down and start anew.  They are the new radicals.

... wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:36pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:31pm: conservatism is all but dead in Australia. You're right.  But the problem for you, is that your label no longer fits.  The right wing doesn't want to conserve this circus the left built - they want to tear it down and start anew.  They are the new radicals.

Really? They like to tear down but not start anew, rather just go back to 1880. You guys never got over the loss of the old aristocracy.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:50pm:

... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:31pm: conservatism is all but dead in Australia. You're right.  But the problem for you, is that your label no longer fits.  The right wing doesn't want to conserve this circus the left built - they want to tear it down and start anew.  They are the new radicals. Really? They like to tear down but not start anew, rather just go back to 1880. You guys never got over the loss of the old aristocracy.

You guys?

... wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:51pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:50pm: ... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:31pm: conservatism is all but dead in Australia. You're right.  But the problem for you, is that your label no longer fits.  The right wing doesn't want to conserve this circus the left built - they want to tear it down and start anew.  They are the new radicals. Really? They like to tear down but not start anew, rather just go back to 1880. You guys never got over the loss of the old aristocracy. You guys?

yep, you are definitely part of them.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:

... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:50pm: ... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:31pm: conservatism is all but dead in Australia. You're right.  But the problem for you, is that your label no longer fits.  The right wing doesn't want to conserve this circus the left built - they want to tear it down and start anew.  They are the new radicals. Really? They like to tear down but not start anew, rather just go back to 1880. You guys never got over the loss of the old aristocracy. You guys? yep, you are definitely part of them.

Sure, if you split the population 50/50 I'd be on that side. 

Is that as close a focus as you can manage, or as close as you dare?

... wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 8:06pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 8:02pm: ... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:51pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:50pm: ... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:36pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:31pm: conservatism is all but dead in Australia. You're right.  But the problem for you, is that your label no longer fits.  The right wing doesn't want to conserve this circus the left built - they want to tear it down and start anew.  They are the new radicals. Really? They like to tear down but not start anew, rather just go back to 1880. You guys never got over the loss of the old aristocracy. You guys? yep, you are definitely part of them. Sure, if you split the population 50/50 I'd be on that side.  Is that as close a focus as you can manage, or as close as you dare?

I'd say you're around here:
                                                                      x
EXTREME LEFT-------LEFT-------|-------RIGHT-------EXTREME RIGHT

:)

And Me:
                         x
EXTREME LEFT-------LEFT-------|-------RIGHT-------EXTREME RIGHT

Nar, nothing quite that exciting.

---

If you shared than so shall I.

---

whoa.  That's froot loop territory.

... wrote on Jan 28^th, 2016 at 8:33am:

whoa.  That's froot loop territory.

I'll always pick to base my politics on ideology than some apolitical centrist mumbo jumbo.

Tim Allen, a funny guy:
"The Clintons are like herpes - just when you think they've gone away, back they come."

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 8:48am:

Tim Allen, a funny guy: "The Clintons are like herpes - just when you think they've gone away, back they come."

Having seen his stand up and Home Improvement and that latest piece of crap he calls a TV comedy, that may be the funniest thing he's ever said. And its not even that funny.

Never let politics get in the way of your sense of humour bojack. It's just not important enough.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 9:00am:

Never let politics get in the way of your sense of humour bojack. It's just not important enough.

I'm not. Its just not that funny.


Although on reflection it is bias.


Its just not me being pro-democrat, its me being anti-Tim Allen. He's a talentless hack.

I'm not a fan of American humour as I've often said. Seinfeld is an exception and the Frasier show, and then you go back to some funny people like Groucho Marx and Mort Sahl.
But the few times I did see that Home Improvement show I thought he was quite a funny guy.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 10:40am:

I'm not a fan of American humour as I've often said. Seinfeld is an exception and the Frasier show, and then you go back to some funny people like Groucho Marx and Mort Sahl. But the few times I did see that Home Improvement show I thought he was quite a funny guy.

I didn't but thats humour I guess.

I'd be surprised if you had ever laughed in your life.

... wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 11:35am:

I'd be surprised if you had ever laughed in your life.

Prepare to be surprised.

Better give me an hour to prepare for such a momentous event.

... wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 11:41am:

Better give me an hour to prepare for such a momentous event.

Quite. Seems about right for how slow you are.

Good point.  Make it two. 

Why not take the whole day, you don't want to rush the "thinking" process.

Yes, that'll give you time to moisturise, to stop your face cracking. 

Have to maintain my youthful looks, my friend.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 10:40am:

I'm not a fan of American humour as I've often said. Seinfeld is an exception and the Frasier show, and then you go back to some funny people like Groucho Marx and Mort Sahl. But the few times I did see that Home Improvement show I thought he was quite a funny guy.

Married with children

Abbott and Costello, The three stoogers, Lewis and Martin.

I wasn't much of a Seinfeld fan. My problem was that the first episode I seen was very funny then I watch for about 3 years waiting for a second funny episode.

Arrested Development, Archer.

I wasn't much of a Seinfeld fan. My problem was that the first episode I seen was very funny then I watch for about 3 years waiting for a second funny episode - Dna

Takes you a while to make up your mind then . . .not that there's anything wrong with that

I especially liked the episodes that took us to Del Boca Vista, Florida, with the various relatives and retirees. Uncle Leo, Mr Mendelbaum, Jerry's parents. I wish they had made a spin-off using all the "6 o'clock special" characters.

Could this be the new front-runner for the Democrat Party Nomination for President of the USA?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-um1JDpBWA

And get rid of the attributed.

http://unsavoryagents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/bag_02.jpg

... wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 7:29pm:

http://unsavoryagents.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/bag_02.jpg

I hope you took some, it's free, Wes!  And we know how much you love sh1t, given you actually support idiots like trump ;D

In Fact, the one thing that lightweight brains who support Trump fail to recognise is that Bernie never asserts that his programs are 'free'.  He says students should get tuition free public colleges, but he doesn't shy away from that fact that the program would be paid for via tax increases. In this case, the tax increase would result in wall street paying a tax on speculation.

In the case of health care, Bernie doesn't shy away from that fact that middle class will have a tax increase. But given he'll do away with the private insurances, and have a SINGLE PAYER system, the tax increase will be offset by not having to pay insurance premiums. In fact people would SAVE money in America by not having to pay insurance premiums.

