- Date published:
10:50 am, July 26th, 2016 - 184 comments
Categories: capitalism, class war, Hillary Clinton, International, us politics - Tags: bernie sanders, hillary clinton
Day one of the Democratic Party’s National Convention.
Against a backdrop of controversy and an apology to Bernie Sanders following the apparently Russian hack of the DNC’s candidate process emails and an unwelcome post conference poll bump for the establishment candidate Donald Trump, the Democrats are struggling to control the message. A small but idiotic minority of delegates are booing every time Hillary Clinton’s name is mentioned. That includes shouting over the speakers so far in the session. Shame that some of Bernie’s supporters don’t seem to be interested in hearing from the women on the stage, nor the black and Hispanic delegates who have struggled to get their stories across.
Bernie Sanders has tweeted the leaders of the delegations from states that supported him asking them to STFU. It seem so to be working, as the booing seems to have subsided. This follows on from Sanders himself being booed at a pre-convention speech.
Sanders is due to speak in a few hours, at roughly 2PM our time.
EDIT: The Sanders speech is here:
Here’s the Guardian’s regular update page.
And here’s a live link to the convention:
“I first met Hillary as First Lady on a visit to the White House. I was 9 years old and I listened to her and my mom discuss healthcare and early intervention for children with disabilities. Over the past 23 years, she has continued to serve as a friend and a mentor, championing my inclusion and access to classrooms, higher education and the workforce.
Donald Trump has shown us who he really is. And I honestly feel bad for anyone with that much hate in their heart. I know we will show each other, and the world, who we really are in November – when we choose genuine strength and thoughtful leadership – over fear and division. Donald Trump doesn’t see me, he doesn’t hear me, and he definitely doesn’t speak for me.
I am confident that as president Hillary Clinton will do everything in her power to support the rights… and humanity of all Americans.”
Funny when you rig an election, people get just a little up set. Who would have thought it?
Oh and how is the whole calling people idiots thing working out?
Any more gems you want to hand trump and the wingnuts?
DWC and staff tried to fix the candidate – and are you saying that Hillary is not an Establishment candidate?
Outgoing head of the Democratic Party and pro-Clinton organiser Debbie Wasserman Schultz tried to speak to Florida’s voting delegates on stage at a pre-convention breakfast event.
She was booed off stage by Bernie supporters. Security had to escort her out of her own party’s breakfast event.
Video tweeted from the event:
All the leading participants are ‘escorted by security’ arriving and leaving their events.
Is that what you call ‘news’.
I watched the clip and there was cheers too. Thats not really news either
Even Sanders was booed by his own supporters. Which means nothing either.
Must be a typo where Donald Trump is the establishment candidate.
I guess that makes Hillary Clinton the fresh edgy anti-establishment choice
And the Protesters were chanting
“Hell no DNC, We won’t vote for Hillary!”
While Trump makes up ground. In fact he may be the first ever candidate to gain voter share after both the RNC and the DNC
The GoP has been toxic since nearly forever, and have no wish to put their house in order, but Trump has (if nothing else) given the little guys a sense of hope that the party WILL be transformed whether they like it or not.
Whereas the Democrats have been toxic since nearly forever too, but have no wish to put their house in order, and they dont have a candidate who wants to either.
I reckon Trump will be POTUS if the Democrats stick with Hillary. The tide has already turned.
Talk to his bankers, they know exactly how on message he is. Like Reagan, Thatcher and Shipley, he talks as if he wants to help the little guy, but at heart he just wants to see the majority suffer to make himself and his mates richer.
Trump deals with bankers as part of his property empire.
Hillary gets money from bankers for her politics and her help in office.
Trump’s also declared bankruptcy 4 times. I’m sure the banks that were burned by that aren’t particularly happy with him.
Trump’s declared bankruptcy with debts owing 4 times and is still in business?
Given that the USA has a national debt of $19 trillion dollars and climbing, his experience might come in handy.
He’d be the first president under which the US has ever defaulted on its debts. Would seem in keeping with his competence, really.
The US defaulted on some of its debts in 1979. So your ‘honour’ goes to President Carter!
Anyway, Trump has already addressed this, the US govt can’t be forced to default.
CV’s comment was quite firmly tongue in cheek. But you have demonstrated that there is always someone for who the joke goes over their head.
And Nixon going off the gold standard could also be considered the USA defaulting on its debts.
Actually my search was a bit superficial,
but that does not include the US leaving gold convertibility. I don’t think that counts however as the govt didn’t miss any payments (in gold) but legally shut down the exchange facility. The events above include a few where the govt missed payments in gold by comparison.
Only if you squint really really really hard.
Nixon’s policies reduced the value of the US dollar, so any foreign investor who had an unhedged claim on the US government lost out (because a US dollar was now was worth less in foreign currency than before).
By the same logic, any government pursuing policies to devalue their currency are defaulting on debt… which would be an extreme and absurd conclusion to draw.
Ahem. Mexican devaluation. US investors regarded it a significant default.
So not that absurd.
The US in 1971 and Mexico in 1994 are examples of devaluation, not default. In both cases, the government made a commitment to repay government debt in their local currency. They both did repay.
If you, as a foreign investor, didn’t hedge against or understand the risk of a falling currency reducing the value of your investment (when converted back to your own currency), that’s on you and you alone. It ain’t a default.
I’m interested that you don’t think it’s a default Phil.
American investors lost a huge amount of money in this deception by the Mexican Govt which had assured investors right to the eleventh hour that there would be no devaluation.
Your very description – that Mexican bonds lost a massive amount of value overnight due to direct govt action – is tantamount to a debt default even if you somehow argue via technicalities that it somehow is not.
Let me be very clear on this: The Mexican government issued debt denominated in Peso’s. The commitment to repay debt was in Peso’s. The Mexican government repaid the debt in Peso’s.
Therefore, they did not default on the debt instrument. It’s literally as simple as that.
