2016 Presidential Election Thread

Mediate's take on last night's debate

CNBC’s Harwood Now Media Bias Poster Boy After Career-Altering ‘Moderating’ of GOP Debate

I had to watch it again.

I had to make sure I witnessed what I just witnessed.

And upon absorbing the whole thing and double checking my notes from watching last night and again this morning before sunrise, they were practically identical. Conclusion: CNBC, a solid niche network with solid talent, just performed the worst moderation of any debate — and we’re including all presidential, vice presidential, fictional… the one from Old School (Will Ferrell’s Frank the Tank vs. James Carville moderated by Jeremy Piven’s Dean Pritcher), the one from Clueless (Alicia Silverstone vs Amber on the plight of Haitian refugees) — in American history.​

Then he awards the gold, silver, and bronze Medals of FAIL to two of the moderators and the RNC chair who let the fiasco happen.

The two GOP frontrunners are lying liars

http://m.nydailynews.com/opinion/editorial-donald-trump-ben-carson-lying-liars-article-1.2416389

Just those two?

I like that Who Hates What? widget on the Daily News page:

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/2015/10/haters-in-chief/index.html

Jeb had a meeting with his backers and circulated his staff's paper on why he could win. There were also some documents only circulated to insiders, and those got leaked to US News, which printed them. Among them was this slide:



voters have A.D.D.

Well that's certainly a Mitt Romney moment. He should've just said they're fuckin' retards. And of course this is about the primary, so you can guess who they're talking about.

Hillary's support among Democrats surges to 50 percent.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...nton-hits-50-percent-support-in-national-poll

That's because the media won't tell them that Hillary lied for eleven hours straight.

Because outside of your delusional little world, she didn't. You blithering moron.

She lied. Judicial Watch's FOIA's are fascinating. Prior to blaming the attack on a Youtube video by the Egyptian ex-pat, the White House was going to blame the attack on a Youtube video by some preacher in Colorado named Pastor Jon. Good thing they found a different scapegoat or he'd be rotting in jail right now.



The "S" who was expected to make statements is Hillary (Sec of State).

And of course this is after Hillary told Chelsey and the heads of Libya and Egypt that the attack was carried out by a terrorist group affiliated with Al Qaeda.

I hope there's some other document that says the things you're attributing to it, 'cause that one sure doesn't.

The Pastor Jon video (mp4)

The e-mail saying that the White House was going to blame Pastor Jon was sent at 9:11 PM on the night of the attack.

None of the e-mails coming from people on the ground, the military, or the CIA mention any video or any protest. That lie was being concocted and driven by White House and the State Department.

It also fits perfectly with a previous e-mail discussing Susan Rice's preparation for her public statements.

Rhodes e-mail (pdf)
From Sept 14, 2012, 8:09 PM

Goals:
​

• • To convey that the United States is doing everything possible to protect our people and facilities abroad;
  • To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, not a broader failure of policy;
  • To show that we will be resolute in bringing people to who harm Americans to justice, and standing steadfast through these protests;
  • To reinforce the President and Administration's strength and steadiness in dealing with difficult challenges.

Top-lines:
​

• • Since we began to see protests in response to this Internet video, the President has directed the Administration to take a number of steps. His top priority has been the safety and security of all Americans serving abroad.

<snip>
​

• • Third, we've made our views on this video crystal clear. The United States government had nothing to do with it. We reject its message and its contents. We find it disgusting and reprehensible. But there is absolutely no justification at all for responding to this movie with violence. And we are working to make sure people around the globe hear that message.

Note that virtually everything in that e-mail is a lie. They knew from the get go that there was no protest, there was an attack by Al Qaeda affiliates. That's what Hillary told her own daughter, and what she told the leaders of Libya and Egypt. When the president of Libya publicly stated that there hadn't been any protest, just as Hillary told him, Hillary attacked him viciously for lying.

The next bullet point, that we would be resolute in bringing the people to justice, was also a lie. The State Department waited weeks before sending in the FBI, and the leader of the terrorist attack was talking to New York Times reporters in a hotel bar months after the attack. Since Hillary, Obama, and Rice had spent months lying about the cause of the attack, they couldn't very well arrest those responsible because then the terrorists would explain that Hillary was lying her ass off.

The bullet point after that is also a lie. The only "difficult challenge" the President faced was trying to get away with the lie that the attack was caused by a Youtube video.