The problem is that people are so stupid that they get caught by the childish antics of a Trump. So much so that when they have a real conviction politician, who has been saying the same thing, and fighting for the same thing, for 30 years, they get caught up in dumbing down the debate to 'ooooh freeee sh111tttttt. Must be a socialist!!'  Bernie is proud of being a socialist democrat, because he knows all too well that the successes of the past century in the western world have been the result of social democratic policies. 


America needs to FEEL THE BERN!  the world needs to FEEL THE BERN!

Panther wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 3:50pm:

Could this be the new front-runner for the Democrat Party Nomination for President of the USA? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-um1JDpBWA

*yawn*

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 7:49pm:

In Fact, the one thing that lightweight brains who support Trump fail to recognise is that Bernie never asserts that his programs are 'free'.  He says students should get tuition free public colleges, but he doesn't shy away from that fact that the program would be paid for via tax increases. In this case, the tax increase would result in wall street paying a tax on speculation. In the case of health care, Bernie doesn't shy away from that fact that middle class will have a tax increase. But given he'll do away with the private insurances, and have a SINGLE PAYER system, the tax increase will be offset by not having to pay insurance premiums. In fact people would SAVE money in America by not having to pay insurance premiums. The problem is that people are so stupid that they get caught by the childish antics of a Trump. So much so that when they have a real conviction politician, who has been saying the same thing, and fighting for the same thing, for 30 years, they get caught up in dumbing down the debate to 'ooooh freeee sh111tttttt. Must be a socialist!!'  Bernie is proud of being a socialist democrat, because he knows all too well that the successes of the past century in the western world have been the result of social democratic policies.  America needs to FEEL THE BERN!  the world needs to FEEL THE BERN!

If it makes you feel better, I support his smacking-over-wall-street policy.

... wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 8:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Jan 29th, 2016 at 7:49pm: In Fact, the one thing that lightweight brains who support Trump fail to recognise is that Bernie never asserts that his programs are 'free'.  He says students should get tuition free public colleges, but he doesn't shy away from that fact that the program would be paid for via tax increases. In this case, the tax increase would result in wall street paying a tax on speculation. In the case of health care, Bernie doesn't shy away from that fact that middle class will have a tax increase. But given he'll do away with the private insurances, and have a SINGLE PAYER system, the tax increase will be offset by not having to pay insurance premiums. In fact people would SAVE money in America by not having to pay insurance premiums. The problem is that people are so stupid that they get caught by the childish antics of a Trump. So much so that when they have a real conviction politician, who has been saying the same thing, and fighting for the same thing, for 30 years, they get caught up in dumbing down the debate to 'ooooh freeee sh111tttttt. Must be a socialist!!'  Bernie is proud of being a socialist democrat, because he knows all too well that the successes of the past century in the western world have been the result of social democratic policies.  America needs to FEEL THE BERN!  the world needs to FEEL THE BERN! If it makes you feel better, I support his smacking-over-wall-street policy.

what about his opposition to free trade deals like the TPP, NAFTA? His opposition to trade deals with China?

What about his opposition to corrupt campaign financing?

What about his opposition to stupid wars, and demanding that the middle east does it's own bidding?

Sounds to me like you're a Bernie man.  Good on you! :)

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 1:02pm:

I wasn't much of a Seinfeld fan. My problem was that the first episode I seen was very funny then I watch for about 3 years waiting for a second funny episode - Dna Takes you a while to make up your mind then . . .not that there's anything wrong with that

It always looked promising - I was convinced that the next episode was going to be funny.

Clinton still the demcorat Front-Runner

I doubt that the US is any more ready for a female leader than Australia was.

Her best chance is if somehow Donald T gets the republican nom.

I guess it's strange what makes different things funny to people.
I can only think of two shows atm that actually had me rolling round the floor hurting with laughter.
One was Fawlty Towers and the other was Seinfeld.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 30^th, 2016 at 6:49am:

I guess it's strange what makes different things funny to people. I can only think of two shows atm that actually had me rolling round the floor hurting with laughter. One was Fawlty Towers and the other was Seinfeld.

Fawlty towers brilliant.

Maybe the funniest show I recall was the first few series of Ellen, it was very funny.

Unfortunately the season where Ellen came out was a dud, she always seemed to blame a homophobic reaction but the real problem was that the show became about Ellen being gay and it just wasn't funny.

Dnarever wrote on Jan 30^th, 2016 at 6:47am:

Clinton still the demcorat Front-Runner I doubt that the US is any more ready for a female leader than Australia was. Her best chance is if somehow Donald T gets the republican nom.

Whether or not Hillary Clinton is ready to be the American President isn't the pending issue, it's whether or not she will be criminally indicted for her part in the pending FBI email server investigations for her handling of Highly Classified & sensitive information on her private email servers.

Highly respected law professionals, past & present, from all sides of the political spectrum, state emphatically if it is found that Sensitive Classified documents or information were located anywhere on her insecure personal servers, that alone would be highly illegal, & would be enough to force the indictment of the Former Secretary of State.

Remember the FBI is apolitical, & will report their findings to the U.S. Attorney General on whether or not the evidence is proof enough that laws were broken.....nothing else. In their final reports containing their findings, they will submit whether or not Clinton should be indicted based on law.

What political feeding frenzies that will or will not produce is beyond the scope of the FBI investigations & findings.

Leave that to the Congress to do what they may, for politics is their playground, not the FBI's.



Report: ..... FBI Has Sufficient Evidence to Indict Hillary Clinton

Emails on Hillary Clinton’s Server ‘Too Damaging’ to Ever Release



Source:  BREITBART     29 Jan 2016 
Quote:

.....The heat surrounding the Clinton probe has risen recently as a series of reports by Herridge have indicated the FBI investigation is proceeding along two parallel tracks, one involving the spread of highly classified information on an unclassified email server and the other involving possible public corruption tied to the Clinton Foundation. On the first track, the FBI is reportedly focusing in on possible “gross negligence.” A former law enforcement official tells Herridge, “The documents alone in and of themselves set forth a set of compelling, articulable facts that statutes relating to espionage have been violated.” Recently, the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community revealed, in a letter sent to Congress, that dozens of classified emails were found on Clinton’s server–including some at the “Special Access Program” level, considered to be a step above “top secret.” At least one email contained “HCS-O” information derived from human intelligence sources. The leak of such information is considered especially dangerous since it could lead to the identification of a source.....continued

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boNh_JNKc2g

http://i.imgur.com/ycsAc6n.gif  Somebody send out fer pizza .....  http://imgur.com/HcRtIoq.gif

Not attribvuted and pretty vague report

http://imgur.com/EY57fVG.gif
..