I honestly couldn’t give a flying fuck what else the Mexican Government did or did not do to stave off default. Investors in America shouldn’t be investing in Mexican debt securities if they don’t understand the risks of dealing with emerging markets that have significant capital account outflows and fixed exchange rates.
Side note: if the Investor-State dispute settlement obligations of the TPPA were in force, then maybe those american investors you appear so very worried about might have been able to sue the Mexican Government and recoupe some of their losses – wouldn’t that be great!
1979 wasn’t a default in the typical/joe-public sense of the word, and no investor lost money.
There was a long debate in Congress about raising the debt ceiling, which led to a large increase in the volume of T-bills being traded on the secondary market as investors wanted to get out early. The Treasury got behind in its paperwork and had computer problems, so there was a delay in payments.
It was embarrassing, sure, but not a catastrophe.
Your argument is that it was merely a technical default?
You understand that late payment of your mortgage is a default on your obligations to the bank as a borrower right, even if you catch up later?
And the bank only goes to mortgagee sale after all other avenues have been explored.
Kind of like how the treasury was given extra time to get their payments sorted, rather than everyone turning up at fort knox at 9am on the first day and demanding gold bullion.
There’s a difference between having the money and not being able to pay because of a dysfunctional congress, and a householder not having the money and no prospects of getting it soon.
Not a catastrophe no, but clearly refuting Lanthanides assertion that Trump would mark the first, yes.
President Carter did not default, not in the manner you’re implying. The Treasury bills were defaulted temporarily due to the US treasury being garrotted by a congress engaged in a debate limit shutdown. The T bill were paid out when congress pulled it’s head out of it’s arse.
bastables, you are aware that late payment is defaulting on your obligations as a borrower?
You may catch up on payments at some later date, but you have still defaulted on the terms of your borrowing.
Just try putting through your mortgage payment a week late and then arguing with the bank that you haven’t incurred a technical (although not ultimate) default on your mortgage agreement.
If you pay your mortgage a week late, the bank is not likely to foreclose and send your house to mortgagee sale, either.
They’ll wrap you over the knuckles, charge penalty interest on the overdue amount and put a black mark in your credit file.
“He’d be the first president under which the US has ever defaulted on its debts.” – Lanthanide. That’s the manner in which I am implying the US defaulted, which it did.
Clinton raises money for their major charity too.
hangon hangon there is no. i repeat NO creditable evidence that the “russians” had anything to do with this … Please dont repeat that sort of spin !
“experts have said”
“FBI are looking into the possibility”
“bits of code “look like” bits of code used in russian (and other parties) hacks”
sum of above == ZERO
Now I am not saying the Russians didnt do it . The point is we dont know and this is such an obvious attempt to deflect from the content of the emails that we (wiser persons !!) should not be falling for it and repeating such an obvious spin
As well consider that this is also an attack on Wikileaks itself
I repeat there is NO creditable evedence for the claim that the Russians did it
As I’ve said, the NSA can determine definitively where the email leak came from in moments, using their XKEYSCORE internet tool. No further investigation than that is needed. Unless it suits the agenda to keep pushing the barrow on Russia rumours.
lol. it’s not quite that easy.
Just some of the evidence it was Russians…
I do not see any “evidence” at the link you posted (which I had already studied)
a number of different organisations are reported to have said its the russians
That isn’t evidence , its hearsay.. different things !
exactly the same hearsay as the other link.. Just keep repeating it ! by tomorrow it will be the underlieing assumption in news stories. I still see no shred of actual EVIDENCE
and I agree with CV here if there was actual evidence we shure as heck would have seen it by now
YES THERE IS
The DNC Hack Could Be Misinformation From Russian Spies
“The metadata in the leaked documents are perhaps most revealing: one dumped document was modified using Russian language settings, by a user named “Феликс Эдмундович,” a code name referring to the founder of the Soviet Secret Police, …. The original intruders made other errors: one leaked document included hyperlink error messages in Cyrillic, the result of editing the file on a computer with Russian language settings. After this mistake became public, the intruders removed the Cyrillic information from the metadata in the next dump ”
Im not suggesting it wasnt information from the DNC but they have carefully altered some information that was dumped into public domain
The bullshit, is that links like that have content which pretends to know what’s going on
Vice media is a fantasy being delivered to simple peope by Disney studios!
have you ever written any code in your life: I could fill books with mine
Then how come the DNC apologised to Bernie Sanders supporters for the emails, and Wasserman Schultz took responsibility by resigning as Chair of the DNC?
I read a tweet which said it best (paraphrasing):
– Putin’s not trying to manipulate the election process by leaking emails. The DNC committee is by writing them.
I said they have real emails but have manipulated some data.
You can imagine the GOP National committee stuff about them trying to stop Trump.
Wakeup , these are highly political people.
OK at least now we can agree that the Democratic Party hierarchy was set against Sanders from the beginning like he always claimed, and they always denied.
So the DNC organised Clinton to get 3.5 million more votes in the primaries ( which are run by the state governments.)
Sanders did much better in the caucuses which ARE organised by the local democratic parties.
Sanders raised an incredible amount of money, not far behind Clinton. For a non democrat he did remarkably well.
“The Washington Post went so far as to claim that one of the most damning emails in the WikiLeaks dump was Wasserman Schultz complaining that Sanders spoke “like someone who has never been a member of the Democratic party and has no understanding of what we do.”
Crap DofE once again “people have suggested that russians may heve inserted misinformation” is not evidence or actually anything !!!!
HEARSAY nothing more
dont post bullshit as some sort of citation
metadata mumble mumble metadata oh must be true then…
No I cited a fairly good source. Unless you have expertise in cyber-security to find fault, I suggest you stick with your coffee grounds
Yes, Russian cyberwarfare operators are incompetent enough to leave fingerprints all over the metadata of the files they’ve touched.
Very easy to believe.
Joe Scarborough NBC reporter tweets 26 mins ago that booing continues unabated at the DNC Convention.
