jerseyhoya wrote:Boston Herald ‏@bostonherald
Franklin Pierce Univ/Boston Herald NH Dem primary poll: Sanders 44, Clinton 37, Biden 9, Webb 1, O'Malley & Chaffee -1

#FeelTheBern

It's New Hampshire and it's August 2015. This means basically nothing. Have we learned nothing from Nate Silver?

JUburton wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Boston Herald ‏@bostonherald
Franklin Pierce Univ/Boston Herald NH Dem primary poll: Sanders 44, Clinton 37, Biden 9, Webb 1, O'Malley & Chaffee -1

#FeelTheBern

It's New Hampshire and it's August 2015. This means basically nothing. Have we learned nothing from Nate Silver?

Disagree. More signs of Clinton vulnerability makes it more likely Biden jumps in.

pacino wrote:I've been guffawed at but we broke the region by invading Iraq and there's no real immediate exit strategy that will work. we're fucked. thanks, neocons.

so, we nibble, as we should. Diplomacy, lead the way! We are working with Iran and SA against Isis. Amazing.

When you have a bunch of chicken-hawks running wars this is what you end up with. George W. Bush was a great commander in chief. We haven't had one since.

just had an interesting thought, if Hilary wins and becomes the next POTUS (good money on this happening) Dems will have won the popular vote in 6 out of the last 7 elections.

TomatoPie wrote:
Yeah, great flick.

Have you seen Greetings and Hi Mom?

I have not

jerseyhoya wrote:Clinton campaign says email server to go to Justice Dept

Pete Williams is the only person who's said anything intelligent at all recently about the Clinton's computing hardware.


Trey Gowdy looks and sounds like a roadie for Black Oak Arkansas. And he's a complete idiot.

drsmooth wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:
Yeah, great flick.

Have you seen Greetings and Hi Mom?

I have not

You should!

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Clinton campaign says email server to go to Justice Dept

Pete Williams is the only person who's said anything intelligent at all recently about the Clinton's computing hardware.

Trey Gowdy looks and sounds like a roadie for Black Oak Arkansas. And he's a complete idiot.

I am not sure what Pete Williams said about Clinton's computing hardware. Hopefully it was something along the lines of Hillary Clinton, in her habitual quest for secrecy and acting as if the rules do not apply to her, thought she could get around pesky disclosure requirements by conducting her business as Secretary of State off government email. Instead the setup is causing far more scrutiny for her than working within the system and complying with typical FOIA requests would have, and she may have endangered national security in the process.

Gowdy is a pretty sharp guy outside of his haircut. He's been doing a nice job handling all of this.

jerseyhoya wrote:I am not sure what Pete Williams said about Clinton's computing hardware.

basically he's said no talking head or politician talking about this knows anything about servers, or email, or communications technologies, and they should all pretty much shut the fuck up, because they all sound like idiots, because they are, in fact, idiots.

He said it in a nicer way, though

Gowdy is a pretty sharp guy outside of his haircut. He's been doing a nice job handling all of this.

Gowdy is Gomer Pyle's 2nd cousin by his 1st mother.

I understand that you think anyone with a southern accent is an inbred moron, and that this is an acceptable prejudice to hold apparently, but he's a former federal prosecutor and district attorney in South Carolina and knows what he's doing with the investigation. He's not overreaching or letting his rhetoric get ahead of the facts.

i dont think it's a southern thing; doc has said fairly similar things about Issa

jerseyhoya wrote:I understand that you think anyone with a southern accent is an inbred moron, and that this is an acceptable prejudice to hold apparently, but he's a former federal prosecutor and district attorney in South Carolina and knows what he's doing with the investigation. He's not overreaching or letting his rhetoric get ahead of the facts.