..
Clinton & Sanders in a statistical dead heat ..... 50%   to    50%

IMHO, Clinton was the big loser.

She had a very large margin in the polls a short while ago.  Bernie only had 3% then.

Now this 74 year old disheveled socialist has brought her to her knees!!!

Or was it that a lot of Iowan Dems polled said Hillary's legal problems caused them to reconsider Sanders of late.

Was that a major factor in his surge & her demise?






So.......it's ONE down & FORTY NINE to go!




DEMS

http://i.imgur.com/aOKxjrJ.jpg





GOP

http://i.imgur.com/my9TyFk.jpg


http://imgur.com/EY57fVG.gif


..

Man that caucus was retarded, so much underhanded poo went on lots of it caught on camera but nobody will do anything about because the DNC has already chosen Clinton.

Sanders lost by 3 delegates, Hillary got 6 delegates on I poo you not, coin flips, one of which is up in the air because it's likely the coin flip wasn't legitimate in the first place because the Clinton side didn't actually have the numbers to call a draw.

‘Hillary Clinton’s real constituency has been Wall Street and the military-industrial complex’

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/331036-caucuses-iowa-clinton-sanders/

The Clinton Machine is at it ......... at it again in 2016?


Watch, & then you decide ...... what the hell was going on here?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG8uHiaAzdk



Well????? What do you think??

VoxPolitics:

Though Ted Cruz was declared the definitive victor in Monday night’s Iowa Republican caucus, Democratic officials scrambled through much of the night to declare a winner of their own.

That’s partially because the results in the Democratic caucus were so close — Hillary Clinton had 49.9 percent of the vote to Sanders’s 49.6 percent, a result that Clinton’s camp called a victory and Sanders's camp called a "virtual tie."




But part of the holdup was due to missing results from as many as 90 precincts, which Democratic Party officials scrambled to gather through the night. The missing results accounted for about 5 percent of the total vote.

By the time party officials announced the final tallies, results from only one precinct were still missing. But Sanders’s camp, frustrated by the disorganization, has still not formally conceded the race to Clinton.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What happened to those votes while they were missing?

Panther wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2016 at 4:44pm:

The Clinton Machine is at it ......... at it again in 2016? Watch, & then you decide ...... what the hell was going on here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG8uHiaAzdk Well????? What do you think??

Why waste our time? 3 people walk out, they challenge vote, majority says no recount. End of story.

Des Moines Register calls for audit of Iowa results: 'Something smells in the Democratic Party'
By Eliza Collins
  | 02/04/16 12:02 PM EST


In a strongly worded editorial on Thursday, The Des Moines Register called on the Iowa Democratic Party to move quickly to prove that Monday's results are correct.

The piece titled “Editorial: Something smells in the Democratic Party,” starts out: “Once again the world is laughing at Iowa.”


It gets sharper from there. “What happened Monday night at the Democratic caucuses was a debacle, period. Democracy, particularly at the local party level, can be slow, messy and obscure. But the refusal to undergo scrutiny or allow for an appeal reeks of autocracy,” the DMR reads. “The Iowa Democratic Party must act quickly to assure the accuracy of the caucus results, beyond a shadow of a doubt.”

The editorial cites Clinton’s razor-thin victory as too close “not to do a complete audit of results.”

The newspaper editorial also said there were too many opportunities for error to arise.

“Too many accounts have arisen of inconsistent counts, untrained and overwhelmed volunteers, confused voters, cramped precinct locations, a lack of voter registration forms and other problems,” the editorial reads. “Too many of us, including members of the Register editorial board who were observing caucuses, saw opportunities for error amid Monday night’s chaos.”
The editorial ends by calling on the state's Democratic Party to “work with all the campaigns to audit results. Break silly party tradition and release the raw vote totals. Provide a list of each precinct coin flip and its outcome, as well as other information sought by the Register. Be transparent.”

The Hill:
News Corp. boss Rupert Murdoch is floating Secretary of State John Kerry as a Democratic presidential nominee as Hillary Clinton’s candidacy “sinks.”

“Watch Hillary’s candidacy sink and sink,” Murdoch tweeted Saturday morning. “Nobody buying and more big trouble coming on emails. Dems looking for a replacement. John Kerry?”

bogarde73 wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 10:18am:

The Hill: News Corp. boss Rupert Murdoch is floating Secretary of State John Kerry as a Democratic presidential nominee as Hillary Clinton’s candidacy “sinks.” “Watch Hillary’s candidacy sink and sink,” Murdoch tweeted Saturday morning. “Nobody buying and more big trouble coming on emails. Dems looking for a replacement. John Kerry?”

http://imgur.com/7ntsMWh.jpg

http://imgur.com/0mf6Ghn.gifJohn Kerry....a losing 2004 demoncrat leftist retread!  http://imgur.com/6tcmHQH.gif

http://i.imgur.com/wthWDYP.jpg

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3cQ9xlOpQ_Y/VrdYucY2VlI/AAAAAAAAi7E/GCRKVPDPJdo/s1600/2.jpg

I guess the Libs and Labs would declare elections in the US null and void, therefore illegal - it's voluntary voting, how on Earth could they be legally recognized ?

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 6:44pm:

I guess the Libs and Labs would declare elections in the US null and void, therefore illegal - it's voluntary voting, how on Earth could they be legally recognized ?

It's called Freedom.

The freedom to vote or the freedom not to vote.

The choice is that of a free man or woman to exercise their right, a right protected by a law established by those they hired to serve & govern them, but not to rule over them.

A truly free society would never have to force it's citizens to exercise their right of choice......never.

Panther wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:37pm:

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:44pm: I guess the Libs and Labs would declare elections in the US null and void, therefore illegal - it's voluntary voting, how on Earth could they be legally recognized ? It's called Freedom. The freedom to vote or the freedom not to vote. The choice is that of a free man or woman to exercise their right, a right protected by a law established by those they hired to serve & govern them, but not to rule over them. A truly free society would never have to force it's citizens to exercise their right of choice......never.

Here's a little bit about Howard's hypocrisy ....