I’d be booing too. Sanders got royally shafted by the whole rotten corrupt Democratic Party machine, and now we are realising the extent of the Clintons’ cancerous influence in U.S. politics.
I see the libertarian candidate is doing ok at 13% in the polls Richard. If he can get another 2 points and hold it for the next month, the debates will get real interesting.
Have to say been really impressed with some great anti-trump stuff coming from the libertarians in the USA at the moment. It ends up in my email, funny and right on point. I hope they crack the 15%.
So do I. Would love to see this Nov being a breakthrough for the Libertarians.
btw how do they get along with Ron Paul?
Ames on Johnson.
Since Gary Johnson and libertarianism is the only real Third Party choice our gangrenous democracy allows us, it’s time we took a serious look at him — and it’s not pretty, folks. Because if you poke beneath the facade, what you find is a sponge absorbing just about every bad right-wing idea, and a campaign mixed up with some of the most loathsome GOP political operators of the last few decades.
Gary Johnson, in other words, is proof that our democracy is finished, a fistula of bad politics swelling up under Lady Liberty’s armpit.
Johnson is the nominee from a party whose values are no longer represented by the Republicans. I’d like to see how Trump and Clinton would react to his small govt messages in a three way debate.
I think Ron Paul is still respected among U.S. Libertarians but comes across as a bit eccentric. Johnson comes across as more of a regular guy
Yes Adam, Johnson would be a breath of fresh air in the debates. He has polled far higher than any Libertarian Party candidate before him. Trump certainly has little in common with anything libertarian.
Myself and other anarchists pointing out to libertarians that they have been done over the Republican party has finally got through.
Now we just need to work on the social democrats, and make them see the light vis-a-vis the Greens.
That would be a way better debate, libertarian verse Greens. It would be a nice clear divide, but one of with freedom at it base, not just another variation on authoritarianism.
Funny how both left and right authoritarians start looking the same when you scratch off the veneer.
The rule of the police state and the rule of the corporate state are more similar than they are different.
@ Richard McGrath
Richard, the DNC screwing of Sanders was wrong, but it was 100% “American.”
You may recall George W. Bush used electoral and judicial fraud (the US Supreme Court) to steal Florida from Al Gore, who was the true winner of the 2000 election.
In 1960, John F. Kennedy defrauded Richard Nixon out of the presidency with the help of the democrat mayor of Chicago, whose motto was “vote early and vote often.”
Electoral fraud has always been the cornerstone of US elections. Their system was designed to make it easy.
P.S. Obama could have easily been defrauded out of victory in 2004 except his lead in all the polls was so large the Republicans and racists didn’t dare.
The DNC has surrounded the convention centre with an 8 foot high steel wire mesh wall to keep thousands of pro-Bernie and other left wing protestors out.
Party of the ordinary People huh?
The DNC is dancing with the devil.
You would have thought that having watched the GOP do the same thing and lose to Trump and his millions of supporters, that they just might have been smart enough to choose a candidate who the voters actually like.
The Lone Haranger
I agree but politics is about money and power. Hillary had them at the outset. Sanders didn’t.
Thats the secret service, did the same at Cleveland
“the Convention is designated as a National Special Security Event (NSSE), making Cleveland eligible for the $50 million federal grant it received in December to offset the city’s cost for providing security. The Secret Service will lead the effort in partnership with the Cleveland Division of Police to help ensure the safety and security of those participating in or otherwise attending the Convention as well as the local community.”
Did the same in Philly for the popes visit
Check your facts, speculation doesnt count.
Reports that DNC staffers are patrolling the aisles of the convention centre taking Bernie signs off people, and threatening Bernie supporters with loss of their Convention entry credentials.
Bernie supporters are also defacing official “Love Trumps Hate” DNC signs to read Love Bernie or Trump wins.
At least we can confident the people holding those Bernie signs were actually Bernie supporters.
The DNC should destroy all the “Love Trumps Hate” signs because they violate all the rules of campaign public relations. NEVER, EVER advertise your opponent by name. To make matters worse, the signs don’t say “Hillary” or “Clinton.” The moron who approved those signs should be fired.
Black protestors waving a KKKillary KKKlinton Super Predator 2016 sign.
Seems like some people have not forgotten Clinton’s attitude to Blacks in the 90s.
“Seems like some people have not forgotten Clinton’s attitude to Blacks in the 90s.”
Yeah, in stark contrast to the Clinton-endorsing Congressional Black Caucus. This little elite has a whole lot to answer for. Zero change for Black Americans with the Goldwater Girl.
Which is what makes TRP’s cynical deployment of the PC/Identity Politics weaponry so amusing: (“Shame that some of Bernie’s supporters don’t seem to be interested in hearing from the women on the stage, nor the black and Hispanic delegates who have struggled to get their stories across.”)
The affluent, powerful, Clinton-supporting Black, Hispanic and Women Political Elites up on stage are looking just a little bit shell-shocked. As well they might, getting a bit of blowback from activists for betraying their core constituencies.
And one more point – Bernie Sanders is finding that ‘his supporters’ are not actually his to control. His txts, emails to his supporters to stop the booing and support Clinton are having only mild effects.
This ‘lack of positive control’ is going to scare the establishment beyond measure.
CV, in politics you NEVER have “positive control” over your supporters.
Isn’t that why the Labour Caucus has been in such strife with people like you and me? The caucus thinks we should obediently follow them and we tell the caucus to follow us.
Don’t be a wanker, mate. Watch the speeches.
The “feeling the Bern” updates on the front page were particularly galling. Incredible if implemented by the Voice himself.
Oh, do fuck off. I put the time and effort into writing the post and kept it updated during the afternoon. Your next comment had better be “Thanks for posting, TRP,” or I’ll assist you in achieving the instruction in the first sentence.
