Presidential 2016: A New Paradigm?

[August1991]

Uh, no. It's business as usual in democracy in the 20th/21st century.

IOW, this US election will turn on a "wedge" issue. Scott Adams calls it "identity politics". I call it nationalism.

Trump has turned this presidential election into a referendum on "political correctness". Call it a wall if you want.

Edited June 3, 2016 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

Nationalism works...always has. President Obama remarked in Japan that lots of other nations and their leadership are watching the 2016 presidential election and candidates with much interest, because Donald Trump has already flipped the bird at them. The politically correct term is "a fear of American isolationism".

Frankly, I think a lot of American voters will join the "FU" Washington/World bandwagon, which is an old paradigm.

[August1991]

Nationalism works...always has.

Uh, no. Nationalism doesn't always work. (Many politicians have tried to play that card... )

It is the "wedge" aspect to Trump's campaign that intrigues me.

If you don't vote Trump, then you favour ..... (You want to make America apologetic?)

Edited June 1, 2016 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

Uh, no. Nationalism doesn't always work. (Many politicians have tried to play that card... )

It works for voters who turn out for the candidate, and it is most certainly working for Trump.

Critics claim that the U.S. is a "rogue nation"....egads! ...those dumb 'Muricans still haven't gone metric.

Perfect for Trump.

[August1991]

It works for voters who turn out for the candidate, and it is most certainly working for Trump.

Critics claim that the U.S. is a "rogue nation"....egads! ...those dumb 'Muricans still haven't gone metric.

Perfect for Trump.

My argument may seem contrary to the Leftist/progressive meme but I don't think Americans are nationalistic. (I have had some experience with nationalism.)

I don't even believe that White Americans/Republicans are racist. (Another given of the American left... )

Rather, I believe that all/most by far Americans (typical of democracy in this age) are prone to wedge issues.

Edited June 1, 2016 by August1991

[bush_cheney2004]

...Rather, I believe that all/most by far Americans (typical of democracy in this age) are prone to wedge issues.

Wedge issues may win the day given an otherwise even preference for the candidates as presented, but Clinton and Trump move this game far more into the realm and clash of personality, likability, trust, temperament, etc.

[Topaz]

Over the weekend, listened to a show that was talking about Clinton and how the Attorney General of the US is saying that Clinton broke the law and should be arrested, but will she....double standard for the elite? Will Bernie be the leader for the Democrats by default?

[Argus]

Over the weekend, listened to a show that was talking about Clinton and how the Attorney General of the US is saying that Clinton broke the law and should be arrested, but will she....double standard for the elite? Will Bernie be the leader for the Democrats by default?

You are speaking of a FORMER Republican attorney general for the District of Columbia, a sort of local prosecutor. He is a shrill, far right wing Republican who has made many disproved claims before.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/01/07/right-wing-media-cite-discredited-republican-la/207839

[Shady]

You are speaking of a FORMER Republican attorney general for the District of Columbia, a sort of local prosecutor. He is a shrill, far right wing Republican who has made many disproved claims before.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/01/07/right-wing-media-cite-discredited-republican-la/207839

Lol you're actually citing media matters? Do you know that they were created by the Clinton's?

[Shady]

Hillary Clinton did break the law, and the rules by setting up her own private email server. That's not even disputable.

[waldo]

Lol you're actually citing media matters? Do you know that they were created by the Clinton's?

citation request

[waldo]

Hillary Clinton did break the law, and the rules by setting up her own private email server. That's not even disputable.

under what premise do you claim to speak to 'law breaking'? When the FBI delivers its report to the U.S. Justice Department, it will be prosecutors that review that report, decide if a crime was committed and proceed as they see fit. Perhaps you need to better scrutinize your 'breitbart, daily howler, hot air' like sources, yes?

the rules aspect is worthy of comparative review... Other Secretaries Handled Classified Material on Private Email, State Dept. Concludes

The State Department’s internal investigation arm issued a final memorandum today on the email practices of past and current secretaries of state, and it said definitively that past secretaries handled classified material on unclassified email systems.

The same claims were made in an early February memo when the State Department's inspector general first announced it was conducting a records review related to the email accounts of five secretaries of state -- Madeline Albright, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Hillary Clinton and John Kerry -- and their immediate staff.

as I understand, new regulations were brought in under Obama's admin relative to the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration... breaking a regulation is not an indictable offense... is not breaking a U.S. law. As I read, there are no related penalties, principally as the U.S. National Archives has no/limited enforcement capability. Also, as I read, at the time emails were current/active, any received by Clinton were not classified in nature.

.

[GostHacked]

Any IT person could have told you that Clinton broke the laws. She used her private email server for official government business which is against the law. In comparison if I used my personal email server for official work purposes without my employer signing off on it, I would be charged and fired and I would never be able to work in IT again.

She screwed up there and she needs to be held accountable. She even ordered some of the hard drives destroyed. So now that's a charge of using her own server, another for destroying evidence during an investigation. If she was on the up and up, she would have never had her own server.

[?Impact]

Any IT person could have told you that Clinton broke the laws.

I guess it is a good thing we don't have IT persons arguing in front of the bench. Can you tell us with Title 18 means?