Legitimacy

“…full participation provides electoral outcomes with greater legitimacy” (this is a comment requiring an answer in the site)

In 1994 John Howard, who was later to become Australian Prime Minister, declared a 38% midterm election turnout in the United States as ‘largely meaningless as a reflection of American political opinion in 1994’6. Four years later his own Liberal Party won the 1998 federal election with 217,000 fewer votes than the Labor opposition (see below).  One might guess the Prime Minister did not see any reason to question the legitimacy of that election.


http://compulsoryvoting.org/faq.html#with

The problem with compulsory voting is that it gives an over representation to low information voters, who in most cases don't even realise they don't have to cast a vote.  And then we end up with STOP DA BOATS.

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:29pm:

Panther wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 8:37pm: Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:44pm: I guess the Libs and Labs would declare elections in the US null and void, therefore illegal - it's voluntary voting, how on Earth could they be legally recognized ? It's called Freedom. The freedom to vote or the freedom not to vote. The choice is that of a free man or woman to exercise their right, a right protected by a law established by those they hired to serve & govern them, but not to rule over them. A truly free society would never have to force it's citizens to exercise their right of choice......never. Here's a little bit about Howard's hypocrisy .... Legitimacy “…full participation provides electoral outcomes with greater legitimacy” (this is a comment requiring an answer in the site) In 1994 John Howard, who was later to become Australian Prime Minister, declared a 38% midterm election turnout in the United States as ‘largely meaningless as a reflection of American political opinion in 1994’6. Four years later his own Liberal Party won the 1998 federal election with 217,000 fewer votes than the Labor opposition (see below).  One might guess the Prime Minister did not see any reason to question the legitimacy of that election. http://compulsoryvoting.org/faq.html#with

Not only is the vote compulsory (I think only about 9.....mostly 3rd world.....countries worldwide enforce compulsory voting), then you need to jackass them around with preferences, & what if's, etc...etc....so numbers of voters are actually excluded because they messed up their ballots, & nobody lower than rocket scientist grade can figure out the ballot counts to 100% accuracy.

Should be simple & pure:

For dog catcher in Perth

person#1  yes ☐    no  ☐ 
person#2  yes ☐    no  ☐
person#3  yes ☑    no  ☐
person#4  yes ☐    no  ☐

No Preferences!!!

Panther wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 8:37pm:

Bias_2012 wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 6:44pm: I guess the Libs and Labs would declare elections in the US null and void, therefore illegal - it's voluntary voting, how on Earth could they be legally recognized ? It's called Freedom. The freedom to vote or the freedom not to vote.

Lets look at this first pro compusory voting comment in the link below ....

"Voluntary voting plays into the hands of conservative political parties who would benefit from it".


If this was true, Barack Obama might not have been elected. He was elected twice back to back, so this comment is based on BS



Here's an interesting comment by John Howard, again in the link .....

“With voluntary voting it would be possible to end up with a government the majority disapprove of because many of the disapproving did not vote.”-John Howard


Well there you go ! Howard's own government wasn't the wrong government - just ask him, he'll gladly tell you. How could it have been the wrong government ?

Now, Johnny thought that voluntary voting wasn't the right way to go and that compulsory voting is king. Ok, so why did he readily join the coalition of the willing headed by the US which has voluntary voting? Surely there was a chance the the US had the wrong government, according to Howard's logic

Many people thought that the Bush administration was the wrong administration because of voter fraud, but it didn't stop Howard cuddling up to him - massive hypocrisy no doubt


http://compulsoryvoting.org/faq.html

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 4:16am:

The problem with compulsory voting is that it gives an over representation to low information voters, who in most cases don't even realise they don't have to cast a vote.  And then we end up with STOP DA BOATS.

If only homosexuals, gays, communists and feminists were the only ones allowed to vote. Next stop: paradise.  :D

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 9:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Feb 9th, 2016 at 4:16am: The problem with compulsory voting is that it gives an over representation to low information voters, who in most cases don't even realise they don't have to cast a vote.  And then we end up with STOP DA BOATS. If only homosexuals, gays, communists and feminists were the only ones allowed to vote. Next stop: paradise.  :D

Definitely didn't get a pHD, doc. 

There's a difference between voluntary voting and partial suffrage.  But the point of course is that compulsory voting makes every idiot have to go out and vote. So elections become about nonsense such as STOP DA BOATS.  In voluntary voting one hopes that things like rain keep the idiots at home. And then politics can actually be about details and visions. Not just STOP DA BOATS!!

Fun fact of the day: today marked the first time ever that someone of non-christian heritage won a US primary.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 10^th, 2016 at 5:57pm:

Fun fact of the day: today marked the first time ever that someone of non-christian heritage won a US primary.

yeah, a jew. Hamas won't be too happy.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 10^th, 2016 at 5:57pm:

Fun fact of the day: today marked the first time ever that someone of non-christian heritage won a US primary.

Not true, the current President was raised an Atheist by an Atheist mother and maternal Grand Parents.  If being a Christen in this country was already a crime there would not be enough evidence to convict him!

Mortdooley wrote on Feb 10^th, 2016 at 11:10pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 10th, 2016 at 5:57pm: Fun fact of the day: today marked the first time ever that someone of non-christian heritage won a US primary. Not true, the current President was raised an Atheist by an Atheist mother and maternal Grand Parents.  If being a Christen in this country was already a crime there would not be enough evidence to convict him!

*sigh*  Just because he isn't a god loving nutjob does not mean he is an atheist.

polite_gandalf wrote on Feb 10^th, 2016 at 5:57pm:

Fun fact of the day: today marked the first time ever that someone of non-christian heritage won a US primary.

So what are you trying to say here? First time ever for a Zionist?

The entire the Sanders campaign is nothing more than a political instrument of the ruling class. Seems America's self-professed "Democratic socialist" (again, whatever the hell that is) is nothing more than a toolsack as he seeks to play in safeguarding the Democratic Party and the political monopoly of the two-party system. F- him.

http://www.notable-quotes.com/m/karl_marx_quote_2.jpg

Where's the surprise in Bernie's huge win?

1 it's his backyard
2 his opponent is a criminal-in-waiting
3 it's virtually an ethnically clean white zone
4 liberalism is king in the north east
5 did you see the young lady with the sign "I'm voting like a girl"??!!

But don't imagine he has a snowball's chance in hell in the south or west

There's all this talk that Hillary will survive on the Black & Latino vote. And Bernie is out today trying to build his cred there.

Don't believe it. I don't know about the Latinos but I'm sure the blacks don't buy the Clintons or any of the liberals anymore, especially the pants suit brigade of feminist (?) progressives. The young sure don't.