What a shame Bernie capitulated to Clinton and the DMC, as we all know at heart, having Clinton in the White House just extends the misery of working people, the poor and disenfranchised, nothing of substance will change for this demographic with her in power.
Strangely enough we are witnessing just the same sort of frantic fear of a real Left wing politician and movement in the UK from it’s own party, and (so called) liberal media, The Guardian being one of the most biased.
As this study makes abunatly clear
The same day The Guardian came out with this almost unbelievable response!
Still I think this is all great to finally see, now no one in their right mind could fail to see that the western Left and left (MSM) media has been totally infiltrated by neo liberals, who as it turns out, are not advocates for the working class, poor and disenfranchised if it at all looks like that position might effect their house values, share portfolios or own way of life.
Sadly NZ Labour must think having this lack of principles and moral compass in a politician is a good thing to, as they seem quite taken with Nash, even though he himself has made it clear, he regards winning more important than holding to his stated values and principles…
I couldn’ t agree more Adrian but you will get pilloried for pointing out NZ Labours faults on this site.
NZ Labour has sold out to neoliberalism just the the US Democrats and UK Labour.
Blair, Douglas and Clinton did more damage to people’s democracy than Thatcher, Bolger and Reagan.
They took away any choice.
One day the truth will come out about how neoliberal institutions instigated coup détats in these parties.
These criminals be be shown to be the traitors they are.
Thanks Paul, “They took away any choice” is a really good way to frame this sad situation we have ended up in.
But like I mentioned, at least now we are getting to see what side of the fence politicians of the Left really stand on, well in the UK and US anyway.
Clinton could have made Sanders vice president. That would have guaranteed the election for her, alot more than pro trade, pro war Kaine. But why share or compromise ideology when you feel you can get everything your own way, even if you lose to someone dangerous like Trump for being so greedy for your own increasingly very unpopular views on neoliberalism?
Like Brexit, voters are feeling angry for not being listened too. So Clinton has made a very big error in her strategy. Better to share with someone very popular like Sanders than gamble on a very unpopular ideology of neoliberal free trade.
Are most people richer in the last 39 years (nope) are most people safer (nope) are most people freer, (nope), is the economy doing betterl (nope), is society fairer, (nope)?
Infact one article estimates the US is now 10 trillion dollars richer in the last 40 years, but somehow 50% of peoples incomes are only up a bit over $1000, and the cost of living is certainly a lot higher than 40 years ago! So where is the money going?
Check the score cards,
@ Joe, fascinating.
Why the hell would the democrats do that? are they so arrogant they want to lose the election????
Similar stuff in UK too, with Corbyn. The Blairites and MSM keep telling us he is not leadership material but the voters seem to differ!
If some people can’t work it out, neoliberalism is dying so clinging to that branch especially the “Labour type’ parties, is not really going to work.
They score members of congress on how conservative they are – on their voting record and respective positions taken over key issues Kaine is rated as way more liberal the Sanders.
Sanders is far more economically left of Kaine, even if Kaine is mildly more socially liberal than Sanders.
Too many stupid advisors and in group thinking, not enough people with intuition and common sense.
Labour suffers from this also.
Back to Kaine. Being a missionary is not really considered the respectable thing it used to be.
Being Catholic is not as respectable as it used to be.
Being Pro Free trade is not as respectable as it used to be.
Speaking Spanish could actually alienate white voters who fear job losses, to Trump.
Being a lawyer is not considered as respectable as it used to be.
Saw him speak about ISIS and he seems like a Hawk who does not understand that ISIS did not exist before USA bombed Iraq. If he doesn’t understand that, then he’s doomed to repeat mistakes.
But most of all, he looks like Sanders but does not have the drive for change that Sanders wants. Kaine might be liberal but change is what voters want and need. Change is what Trump offers. Change does not seem to be on the agenda with the democrats in the way I think voters want, on the issues it wants.
“Clinton could have made Sanders vice president.”
He would have been a fool to have accepted. VP is the most powerless job in the US government. Some VP’s have had a lot of influence and power (Dick Chaney), but most are completely sidelined. Bernie would be sidelined and both he and Hillary know it.
Got home in time to hear Elizabeth Warren. Fantastic speech and a fantastic woman.
And what a breath of fresh air after the awful scenes at Cleveland to see a venue full of genuine, normal American people, young and old, black and white and every shade in between. We can be forgiven after last week for thinking America had gone to hell in a hand basket. It hasn’t.
Normal American People..all suckered in by cynical duplicitous, controlled opposition politics
Warren knows best of all how Obama let the investment bankers run his economic policy. How Obama appointed a slew of ex-Goldman Sachs JP Morgan Citibank types to his council of economic advisors, ultimately sidelining Warren.
Sad to see that she is now supporting the bankster bought and paid for Hillary Clinton.
I wonder what they promised Warren in order for her to do that.
Your extreme cynicism is destroying you CV. You used to be so much better than that.
Not sure why you would still have faith in the DNC after its been revealed that they conspired with the Clinton campaign team to undermine the Sanders campaign from the inside.
It would be like Parliamentary Services staffers deciding which MP they wanted re-elected and which one they did not, and then working to undermine one while supporting the other.
Given this, is some cynicism not warranted? Many delegates inside the convention centre, and many protestors kept outside the convention centre by 8 foot high steel and wire fences, seem to be just as cynical about what has gone down.
No its not like parliamentary service staffer- these people were working for the political party, not the government.
But we know our parliamentary staff do do work for their Mp when they are supposed to be neutral come election time
Or like NZ Council deciding that they would back one particular candidate in a Labour leadership campaign, while acting as if they were neutral towards all candidates.
Sanders is just a ‘drive by democrat’- always ran as independent.
They have a party for that but he decided at 78 to become an instant democrat
His Senate website and press materials continue to label him as an “independent” while his campaign website lists him as a “Democratic candidate.” In his home state of Vermont, there is no party registration.