Easy there, Mr. Jump To Confusions - you called him an inbred moron. I did not. Have you ever heard Jim Nabors sing? Like an angel, he does

Inter party nomination drama is not contained to this side of the pond. Labour is holding leadership elections in the UK, and it's bananas. The gentleman who is leading in the polls is Jeremy Corbyn, an old school socialist, who is seen by most - including many of his supporters judging by the barometer of the Labour Party thread on RAWK - as utterly unelectable. In addition to the throwback economic stuff, he's seen as sympathetic to groups like the IRA, Hamas and Hezbollah. Party activists and their union affiliates are fed up with New Labour, which they see as Tory-lite stuff, and they think they need to be more boldly in favor of True Labour principles to right the ship. They might have a small bit of a point as Scotland, which used to be heavily Labour, swung to the lefty nationalist SNP in the past election. But Ed Miliband, the last leader, was the pick of the unions as well over his more moderate brother David and others seen as more electable in middle England. Picking a guy to the left of Ed isn't going to fix anything toward getting Labour a majority. It is amusing though to see the same logic following a stinging defeat - "voters didn't pick us because they didn't see a difference between us and the people who won" "we need to be MORE fill in the blank instead of playing to the center" - plays out all over the world.

Tony Blair has a remarkable op-ed in the Guardian today - Even if you hate me, please don’t take Labour over the cliff edge. Blair isn't a popular figure among many Labour folks because of his work in pulling the party to the center in the 1990s and the whole Iraq thing, but he's also the only Labour leader who has won an election since Harold Wilson won a 3 seat majority back in 1974. I'm not sure anything like this would move an undecided Labour voter, but it'll be interesting to see if the other recent leaders who have a bit more cred with left leaning Labour supporters will join Blair in his hyperbolic warnings. Imagine Clinton writing this about the Dems nominating Sanders (in a world where Hillary isn't running) or GWB about the GOP picking Cruz.

Voting starts Friday and lasts through September 10th. Corbyn leads in the latest poll 53-21-18-8%. If no one gets 50% on the 1st ballot the lowest finisher has their 2nd preferences are allocated, if no one has 50% on the 2nd ballot the lowest finisher has their preferences allocated. Corbyn is unlikely to do well in the 2nd preferences, but if he's close to 50% (or over it obviously) that won't matter. One additional fun thing is even if Corbyn wins, he's unlikely to have much support within his party at Westminster. His fellow Labour MPs aren't as keen on the pure ideology harming the hope of winning a general election plan, so there will be a segment from the start looking for any excuse to overthrow him as leader. They've gotta be careful not to look like they're disrespecting the will of registered party members though. Pushing too fast could lead to a splintering of the party.

Rand vs. Trump

Paul puts out a video highlighting some of Trump's not so distant departures from GOP/conservatism, and the Trump campaign fires back with a very unique statement berating Paul that reads like it was dictated by Trump to a subordinate while he was having his hair done.

jerseyhoya wrote:Imagine Clinton writing this about the Dems nominating Sanders (in a world where Hillary isn't running) or GWB about the GOP picking Cruz.

isn't the difficulty that, other than having the word "party" included in their various political tribes' labels, there's not really that much similarity in the purpose function and power of UK vs US political parties?

drsmooth wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Imagine Clinton writing this about the Dems nominating Sanders (in a world where Hillary isn't running) or GWB about the GOP picking Cruz.

isn't the difficulty that, other than having the word "party" included in their various political tribes' labels, there's not really that much similarity in the purpose function and power of UK vs US political parties?

They have some similarities and some differences. I'm not sure which differences between the parties in the two countries you think make it difficult to imagine a former US president penning such a plea.

I guess the Dems or GOP getting their clock cleaned in a presidential election would be highly unlikely to imperil the party's existence moving forward, while there's more of an existential threat to Labour - see what's happening in Canada at the moment with the NDP at the expense of the Liberals or the SNP in Scotland at the expense of Labour or whatever. But not sure there's that much more of an existential threat to Labour than exists in the US since the Lib Dems almost got erased in May. And the Dems nominating Bernie or the GOP nominating Cruz (or god forbid Trump) would open the door to a potentially legit third party run that would appeal to a lot of regular party voters that might have lasting effects as well.

Jimmy Carter has cancer and it is wide spread.

probably the best "ex-president" we've had as far as the amount of worldwide diplomacy and charity that he does