It hasn't been put to the test yet but it soon will, however I suspect that the blacks will be coming round to the view that this guy Trump might have something to offer to them. Like jobs & more jobs. And you know what, I think they will identify with him more than the same old same old. They probably all watch his celebrity TV shows for a start and would be quite  impressed with his bling.
There is no end to the Trump charm when it is deployed.

I don't know if this is correct, but it wouldn't surprise me.


Quote:

Despite a crushing defeat by voters in the New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton will likely win more delegates in the state — effectively nullifying Bernie Sanders’ anti-establishment popular victory. At issue are “superdelegates” who aren’t obligated to follow the populace’s vote and are free to cast their choice as they please. New Hampshire has 24 “pledged” delegates, which do conform to the popular vote. Sanders now has 13 of these delegates, Clinton has nine, and two remain ‘undecided.’     New Hampshire also has eight superdelegates — “current or former party leaders, including governors, senators, representatives, and former presidents and vice presidents” — whose vote, despite a lack of correlation with the popular vote, counts the same as that of the regular delegates. Of New Hampshire’s eight superdelegates, six are already committed to Clinton, giving her 15 total delegates so far. The two remaining superdelegates have still not committed to a candidate at the time of this article’s publication. Overall in the delegate count, Clinton holds a whopping lead over Sanders, with 394 to his 42 — mostly due to superdelegates. To garner the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, a candidate must win 2,382 delegates.

http://theantimedia.org/so-you-thought-bernie-sanders-won-the-new-hampshire-primary-think-again/

... wrote on Feb 11^th, 2016 at 11:31am:

I don't know if this is correct, but it wouldn't surprise me. Quote: Despite a crushing defeat by voters in the New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton will likely win more delegates in the state — effectively nullifying Bernie Sanders’ anti-establishment popular victory. At issue are “superdelegates” who aren’t obligated to follow the populace’s vote and are free to cast their choice as they please. New Hampshire has 24 “pledged” delegates, which do conform to the popular vote. Sanders now has 13 of these delegates, Clinton has nine, and two remain ‘undecided.’     New Hampshire also has eight superdelegates — “current or former party leaders, including governors, senators, representatives, and former presidents and vice presidents” — whose vote, despite a lack of correlation with the popular vote, counts the same as that of the regular delegates. Of New Hampshire’s eight superdelegates, six are already committed to Clinton, giving her 15 total delegates so far. The two remaining superdelegates have still not committed to a candidate at the time of this article’s publication. Overall in the delegate count, Clinton holds a whopping lead over Sanders, with 394 to his 42 — mostly due to superdelegates. To garner the Democratic Party’s nomination for president, a candidate must win 2,382 delegates. http://theantimedia.org/so-you-thought-bernie-sanders-won-the-new-hampshire-primary-think-again/

Honky, monky, bonky.

what?

http://benwilliamslibrary.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Illusion-Free-Choice.jpg

Clinton must be the luckiest woman in the world.  After winning 6 coin tosses in a row to beat bernie last time, she's won again with a lucky ace.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/270148-clinton-wins-precinct-with-pocket-ace

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CbsAPj9UEAAI778.jpg

It appears that the Democratic primary is all theater for the naive and gullible. While I feel both Sanders and Clinton are unfit to be President clearly the fix has always been in.

Mortdooley wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 8:00am:

It appears that the Democratic primary is all theater for the naive and gullible. While I feel both Sanders and Clinton are unfit to be President clearly the fix has always been in.

The dEMONRATS had a dilemma.

They wanted Hillary.....you know....First Woman in the White House to follow the First Afrikaner.....but who on the lopsided-Left would run against her?

Without opposition the dEMONRATS would be seen as having a Coronation, & we all know Americans hate anything 'Royal' associated with their government. The mere thought of it causes some to go apoplectic.

So, what to do. They needed an opponent, one who couldn't win, one who could draw a crowd because he's so far left, he'd actually seem right to the 15 to 24 year old's.

They needed a 'patsy'.....their own walking, talking, podium slapping Lee Harvey O.   Hmmmmmm.  http://imgur.com/SvzDchb.gif


Well hello there Mr. Bernard 'Bernie' Sanders!   

http://i.imgur.com/TTGfbP5.gif

You can beat Hillary! http://imgur.com/GanwveZ.gif

http://i.imgur.com/TTGfbP5.gif

You can summon up the demonic juices in youth! http://imgur.com/GanwveZ.gif

http://i.imgur.com/TTGfbP5.gif

You can carry off this scam as if it weren't a scam......hell no,,,,it's the real deal! http://imgur.com/GanwveZ.gif


https://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/159281/large/sanders.jpg

Bernie Sanders.......The dEMOCRAT Party's 2016 Manchurian Candidate Extraordinaire!


;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
 

A threat ahead: California Democrats losing the fight for younger voters

By Cathleen Decker•Contact Reporter
LA Times
February 29, 2016, 12:05 AM

The state Democratic Party convention held here over the weekend presented an occasionally jarring contrast: Democrats gathered at what seemed like a 50th college reunion for veteran politicians, and at the same time one of the biggest rounds of applause came at the mention of Bernie Sanders, the presidential candidate few of those politicians support.

The split, largely generational given the youthful tilt of the Vermont senator’s supporters, underscored a hard truth for California Democrats that was barely discussed during the celebratory convention:
Numbers-wise, the party's heading for trouble.
That’s not to suggest that Democrats are about to lose elections in California; they retain strength at the ballot box. But as those who built the party into supremacy in the 1990s age out, Democrats are having a hard time attracting newer voters, who are allying themselves with no party at all. They are choosing, if they register, to officially be nonpartisan.
Why Super Tuesday is so important to the presidential candidates in both parties
For now, the effect on Democrats has been limited because those independent voters, bridling at the conservative views of national Republicans, have had nowhere to go but with the state’s biggest party.

But it was not hard to hear the clarion of future dissent when Sen. Barbara Boxer made a glancing reference to the presidential contest on Saturday.

“Whether you want to say ‘Madame President’ or whether you are ‘Feeling the Bern’ we have to stand together,” she said. Applause for Hillary Clinton, the party’s national and statewide frontrunner, was drowned out by cheers for Sanders.
And that was among committed Democrats. Broaden the universe of voters and the problems get worse.