Between 1972 and 1976, Sanders was the nominee of the anti-capitalist, anti-war Liberty Union Party of Vermont in two Senate and two gubernatorial elections in Vermont. He lost all four races and resigned from the party in 1977, calling it “sad and tragic,” according to Greg Guma, author of The People’s Republic: Vermont and the Sanders Revolution.
In 1981, Sanders made an independent bid for mayor of Burlington as a self-described socialist.
“I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat,” he said in a 1985 New England Monthly profile, according to Politico.
CV @184.108.40.206, I’ve been around politics (and not just in the L.P.) for four plus decades and there’s not a lot I haven’t experienced about what goes on. Sure, there’s conspiracies – and some leave a hell of a lot to be desired – but the important thing is that it works both ways and over time the frequencies on each side of a given ledger will even themselves out.
Back in the ‘good old days’ these attempts to gerrymander electoral situations used to be carried out by telephone and, provided no-one was tapping in to those conversations (and it used to happen more often than people ever knew and not necessarily by security agencies), then no-one was any the wiser because nine times out of ten the ‘conspiracies’ never got off the ground. In other words talk is cheap. That’s why I don’t get too overly bothered by the modern version (emails) because the old adage “the other side do it too” in these types of cases is often true.
No, it shouldn’t have happened, but believe me I could tell quite a few stories about the NZ political scene in days gone by and it was no better!
That’s a bit harsh Anne.I think CV is right on the ball in all his comments
Your prerogative Garibaldi. I agree with CV sometimes but not at others. I will continue to do so whether you or anyone else likes it or not. I gather you are a relative newcomer to this site?
Anne…Yes but I have been following it for a long time.
He’s right though.
She has probably been offered the Treasury Secretary.
And would do more good to herself and to the country at Treasury than at VP.
Oh god yes, that would be awesome, if she was made Treasury Secretary.
Anyone noticed that trump has a special place of hate for Elizabeth Warren?
Mind you she just does such a good job of kicking him to the curve every time he says anything about her.
No way. The Governor of Massachusetts is a republican who would appoint her replacement.
CV is spot on, Trump employs far more minority’s than Clinton, if you include the George Soto’s funded paved protestors then he’s already creating Jobs, he is far more Presidential, loves his country & supports the Vets ,he is far more entertaining, he is no warhawk so sit back & grab the popcorn because President Trump will rebuild America & will make the whole world safer, oh and how my much did the Clinton foundation give to the people of Haiti (not Including mining companys or politans?) Anyone? ( hint look for ‘Clinton Cash’ now showing free on YouTube
[Verging on spam, but I let it through for the lolz. TRP]
Yep that was the Trump that won the GOP primary with 14 million voters backing him
Sanders the socialist, in a parallel race got 13.2 mill, and came second.
Whos the one with the populist message. You could be thinking for all the rah rah that Trump had 20 mill voters , not just a few hundred thou more than that socialist
1) Trump smashed the record for the most votes gained in a Republican Primary. Last highest was GW Bush in 2000 and Trump smashed through that with around 3M more votes in 2016 than Bush got in 2000.
2) In contrast, Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination this year on fewer primary votes than she lost to Obama with in 2008.
Sanders has the far more populist message, and is the candidate that US voters would far prefer over Trump.
Sanders has been systematically locked out by the Clinton machine of course.
So now it’s left to Trump to be the populist.
1) Trump smashed the record for the most votes gained in a Republican Primary. Last highest was GW Bush in 2000 and Trump smashed through that with around 3M more votes in 2016 than Bush got in 2000.
Trump also smashed the record of having the most votes cast against him of any republican nominee ever. Party unity, anyone?
2) In contrast, Hillary Clinton won the Democratic nomination this year on fewer primary votes than she lost to Obama with in 2008.
Voter turnout in the 2008 Democratic primaries was at its highest (as a percentage of eligible voters) since 1972, because it was the first time voters had the chance to nominate someone other than a white man for nominee.
You sound like someone arguing climate change isn’t real because temperatures aren’t as high as 1998.
Clinton in 2008 got slightly more primary votes than Obama- and lost. You think Sanders has been hard done by.
90% of ‘consistent’ Sanders supporters favor Clinton over Trump
Hillary Clinton led Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination in every Pew Research Center survey conducted throughout the party’s primaries. But many Democratic voters vacillated in their candidate support throughout this period.
Today, however, overwhelming shares of all Democratic and Democratic-leaning registered voters – including 90% who consistently supported Sanders for the nomination – back Clinton in the general election against Donald Trump.
Look forward to seeing all this additional support for Clinton being reflected in the coming polls post-DNC Convention.
Its there already
538 gives Clinton at 47.4 and Trump at 45.5.
OK they put the odds as being well against Trump. Cool.
How did 538 rate Trump’s chances of being the Republican candidate 12 months ago?
And by the way did you check out what 538 said about who would win an election today?
Electoral Vote has it (at this moment) with Clinton on 312-197 (29 tied – which is Florida).
Barely Dem – 77. Barely GOP – 23.
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan (3 of the 4 “Rust Belt” states) & Virginia all in play.
This is the only thing that matters now – who is ahead in which state and the ground game in those ones.
Interesting that 538 has Trump as being more likely to win today while electoral vote makes it look like it would be a fairly clean win to Clinton.
I’ve used Electoral Vote since the 2004 Election. It is pretty accurate. 538 I’ve only started viewing recently.
I notice 538 has three different views on the vote:
*Polls-plus forecast – What polls, the economy and historical data tell us about Nov. 8 (Clinton 59.5%; Trump 40.5%)
*Polls-only forecast – What polls alone tell us about Nov. 8 (Clinton 53.9%; Trump 46.1%)
*Now-cast – Who would win an election today (Clinton 46.2%; Trump 53.8%)
So I think they are probably looking at it through a number of lenses.
This is also why Clinton chose Kaine as her VP candidate – because she wants to hold Virginia. Vermont isn’t exactly relevant in the general election.