[TimG]

I would be charged and fired and I would never be able to work in IT again.

Not true. You would be fired and your company may choose to sue you for damages but you would not be charged with a crime (suits are civil actions - not crimes). The only way criminal law becomes involved is if government secrets are mishandled or if you hacked your way into a system and that appears to be the case with the Clinton email server. Edited June 5, 2016 by TimG

[waldo]

Any IT person could have told you that Clinton broke the laws. She used her private email server for official government business which is against the law. In comparison if I used my personal email server for official work purposes without my employer signing off on it, I would be charged and fired and I would never be able to work in IT again.

She screwed up there and she needs to be held accountable. She even ordered some of the hard drives destroyed. So now that's a charge of using her own server, another for destroying evidence during an investigation. If she was on the up and up, she would have never had her own server.

notwithstanding you've already usurped the FBI and U.S. Justice Department, just what U.S. law(s) do you claim were broken?... specifically, name the law(s) broken. I mentioned new regulations under the Obama admin... and emphasized breaking a regulation is not an indictable offense... is not breaking the law.

citation request in regards your statement that, "Clinton ordered some of the hard drives destroyed".

I also (just a few posts back), presented reference that showed that other U.S. Secretaries of State handled classified material through their own private email accounts... notwithstanding there are only, as I understand, 22 emails that fall into a classification concern - and at the time Clinton received them, they were not designated as Classified.

.

[PIK]

Mean while Gary Johnson stick handles right up the middle.

[GostHacked]

notwithstanding you've already usurped the FBI and U.S. Justice Department, just what U.S. law(s) do you claim were broken?... specifically, name the law(s) broken. I mentioned new regulations under the Obama admin... and emphasized breaking a regulation is not an indictable offense... is not breaking the law.

citation request in regards your statement that, "Clinton ordered some of the hard drives destroyed".

I also (just a few posts back), presented reference that showed that other U.S. Secretaries of State handled classified material through their own private email accounts... notwithstanding there are only, as I understand, 22 emails that fall into a classification concern - and at the time Clinton received them, they were not designated as Classified.

.

http://www.snopes.com/clinton-hard-drive-destruction/

Well hard drives were destroyed, but it is not verified if they came from the email server.

The thing is Clinton was dealing with classified information flowing through her email server.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/04/how-did-top-secret-emails-end-up-on-hillary-clintons-server/

Conflict of Interest

The nondisclosure agreement

Clinton did sign a Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, in which she pledged to safeguard classified information whether “marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications,” as defined by Executive Order 12958. (That was later superseded by Executive Order 13526.)

Interestingly, in that executive order, the secretary of state is given the authority to classify and declassify information at the “top secret” level. In other words, Clinton had presidential authority to decide what State Department information was classified or not.

“It is not simply that she would ‘know the difference’ between classified and unclassified information — it was up to her to make the original determination,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the project on government secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. “This authority, however, did not extend to information generated by other agencies, such as CIA.”

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSMTZSAPEC2O2MGLXL

U.S. spy agencies have told Congress that Hillary Clinton's home computer server contained some emails that should have been treated as "top secret" because their wording matched sections of some of the government's most highly classified documents, four sources familiar with the agency reports said.

The two reports are the first formal declarations by U.S. spy agencies detailing how they believe Clinton violated government rules when highly classified information in at least 22 email messages passed through her unsecured home server.

The State Department has already acknowledged that the emails contained top secret intelligence, though it says they were not marked that way. It has not previously been clear if the emails contained full classified documents or only some information from them.

Manning was charged with leaking information. Clinton could be charged with mishandling classified and potentially top secret information by having that routed through here email server. That I would suspect is against the law.

[Icebound]

Well, at least all that they are calling for is Hillary's imprisonment...

Not at all like what Republican senators (and others) are suggesting for Obama:

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/06/10/david-perdues-quip-about-barack-obama-prompts-swift-social-media-reprimands/

"We should pray like Psalms 109:8 says. It says, ‘Let his days be few, and let another have his office.”

Of course, the rest of Psalm 108.8 quoted here from the King James Bible on-line .... goes like this:

Let his days be few; and let another take his office.

9Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow

. 10Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg:

let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.

11Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labour.

...

But hey, it was all a joke, right? No sitting Republican would wish the President of the United States harm, right?

Indeed, it IS a new paradigm.

..

[-TSS-]

The losing candidate may have to go into exile or prison depending on which one of them loses.

[kimmy]

So did this morning's Islamic mass-murder in Orlando just win the election for Trump?

-k

[Icebound]

..

The losing candidate may have to go into exile or prison depending on which one of them loses.

Ah.... isn't that the SOP for those bastions of democracy such as described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Nemtsov

.....

..

..

[Icebound]

So did this morning's Islamic mass-murder in Orlando just win the election for Trump?

-k

Are you saying that Trump and the Republicans are going to become the de-facto defenders of LGBT?

...

[kimmy]

Are you saying that Trump and the Republicans are going to become the de-facto defenders of LGBT?

More that this event will almost certainly boost support for Trump's anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant rhetoric.

-k

[Icebound]

More that this event will almost certainly boost support for Trump's anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant rhetoric.

-k

I knew what you meant, but the irony.....

...