The birth of the current California Democratic Party dates to 1992, when the state elected two Democratic women senators, Dianne Feinstein and Boxer, who has announced her retirement as of the November election. California also sided with a Democrat, Bill Clinton, in that year’s presidential contest, breaking a Republican streak that had held since 1964. Republicans went on to win the governor’s race in 1994, but it’s been downhill since, with the exception of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s two elections.

At a Saturday convention panel focused on millennial voters — roughly those 35 and under — voting analyst Paul Mitchell issued a warning to Democrats.

“Republicans are dying,” he said. “But Democrats aren’t converting ... young minority voters who are the base of the Democratic Party.”
Of the 10 cities with the highest percentages of independent voters, he said, all but one are Latino-majority cities. That is jarring, since Democratic strength in the last generation has been built on the growing Latino population.
Eric Swalwell, 35, the East Bay congressman who organized the panel, said the strong support for Sanders in the presidential contest was a warning to the party’s older establishment.

“Regardless of whether you’re with Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton, there’s no question that right how Bernie Sanders has the overwhelming majority of the millennials,” said Swalwell, who endorsed Clinton after his first choice, former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, dropped out. “Whoever is the candidate, as a party we have to understand why that is the case.”

Why that’s the case is the candidates themselves. To young voters for whom she has been a life-long presence, Clinton looks like a captive of establishment politics. Sanders, with his call to “political revolution,” is the blunt-speaking fresh face.

cont . . . .

“Authenticity is so, so important for millennials,” Swalwell said. “Being able to really just speak without being seen as beholden to anyone is critically important.”
Democrats have emphasized issues of importance to younger voters. Sanders and Clinton have offered differing proposals making college less expensive or, in Sanders’ case, free. Their focus on lagging wages, immigration reform and voting rights is also aimed at the new voters who have less affinity with partisan politics.

The Republican candidates for president are delaying the reckoning for Democrats. At the weekend convention, nearly every speaker blistered Donald Trump and other GOP candidates as hopelessly out of touch.


“They haven’t changed at all, folks,” Vice President Joe Biden said Saturday. “They’ve just gotten meaner.”

The Republican field’s effort to turn back the clock on Democratic gains under President Obama has left both parties waging the wars of the past in this presidential year.


Change is coming to California Democrats. The next governor, to be elected in 2018, will most certainly be younger than 77-year-old Jerry Brown. The main competitors for the 75-year-old Boxer’s seat are in their 50s. If Feinstein, who is now 82, retires in 2018, her replacement also will be younger.

Age is not an impediment to attracting the young, as Sanders, at 74, has proved this year. But new faces and a look to the future may give Democrats a way to figure out how to preserve their power.

cathleen.decker@latimes.com

Who is  Bryan Pagliano, & what effect will what he does potentially affect the Presidential aspirations of Hillary Clinton & Bernie Sanders?

He is a former State Dept person who has been given immunity from prosecution to appear before a Senate committee looking into the Hillary emails. Who knows where that will go if anywhere.

Hey, how stacked is the Dems primary system. Every time the vote starts you find Hillary is  already awarded delegates but not Bernie.

I wish Bernie could beat her but he won't. Not that he is anywhere what they need in a president.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdHm4zlW8AAjKUA.jpg

Well Bernie had a handsome win in Michigan. The figures are there to see.

Politico reports that Sanders gets 65 delegates and Clinton gets 68 . . .you figure it out.
Is that a corrupt system run by a corrupt party?

Clinton is running into trouble trying to suck oxygen in various ways.

The latest gaff is she upset the gay community when she tried to shoot two birds with the one shot. She lavished false praise on Nancy Reagan (as if she gives a stuff about Nancy Reagan) for "her work" with AIDS.
This attempt to show herself as the bipartisan she isn't led to an eruption from gays who knew the Reagans were very anti doing anything about AIDS. Twitter erupted as Twitter does - what an ugly medium - and she has egg on her face instead of a smug smile of indifference.

There are an increasing number of stumbles.

Clinton stumbling against Sanders is good news for socialists. Although Sanders won't win the nomination, it is creating a groundswell movement that Clinton won't be able to ignore when she becomes president.

Clinton won't be president gandalf.

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 12^th, 2016 at 11:37am:

Clinton stumbling against Sanders is good news for socialists. Although Sanders won't win the nomination, it is creating a groundswell movement that Clinton won't be able to ignore when she becomes president.

Sanders is NOT a socialist!

http://imageshack.com/a/img924/9901/6HiecT.jpg


http://imageshack.com/a/img922/2614/w0B2s3.jpg

Marla wrote on Mar 12^th, 2016 at 2:04pm:

Sanders is NOT a socialist!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psp-r68mo8k
Oooooopppppsssss!!      Sowiee Marwah!




http://imageshack.com/a/img921/1574/yovYPe.jpg

Bon Appétit! 

bogarde73 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2016 at 11:40am:

Clinton won't be president gandalf.

Trump still has a lot of defending to do.

A president can't just say whatever is on his mind. That's what Rubio said and that will be the attack on Trump from Hillary.

...America might be pissed at Mexicans and Muslims but they probably like univerrsal healthcare.

The real reason Trump might win is because Democrats have had eight years and it always swaps every 8 years... but he aint home yet!

Ms Clinton is a very bad person.

Panther wrote on Mar 12^th, 2016 at 4:47pm:

Marla wrote on Mar 12th, 2016 at 2:04pm: Sanders is NOT a socialist! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psp-r68mo8k Oooooopppppsssss!!      Sowiee Marwah! http://imageshack.com/a/img921/1574/yovYPe.jpg Bon Appétit!

Maybe Marla is a little skeptical of Bernie's claims. Critics tend to be that way.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 13^th, 2016 at 12:59pm:

A president can't just say whatever is on his mind. That's what Rubio said and that will be the attack on Trump from Hillary.

I dont think she can pull off that angle of attack.  Not with her image being seen as "fake" already - Trump would turn it around and destroy her with it - and she'd be hoping he does, because her real strategy will be playing the victim.  A poor woman just fighting to be heard against the big patriarchal bully in Trump.

Panther wrote on Mar 12^th, 2016 at 4:33pm:

http://imageshack.com/a/img924/9901/6HiecT.jpg http://imageshack.com/a/img922/2614/w0B2s3.jpg

Depends on what was on the emails. The tape was a concerted effort against his political enemies.

bogarde73 wrote on Mar 12^th, 2016 at 11:40am:

Clinton won't be president gandalf.