Thats based on a computer !
The numbers based on the polls are the ones I referred to.
You mean you dont know the difference between a ‘now cast’ and his real forecasts.
Debunked by a professor of Statistics
“From Salon: Shock poll: Nate Silver’s election forecast now has Trump winning
That’s not either of his two forecasts, that’s the “now-cast”:
Ok to do a face palm CV
Cherry pick Nate’s work as it suits you. But his prediction is clear – if an election was held today, Trump is more likely to win.
So you know more than a Stats professor ?
His forecast- look the word up, it means predict events- is Clinton wins
A month or two back I was saying Sanders will endorse Clinton, while you still though she would be in court.
You’re right I hadn’t thought the US Department of Justice and FBI were that politically corrupt and need to lower my expectations.
if an election was held today, Trump is more likely to win
It’s July, not November…. so who cares?
If US elections were held in the month before the two major party conventions, rather than a few months after, then you and I would be arguing over what effect the legacy of a Kerry presidency was having on the 2016 election, and whether president Dukakis achieved more than Bush I did in his second term.
Except the election isn’t being held today, so those numbers don’t mean a whole lot.
This. Yours is the simplest and best retort.
Although it also shows is that Trump has gone from being a 5 or 10 point dog at the start of the year behind Clinton to being neck and neck now.
The Trump campaign has the momentum now and we will see if Clinton gets it back this week
The Polls Plus model builds in compensation for the convention bounce. So the convention bounce that Trump has received hasn’t shifted the Polls Plus prediction.
If Clinton gets the average 2-4 point convention bounce, then that also won’t affect the Polls Plus prediction.
Everything else is noise.
Vote: None of the above
They’re all compromised ‘crooks’, which is why it’s bizarre that commentators debate who is the more atrocious candidate. Some even show support or endorsement for one or other
You’re being mugged
War criminal/drug lord/???
War criminal/impeached philanderer/???
War criminal/ nobel peace prize token black/white man/???
War criminal/corrupted businessman/currupted token woman/???
It is a lose, lose, lose situation regardless the outcome!
Why argue with eachother over it
the disdain that this author continuously shows for left wing beliefs makes me wonder what in hell TRP is doing writing for a progressive blog.isn’t there a neoliberal blog you should be working with, seriously though….
The Democratic party is over and so is Hillary, they lied cheated and stole to win her the nom and don’t even have the capacity to see that by pissing on Sanders supporters and their beliefs they show that they are completely out of touch with the working class and the electorate as a whole they will not unify over hillary and are doomed to fail, attacking the sanders supporters only cements that, status quo politics is over mate.
Hillary and DNC may have cheated Bernie but they won’t do the same to trump, hillary will do about as well as fellow robot rubio against trump oh the debates will be magical!
Can’t wait to see what else Russia
Leaks to destroy what’s left of Clinton’s likability and wow shes already losing by ten points ahahahaha…. So much for better choice!! Can’t even win without cheating!
[If you think I’m a neo-liberal, you’re clearly still riding with your political training wheels on. And don’t presume to tell authors what they should and shouldn’t write. Read the rules if you want to find out how that’ll end. TRP]
“Between 1972 and 1976, Sanders was the nominee of the anti-capitalist, anti-war Liberty Union Party of Vermont in two Senate and two gubernatorial elections in Vermont. He lost all four races and resigned from the party in 1977, calling it “sad and tragic,”
The Democratic party has been around since 1828, if you dont think they arent Establishment then you are a bit deluded. Yes they are full of liars, cheats and Crooks but you need to knock the stars out of your eyes about politics.
Sad and Tragic was Bernies comment about the far left of US politics
Cynicaljester, you need to stop kidding yourself. If you think Trump is somehow a ‘man of the people’, your judgement is seriously skewed.
And learn what “neo-liberal” means before you start throwing that label around.
The story about the famous Philly Boo
“Philadelphia isn’t the only town that boos its home team ”
It seems that Booing in Philadelphia was a “Thing” , long before Shultz, Sanders , and even Clinton to come get their share.
A Philly thing?
How does that longstanding Philly tradition explain the California and Florida Democratic delegations booing Clinton?
Whos booed Clinton ? She hasnt arrived yet.
The you tube thing is on the ‘floor of convention’
Clinton doesnt speak till Friday.
I love your Thorndon Bubble armour, it really is imperviously superb.
I think Im a reasonably good judge of events, your record is hopeless. I see you have ditched Sanders and are now ‘hoping’ the 3rd party guy will make the debates. Its like you have an incurable illness and have ‘found a cure’ in Mexico,. Face. Reality.
Like I said, highly trained Thorndon Bubble imperviousness. Impressive. And flawed.
The best thing about Thorndon Bubble armour is that it protects New Zealand from having you ever set foot in a place where policy is developed and implemented.
Bernie’s speech was great. He gets to the point quickly and elaborates on it clearly.
Yep, he hit all the right marks, tc. Talked about policy as well as the need to keep the right out of the White House. So it’s not just about retaining power, it’s about achieving for the majority of Americans after Clinton wins. Sanders’ supporters were given a straight message; Trump is the candidate of the 1 percenters.
Then why are all the big investment banks sending executive management to support Clinton and the DNC in Philadelphia? And why has the DNC lifted a whole lot of donation restrictions off the banking lobby?
I’ve only got your word that they are, bud. But even if they were, so what? This is America and you don’t get to be President without big money behind you. You know there hasn’t been a non millionaire president for about a century, right? Trump has been a part of the establishment since birth, there’s simply no need for the banks to help him out. They already own him.
But, as usual, you’re missing the point. In your rush to hate on the left, you leave behind the people of America. They need a democrat win, if only so that things don’t get worse. For example, Trump isn’t promising a $15 minimum wage, he wants the minimum wage removed altogether. He isn’t proposing health reform and education for the poorest, he wants them dumped south of a great big wall.