So again, note that the video had nothing to do with the attack, the Administration knew the video had nothing to do with the attack, and in fact was going to put all the blame on a completely different video on the night of the attack.

Bush cut salaries but hasn't stopped paying people. It was another candidate who stopped paying people. I agree the dem primary rules have been changed to give Hillary the advantage and she did all the backroom deals to clear the field before this contest even started. Apparently Bernie was not given the memo as they thought he was a joke ("A Jewish social democrat?! We can ignore him.") in the end he doesn't have the resources to win but that he is doing so well shows how many dems don't like or trust Hillary.

Your own latest polls show Carson in the lead, man. He won't last but Trumps fall in the polls has already started. If they follow true to form several "NotRomney" (to borrow the 2012 phrase) candidates will take their turn before the insider candidate gets the nomination.

You're not reading it correctly. Trump is in the lead. But do you mean an insider who is not currently in the running?

Shut up.

No he means an insider who is already running. Trump,Carson and Fiorina are outsiders because they've never held a political office. Everyone else in the field has or currently held higher office which supposedly makes them an "insider" and somehow unfit for the presidency.

Yeah, I know. It's highly illogical but so is the far right.

She did, and the media proclaims that her testimony proved that she's still got it, which apparently means the ability to tell bald face lies to Congress and the American people. Somehow the left now thinks that makes her electable.

They are running already. Most likely it will be either Bush or Rubio probably Bush. Just like Romney struggled in the polls but won on the point count so the insider guy will struggle in the polls but win on the point count. The far right tea party types will continue to flirt with one outsider candidate after another before slowly figuring out what losers they are. In the end they will get the insider candidate and then do nothing but bitch about it.

Especially when they lose yet again in 2016 as they are destined to do. They are just too extreme and even the relative moderates have to move too far to the right during the primary thus making them unelectable in the general. They are in the same funk Democrats were in from 1968 to 1992. They will have to come back to the center before they start winning the Presidency again but that won't happen until after decades of losing finally discredits the extremists.

None of them could be much to the right of George HW Bush, Bob Dole, George W Bush, John McCain, or Mitt Romney. If anything they've moved left. But not nearly as far left as the Democrats have moved. They're actually running a Socialist socialist who thinks we should only have one brand of toothpaste. His opponent thinks we should make rich people pay for everybody's college education.

Bush doesn't have a chance. I wouldn't vote for him even though his brother was probably the greatest leader in the history of mankind.

Chardman, why do you make so many replies with little images?

IIRC when pressed to explain WHY the Republican candidates are considered "too extreme" in your opinion, the only issue you've ever mentioned specifically was there opposition to abortion rights.

IIRC something like 33 to 40% of the American people have about the same position. If that many Americans believe something then the position is de facto NOT an extremist one.

Because he's an idiot incapable of any type of intellectual response.

Because (as the notation under my avatar proclaims) a picture really is worth a thousand words. Also, most of the things I reply to thusly are sufficiently stupid that they are undeserving of any more of a response than a simple cut-n-paste cartoon.

Voters surely know an extremist when they see one. Thus the Republican problem with purple districts.

The target moves over time but voters know it when they see it.

Yes, they do, and a Socialist is an extremist. Hillary, the other option, is a lying pragmatist who will take any position if it results in off-the-book donations to her personal crime family. Thus her flip flops on the Trans Pacific Trade Deal, the Keystone Pipeline, and anything related to foreign policy, gay marriage, or any other imaginable issue.

This just in. Hillary was a big supporter of the Defense Of Marriage Act. Instead of explaining that she was wrong, she's claimed that the Bill Clinton Administration was afraid of a Constitutional Amendment, yet nobody can find a single memo mentioning that anywhere in the Clinton Administration's correspondence. What all the left-wing sites instead found was that the White House was desperately happy to get the bill signed into law.

She lies once again. It's all she's ever done since her days back in Arkansas, which is why she's had to testify before Congressional Committees probably more than any human in history. Whitewater, Travelgate, Rose Law firm billing records, FBI files, Chinese cash, Lewinsky, Benghazi, E-mail servers, illegal contributions, and on and on. She's a walking crime scene who needs an infinite prison sentence or a bullet through the forehead. She's scared off any electable Democrat, and she'll probably bring a host of Congressional Democrats down with her. She's narcissistic that way. Saturday Night Live's portraits are spot on.