You've got to be joking. Seriously.

Clinton is the next POTUS.

It's already been decided.

Drumpf will fade off into the distance, never to be heard of again.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 16^th, 2016 at 4:22pm:

bogarde73 wrote on Mar 12th, 2016 at 11:40am: Clinton won't be president gandalf. You've got to be joking. Seriously. Clinton is the next POTUS. It's already been decided. Drumpf will fade off into the distance, never to be heard of again.

Its unlikely Trump will win, but we have to accept it as a possibility. Given all that has happened, I don't think its wise to continue writing Trump off. He seems to thrive off people writing him off.

One things for sure though, in a Trump - Clinton contest, I'll be rootin for Trump.

Wikileaks released 30,000 of Clitnosn emails. 

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/

I'm sure a lot of people with more time than I will find some very disturbing poo, but it won't amount to anything.

Cascadian Goths for BERNIE
http://s10.postimg.org/5qzcnv9zt/image.jpg

That's just...sad.

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 16^th, 2016 at 7:27pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 16th, 2016 at 4:22pm: bogarde73 wrote on Mar 12th, 2016 at 11:40am: Clinton won't be president gandalf. You've got to be joking. Seriously. Clinton is the next POTUS. It's already been decided. Drumpf will fade off into the distance, never to be heard of again. Its unlikely Trump will win, but we have to accept it as a possibility. Given all that has happened, I don't think its wise to continue writing Trump off. He seems to thrive off people writing him off. One things for sure though, in a Trump - Clinton contest, I'll be rootin for Trump.

Course you will gandalf. You're not a mug and there are necessary changes to be made for the US domestically and internationally. An outsider is required for that. Forget the rhetoric.

Clinton will not be the Democratic nominee:


by BREITBART NEWS
20 Mar 2016
Speaking in a radio interview on Sunday, John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, stated he believes the FBI will “explode” if Hillary Clinton ultimately is not indicted for her email infractions due to what he described as politics triumphing over the legal system.

"So this is a far more serious than what happened to General Petraeus. And it’s one reason why I think that both the FBI and I believe the people in the Justice Department, the prosecutors who would oversee the handling of the case, are moving more and more to the conclusion that serious indictments are warranted here.

Now it’s possible that in this administration that politics can triumph over the legalities. But I think if that does happen, there’s a real risk for Obama and for the Attorney General that the FBI will explode. And a lot of things that we don’t know about, that are not on the public record at the moment, will come on the public record.

It may not be the same thing as firing Archibald Cox (the discharged Special Prosecutor) in the Watergate investigation, but if this potential prosecution is tanked for political reasons, it will be a very loud explosion.  And it will stain Obama’s legacy forever. It will damage Loretta Lynch’s professional reputation and I think it will have a profound impact on the presidential election, as well."

Paranoid capitalist and pseudo-socialist Sanders supporter from Arizona believes Hilary is er...just being Hilary.

https://youtu.be/seCDQM1vNvg

bogarde73 wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2016 at 12:27pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 16th, 2016 at 7:27pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 16th, 2016 at 4:22pm: bogarde73 wrote on Mar 12th, 2016 at 11:40am: Clinton won't be president gandalf. You've got to be joking. Seriously. Clinton is the next POTUS. It's already been decided. Drumpf will fade off into the distance, never to be heard of again. Its unlikely Trump will win, but we have to accept it as a possibility. Given all that has happened, I don't think its wise to continue writing Trump off. He seems to thrive off people writing him off. One things for sure though, in a Trump - Clinton contest, I'll be rootin for Trump. Course you will gandalf. You're not a mug and there are necessary changes to be made for the US domestically and internationally. An outsider is required for that. Forget the rhetoric.

It's actually against gandalf's adopted religion to help promote a female into a position of power over men.

Never mind the rights & wrongs, if Obama releases the Allende files I've got a feeling the intelligence community will finally come after Hillary.

Quote:

The latest batch of emails shows that foreign interests in Libya and Syria were among the many that took advantage of the State’s close ties to the Clinton Foundation. It was previously discovered that governments in Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman made donations to the foundation in return for, as far as we can tell, favorable treatment by the State Department. Judicial Watch reminds us that the Clinton Foundation has “accepted millions of dollars from at least seven foreign governments while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state,” including “a $500,000 donation it received from the government of Algeria while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state (that) violated a 2008 ethics agreement between the foundation and the Obama administration.” In all, nearly 200 Clinton Foundation donors have played politics with Clinton’s State Department, and it’s known, as we’ve reported, that at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department while Clinton was there donated more than $26 million to the Foundation. The Libya connection, by the way, was made just two days after the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorists attacks on U.S. personnel and grounds in Benghazi. The message was focused on the wish of Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, president of Libya’s National Congress, “to meet President Clinton and to participate at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting for New York.” It was forwarded to Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, by the Clinton Foundation’s director of foreign policy, Amitabh Desai.

http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-email-scandal-heres-one-thing-hillary-was-trying-to-hide/

oh dear.  Surely not even she could avoid indictment over this. 

... wrote on Mar 24^th, 2016 at 6:02pm:

Quote: The latest batch of emails shows that foreign interests in Libya and Syria were among the many that took advantage of the State’s close ties to the Clinton Foundation. It was previously discovered that governments in Algeria, Kuwait, Qatar and Oman made donations to the foundation in return for, as far as we can tell, favorable treatment by the State Department. Judicial Watch reminds us that the Clinton Foundation has “accepted millions of dollars from at least seven foreign governments while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state,” including “a $500,000 donation it received from the government of Algeria while Mrs. Clinton served as secretary of state (that) violated a 2008 ethics agreement between the foundation and the Obama administration.” In all, nearly 200 Clinton Foundation donors have played politics with Clinton’s State Department, and it’s known, as we’ve reported, that at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department while Clinton was there donated more than $26 million to the Foundation. The Libya connection, by the way, was made just two days after the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorists attacks on U.S. personnel and grounds in Benghazi. The message was focused on the wish of Mohamed Yusuf al-Magariaf, president of Libya’s National Congress, “to meet President Clinton and to participate at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting for New York.” It was forwarded to Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, by the Clinton Foundation’s director of foreign policy, Amitabh Desai. http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-email-scandal-heres-one-thing-hillary-was-trying-to-hide/ oh dear.  Surely not even she could avoid indictment over this.