Mate, you’ve lost direction in recent years. You used to want to help the majority, now you’re boostering for a billionaire bigot. As a poet once wrote “The shame is on the other side”. And you’re definitely on the other side now, CV. Hope it’s not a terminal move, but the signs aren’t good.
Hey TRP, you make a very poor confessor priest. Clinton is a neocon and bankster ally who took million dollar money while she was Sec State.
While compromising US national secrets out of a server in her basement.
Well, she likes the TPP at least.
Meh. She’s still a way better option than the billionaire Trump. And you know it.
I actually doubt that.
Good to see your true colours though.
Do you really believe a Trump administration would do anything, in terms of economic policy, materially different from a Clinton administration?
Meanwhile, we’ve got a pretty clear steer from Trump that, socially, he would set America back more than half a century in terms of race relations and individual freedoms.
But it’s good to see your racist colours shining through.
And you, MATE, have cast off the last vestiges of shame about being anything other than an apologist for the Establishment. swordfish has pointed out above how your barely concealed disdain for the “far” Left bleeds through into your writing. Let me call you out on it, too. thechangeling calls Bernie’s speech great, you respond:
Half-hearted acknowledgment to appropriate thechangeling’s sentiment, followed by reframing of it to suit your damning with faint praise of Bernie and his supporters.. The semiotics of your language make you the perfect propagandist for the modern “centre-left”. The gauleiter of url could learn a thing or two from you.
And yet I’m solidly of the left and live my life according to socialist principles, while working every day for the betterment of the lives of others. Funny old world, eh?
You’re a solid establishment loyalist who always cries croc tears for the actual left wing candidate when they end up smashed by the establishment machine that you are so loyal to.
You may have been left wing once, but then you found yourself a nice comfortable middle class niche and that was that.
The irony of life eh.
at least his principles are still aligned – where are yours at – trump the climate change denier, racist, misogynist, 1%er, liar-idiot and cv up a tree…
Shall I explain it again?
I believe Trump will be the far better POTUS for NZ than CLinton will be. All those other sneering words that you used are irrelevant.
They aren’t sneering just the facts, which as you say, you don’t care about.
Of course, it’s typical left wing sneering. Like saying that Trump supporters are uneducated misogynist racist rednecks who supports an ignorant misogynist racist red neck candidate.
BTW remember Clinton and her super predator comment.
Trump will be the far better POTUS for NZ than Clinton will be.
I doubt Trump could find New Zealand on a map… so I suppose our country will look like an incredibly attractive place to live and invest, after Trump turns the rest of the world into a smoking, radioactive, crater.
Really? Yet you want Clinton to become president?
Here’s what John Pilger thinks:
“Trump is the candidate of the 1 percenters.”
– So is Clinton.
I want anybody but a Clinton or Bush, even if that means Trump.
Meh. They still have Whaleoil don’t they? Why don’t you pop over there and play with kids your own age.
you really hate it when you are shut down aren’t you? keep your head in the sand. you’re fooling no one but yourself.
Brilliant reply te reo putake. If only I had half the brain and life experience you do.
Er, yes, quite right. Still, I remain confident that ‘hey babe, I’m a Trump voter’ is never going to work in a dating scenario and many, many shame faced people are going to deny voting Trump in years to come.
mikes, the US system is distorted and it’s possible to argue that it’s become an oligarchy. So much money is needed to run a campaign that it’s frankly undemocratic. I don’t think anyone on this site is going to argue otherwise. Having said that, that doesn’t mean that Mr Big Mouth is somehow “cleaner”: he’s a proven fraudster (“Trump University” anyone?), a bully, a racist and xenophobe, incredibly sexist, wants to rip away any basic support for public education, minimum wages, labour rights, environmental protection or public health provision. He’s toxic, and so are many of his supporters. He’s got no political experience. That doesn’t make him “clean”, it’s part of what makes him frightening. He’s a puffed-up megalomaniac.
You don’t like Hillary Clinton? Tough. She’s her party’s chosen candidate. She’s actually got a proven track record with her party (unlike Saunders or Trump) and (BTW) she represents half of the population who’ve never seen one of their own kind in the top job. (Yes, I’m talking about the female half.)
I can understand people being disappointed that their preferred candidate didn’t win, but Saunders’ supporters have to be mature enough to do what Clinton’s supporters did when she ran against Obama; suck it up for the greater good. (And let’s remember, BTW, that Obama didn’t gift the vice-presidency to Clinton. She won more votes than him and yet the way the US system works means that she didn’t win the nomination and went back to work inside her party. I hope that’s what Saunders will do, now that he’s actually joined the party he was campaigning to lead.)
Saunders made a good run for it and he helped to swing the boundaries of the political discussion in the US. That’s what he started off by saying he wanted to do. Now it’s time for the Democrats to get out there and stop the extreme right wing from further trashing their country.
Why on earth would you include the 40% to 45% of women voters who disapprove of Clinton representing them?
Hey, it’s been a slow climb out of servitude for women, and we’re still climbing. I want to live in a world where girls and boys both believe that they get to choose their futures and that women are just as capable of leadership as men. Do you?
So why did you lump in all American women as being represented by a warmongering denizen of the patriarchy neocon like Hillary Clinton, when 40% to 45% of American women actually disapprove of her as a leader?
The intentional posting of unredacted emails looks pretty damn sinister.
If you visit the WikiLeaks DNC emails website, you can browse the emails using a simple boolean search. Typing a word like “contribution” will actually turn up hundreds of results. The emails include unencrypted, plain-text listings of donor emails addresses, home addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, passport numbers, and credit card information. WikiLeaks proudly announced the data dump in a single tweet.
Usual effort to make wikileaks the subject of the DNC email leaks.
While wikileaks needs to stay vigilent about redacting irrelevant personal information, the real question is obvious:
Why was the DNC holding the personal details of their donors including credit card numbers and social security numbers in plain text emails on insecure systems.
Gizmodo didn’t even bother to ask the question.
“While wikileaks needs to stay vigilent about redacting irrelevant personal information, the real question is obvious:
“Why was the DNC holding the personal details of their donors including credit card numbers and social security numbers in plain text emails on insecure systems””
Sorry CV, I find myself agreeing with you more and more recently, but what if this was re-written:
While WhaleOil needs to stay vigilant about redacting irrelevant personal information, the real question is obvious:
“Why was the NZ Labour Party holding the personal details of their donors including credit card numbers and membership details on insecure systems”
Can you now see why I was pointing out Labour’s culpability in the donation ‘hack’ in 2011? Is it any different if the information simply ends up on a different website?
Labour’s IT security appeared to be subpar, yes. Whaleoil remains culpable for the criminality of his own actions, however.
As does Wikileaks
Please explain what you see as the criminality of Wikileaks actions. I see the work of wikileaks as being critical in breaking the false narratives perpetrated by powerful and highly monied interests.
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 1986
(2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains—
(A) information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or of a card issuer as defined in section 1602 (n)  of title 15, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer, as such terms are defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);
(B) information from any department or agency of the United States; or
(C) information from any protected computer
I think US law explains it clear enough, although ‘any protected computer’ has come to cover any computer.
Unless you are saying Wikileaks didn’t hack the information, they simply displayed it, in which case please explain what you see as the criminality of Whaleoils actions.
Is there a reason you think that US law applies to Whaleoil?
Also wikileaks is a publishing and distribution organisation. Other people provide the information to them.
Yes, because similar law exists here: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM327382.html
It is illegal to access, but not to store or make the information available, the same as in the US.
“Also wikileaks is a publishing and distribution organisation. Other people provide the information to them”
Cameron Slater was found by the High Court to be a journalist, as Whaleoil is his only means of distribution (that I am aware of), that would make Whaleoil a publishing and distribution organisation also. I can’t confirm this, but I believe the Labour ‘hack’ was information passed on to him by a government staffer, which would constitute “Other people provide the information to them”, again, what is the difference?
It is good to see your deep dislike of Cameron Slater and love of Wikileaks isn’t clouding you judgement on this.
FYI – I am not a fan of Cameron Slater or Whaleoil, but I do see a massive irony around a number of commentators hatred of spying when done by Government departments, but love of Wikileaks (effectively an unregulated spying organisation).
How do you make the argument that the material released by Whaleoil served the public good?
For wikileaks, they showed us how corrupt the DNC is internally as an organisation when it comes to their leadership elections.
How do you make the argument “personal details of their donors including credit card numbers and social security numbers” served in the public good?
Let’s Be Honest: The DNC Asked To Be Hacked With Passwords This Dumb
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/25/lets-be-honest-the-dnc-asked-to-be-hacked-with-passwords-this-dumb/#ixzz4FVbIkXOS
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/25/lets-be-honest-the-dnc-asked-to-be-hacked-with-passwords-this-dumb/#ixzz4FVavLFSR
I looked up the Wikileaks site where DNC emails are searchable. Cant find any emails with the ‘passwords’ your link decribes
“Obamain08” returns nil searches so does “Obama-Biden-2012”
So your link -Manriquez apologizes for a delay in sending something out over the press email, explaining that, “I cannot login to [email protected] with either of the passwords I have on file for the account (Obama-Biden-2012 and obamain08).”
has found an email that doesnt exist, perhaps they dont go back to pre 08 ( when email security would be poor anyway)
More likley you have been had by an unreliable source – quelle surprise
Hi dukeofurl, I’d appreciate an apology from you.
At least, an apology for your very funny inability to complete a routine search field properly.
Bernie Sanders’ former national press secretary –
Chomsky, corporate neocon sellout.
I love how dishonest you are joe90.
Quoting a Chomsky interview from January, when we now know that the DNC cheated lied, and stacked the deck.
How did the DNC get nearly 3 million more voters to vote for Hilary than Bernie.
Yes we know the superdelegates favoured Clinton , but they favoured Obama last time when Clinton got more votes than him.
My comment is about the dishonest nature of the links and the nature of tweets.
Where by not even giving someone the possibility to change their mind with new information.
As for the 3 million extra votes. Tell that to the millions of democratic party members who feel they have been shafted by the DNC. I’m sure it makes them happy to be condescended to over and over by you lot. Ignored, and then the promotion of the person who led the whole fix. Good luck with that approach with the coming election.
I find you lot have normalised condescension, with a heavy dose of dishonesty, which quite frankly, is bloody depressing.
You know how National has always accused modern Labour of being “arrogant.” This is exactly what the blue team meant.
“A small but idiotic minority of delegates are booing every time Hillary Clinton’s name is mentioned. That includes shouting over the speakers so far in the session. Shame that some of Bernie’s supporters don’t seem to be interested in hearing from the women on the stage, nor the black and Hispanic delegates who have struggled to get their stories across.”
The SJW mind tricks don’t work on more and more of us. Why should they be interested in any stories being told in support of the Clinton machine?
It looks like 200-300 Bernie state delegates have just walked out of the Convention.
Good. This train wreck is exactly what the Clintons and the DWS aligned milleu of the DNC deserve. They feasted on every awkward, divisive second at the GOP convention, and if things continue like this, they’re gonna get an excruciatingly divisive minute in return for every second they celebrated. Not often people like this experience first hand blowback for their actions – normally it’s some other sucker who pays for it (ask Ambassador Stevens or his guards – oh wait).
Today, the big charlie-foxtrot all theirs to own.
I Like Bernie’s politics, but the angry ranting style is like someone yelling into a storm, mmm, guess that’s accurate really, the tsunami of neoliberal destruction and perverse power, with only words to oppose it. (some good lungs on that old fella). He deserves a peaceful meadow all ready. It is going to take a miracle for him to become president, and a distinguished one he would make too. ( miracles do happen, just enough to keep hope alive). roll on November.