Her hubby didn't get the nickname "Slick Willy" for nothing, & his primary adviser was Hillary for his entire political life. She wasn't slaving over an oven baking apple pies in Little Rock & The White House for 16 years.

They (Hillary & Billy) both knew & know what gears to grease, & how much juice needs to be applied to get everything within reach......legally, or otherwise.

Don't ever underestimate the power & reach of the so called "Clinton Foundation", which was the brainchild of dear lil HRC.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-inside-story-of-how-the-clintons-built-a-2-billion-global-empire/2015/06/02/b6eab638-0957-11e5-a7ad-b430fc1d3f5c_story.html   

http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/

And that's not even the tippity-top of the proverbial iceberg.  :o

http://comicincorrect.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/D-Slaves-New-600-CI-1.jpg

LANDSLIDES!



https://i.imgsafe.org/43137ef.png
8-)

Yes! Abby is back. Calling Hillary out for the piece of capitalist poo she truly is.
https://youtu.be/PV_PLCC6jeI

How I missed her.

Donald Trump: 'Bernie Sanders has been treated terribly by the Democrats—both with delegates & otherwise. He should show them, and run as an Independent'

http://i.imgur.com/h7xIeqg.jpg

Bernie gets screwed in another state, but he just can't or won't say anything about it. 

... wrote on May 11^th, 2016 at 8:02pm:

http://i.imgur.com/h7xIeqg.jpg Bernie gets screwed in another state, but he just can't or won't say anything about it.

Well, it just might be that in order not to look like a royal coronation, Bernie might have been suckered into running against Shillary, with them fully knowing that he won't be allowed to win in the end, no matter what.

The only way he can get the last laugh against the democrat party (which Bernie isn't a member of JFYI) is if he ran as an Independent....making it a 3-way race, which would siphon off votes from the Wall Street elitist darling Shillary Clinton.


Quote:

....Unlike elsewhere in the world, joining the two major parties isn’t contingent upon membership fees or an application process. Party leaders also don’t have the power to say someone isn’t a Democrat or a Republican. So political affiliation in the United States is a matter of self-identification, in both the governing system and the party organizations, experts said. That allows Sanders and other elected officials to be flexible...... .....When asked if he would officially join the party on April 30, 2015, when he announced his candidacy, Sanders said, "No, I am an independent............."

BTW.....don't rule a 3rd party run for Sanders out if the democrat elite feed him the short end of the stick....there's been rumors.

I read somewhere today of a poll that says up to half of Bernie's voters could vote for Trump rather than Hillary.

bogarde73 wrote on May 12^th, 2016 at 1:13pm:

I read somewhere today of a poll that says up to half of Bernie's voters could vote for Trump rather than Hillary.

Makes sense, being his base sincerely dislikes political elitists, where she's gotten her money from (over $200 million from Wall Street), & just about everything else Shillary says she believes in.....imagine if he ran as an Independent?   :o 

Panther wrote on May 12^th, 2016 at 1:05pm:

... wrote on May 11th, 2016 at 8:02pm: http://i.imgur.com/h7xIeqg.jpg Bernie gets screwed in another state, but he just can't or won't say anything about it.  Well, it just might be that in order not to look like a royal coronation, Bernie might have been suckered into running against Shillary, with them fully knowing that he won't be allowed to win in the end, no matter what. The only way he can get the last laugh against the democrat party (which Bernie isn't a member of JFYI) is if he ran as an Independent....making it a 3-way race, which would siphon off votes from the Wall Street elitist darling Shillary Clinton. Quote: ....Unlike elsewhere in the world, joining the two major parties isn’t contingent upon membership fees or an application process. Party leaders also don’t have the power to say someone isn’t a Democrat or a Republican. So political affiliation in the United States is a matter of self-identification, in both the governing system and the party organizations, experts said. That allows Sanders and other elected officials to be flexible...... .....When asked if he would officially join the party on April 30, 2015, when he announced his candidacy, Sanders said, "No, I am an independent............." BTW.....don't rule a 3rd party run for Sanders out if the democrat elite feed him the short end of the stick....there's been rumors.

No chance.  He has clearly stated he'd support hilary over trump, but him running as a 3rd party would guarantee a trump victory. 

Unless of course, the republican machine also run another candidate, as paul ryan has been threatening to do.

... wrote on May 12^th, 2016 at 1:18pm:

No chance.  He has clearly stated he'd support hilary over trump, but him running as a 3rd party would guarantee a trump victory.

So, you think Bernie is somehow beholden to a party he doesn't belong to...........& to a candidate who demonizes him daily, & one who espouses policies he denounces & detests?  ......  Really?? Well, we'll see.........  ::)

Panther wrote on May 12^th, 2016 at 1:23pm:

... wrote on May 12th, 2016 at 1:18pm: Panther wrote on May 12th, 2016 at 1:05pm: ... wrote on May 11th, 2016 at 8:02pm: http://i.imgur.com/h7xIeqg.jpg Bernie gets screwed in another state, but he just can't or won't say anything about it.  Well, it just might be that in order not to look like a royal coronation, Bernie might have been suckered into running against Shillary, with them fully knowing that he won't be allowed to win in the end, no matter what. The only way he can get the last laugh against the democrat party (which Bernie isn't a member of JFYI) is if he ran as an Independent....making it a 3-way race, which would siphon off votes from the Wall Street elitist darling Shillary Clinton. Quote: ....Unlike elsewhere in the world, joining the two major parties isn’t contingent upon membership fees or an application process. Party leaders also don’t have the power to say someone isn’t a Democrat or a Republican. So political affiliation in the United States is a matter of self-identification, in both the governing system and the party organizations, experts said. That allows Sanders and other elected officials to be flexible...... .....When asked if he would officially join the party on April 30, 2015, when he announced his candidacy, Sanders said, "No, I am an independent............." BTW.....don't rule a 3rd party run for Sanders out if the democrat elite feed him the short end of the stick....there's been rumors. No chance.  He has clearly stated he'd support hilary over trump, but him running as a 3rd party would guarantee a trump victory.  Unless of course, the republican machine also run another candidate, as paul ryan has been threatening to do. So, you think Bernie is somehow beholden to a party he doesn't belong to, & to a candidate who demonizes him, & who espouses policies he denounces?  ......  Really??

He's definitely a stooge of some nature.  Theres plenty of ammo for him to blast hilary to kingdom come - but hes either to weak to, or its above and beyond his job description.  Either explanation makes him unfit for iffice.