Latest primaries – Rubio gone

Written By: - Date published: 1:44 pm, March 16th, 2016 - 95 comments
Categories: us politics - Tags: ,

Results are coming in from Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio in the US primaries.

Early days in some states but at the moment it looks like a clean sweep for Clinton, and possibly for Trump (Kasich is ahead in his home state Ohio, but only 4% reporting at time of writing). Update: Ohio has been called for Kasich. Rubio lost his home Florida.

See The Guardian: Rubio ends campaign as Trump and Clinton win Florida – primary day live

95 comments on “Latest primaries – Rubio gone ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. aerobubble 1
    16 March 2016 at 1:54 pm

    See what happens when Trump, a democrat, runs for the Republician nomination for President. lol

    • aerobubble 1.1
      16 March 2016 at 1:57 pm

      Come on already. Trump is media saturated golden child, the liberal drinking coolaid media democrat lovers are all behind him.

    • Mike C 1.2
      16 March 2016 at 2:28 pm

      @AeroBubble

      Yes … Trump is a “Money-Making Capitalist Racist Sexist Pig who Loves Guns and War”.

      He has one foot in the Democratic Party and the other in the Republican Party.

      Trump has got a truckload of street cunning coming out of his mouth and his arse. LOL.

      • Colonial Viper 1.2.1
        16 March 2016 at 7:02 pm

        Trump doesn’t love war, drones and regime change anywhere like what Clinton does.

        • swordfish 1.2.1.1
          16 March 2016 at 9:54 pm

          Yep, she’s dangerous. Very much immersed in the highly sanitised abstractions of the Washington Consensus, she was the leading proponent in the Obama Administration of the hawkish doctrine of “liberal interventionism” and “humanitarian war” promoted by Susan Rice and, in particular, the influential Samantha Power. These three pushed hard for the Libyan debacle and then extended the same rationale to Syria.

          When it comes to opportunities to demonstrate toughness, nothing quite sets Clinton’s pulse racing like a good “humanitarian intervention”. US Presidential candidates, of course, have long felt the need to at least pay a certain amount of homage to the “exceptionalist” creed, but Clinton’s attachment to the faith borders on the obsessive. The idea of “America’s unique responsibility for global leadership” has always , of course, simply been a euphemism for military intervention, where the US supposedly has a unique role in leading the world towards a democratic future of an implicitly capitalist and neo-liberal nature. Held with as much religious fervour and as little regard for contrary evidence as the kind of dogmatic faiths that these Liberal Democratic Hawks usually like to deride.

          Essentially, the pursuit of what she calls in her memoir “violent extremism” provides an open-ended excuse for on-going military intervention, no matter how hare-brained.

          Despite all the soaring rhetoric, it’s little more than GW Bush/Cheney-style interventionist US foreign policy, the usual Imperial adventures, serving to legitimate all the familiar aims of furthering the interests of US big business. In contrast to the somewhat greater restraint of the pragmatic Realist tradition, not to mention the more Isolationist tradition.

          Exceptionalists like Clinton seem congenitally unable to conceive of a multi-polar world where some nations might just prefer to go their own way. They don’t acknowledge the legitimacy of other nations’ interests.

          And she certainly has all the chaos and blood of the now failed state of Libya on her hands – Libya now routinely referred to as “Hillary’s War”. Sec of Defense Gates, VP Biden and Nato commander Wesley Clark were all opposed / Clinton, Power and Rice all emphatically urging action. Cheney would have been proud.

          Like good Cold War warriors, US exceptionalists, of course, reject the very concept of spheres of influence. So Clinton, for example, characterises Nato’s eastward expansion as a bulwark against “Putin’s aggression” (she’s compared him to Hitler). Rather than the provocation (and betrayal of an earlier American President’s pledge to Gorbachev) that it clearly was.

          She also describes herself as “staunchly pro-Israel”, which as well as entailing strong support for Israel’s regular massacres also apparently means being anti-Iran. As Obama was signalling his intention to accept a diplomatic solution with Iran, Clinton continued to fuel fears about Iran vis-à-vis Israel, warning the Iranians that the US could “totally obliterate them”, and argued for “crippling sanctions” against them. It’s been argued that, to placate pro-Israel voters, Clinton would have liked the sanctions to be even tougher. The key aim, according to one of her aides, was to punish Iran, somewhat undercutting all the humane rhetoric underpinning liberal interventionist claims.

          She’s been an aggressive critic of Obama’s allegedly “timid” reluctance to arm “moderate” rebels in Syria, to the extent that she’s been attracting admiring glances from various leading Neo-Conservative ideologues (Victoria Nuland, married to leading Neo-Con and co-founder of the Project for the New American Century, Robert Kagan, moved from Cheney’s staff to Clinton’s after the latter became Sec of State). And like every good Neo-Con, Clinton’s given to soaring abstractions about the inevitable spread of democracy, with an emphasis that military force is necessary for “the global good”. Obama finally yielded to interventionist demands from Clinton/Rice/Power amid the hysteria over ISIS, leading to the remarkably incoherent / counter-productive Syrian policy the US pursues today.

          At the same time, Clinton also made Afghanistan a much harder, longer, more tortuous trial for all concerned, siding with the generals against Obama’s better instincts.

          As one astute reviewer of Clinton’s 600 page quintessential candidate’s memoir (Hard Choices) put it: “Recent history becomes a series of rescue missions, staged opportunities for heroism worthy of Hollywood, mobs of brown-skinned extras look up to see helicopters – we are saved ! The Americans have arrived ! Such are the dreams that hover unarticulated in our political unconscious, allowing our leaders to redefine war as humanitarian intervention.”

          • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1.1
            16 March 2016 at 10:29 pm

            Hi swordfish, could I edit your comment for clarity and put it up as a standalone post?

            • swordfish 1.2.1.1.1.1
              16 March 2016 at 11:24 pm

              Yep, no probs, CV. Cheers.

              I can see why you want to edit for clarity – reading it back, I noticed some irritating repetition (and some slightly pompous rhetoric here and there).

          • Chooky 1.2.1.1.2
            16 March 2016 at 10:32 pm

            +100…in other words Hillary Clinton is a BIG menace

      • Chooky 1.2.2
        16 March 2016 at 10:36 pm

        What we have been wondering is … is Trump actually a REPTILE?

        …and what is under his GINGER toupee?

  2. alwyn 2
    16 March 2016 at 2:01 pm

    Trump, for crying out loud.
    How could US Republicans be so stupid.
    The man is a nut.
    I was personally in favour of Kasich (not Kaisch by the way) but anyone beating Trump looks impossible.
    It makes a preference very easy doesn’t it? to paraphrase the old slogan of the 1968.
    “Dump the Trump”

    • r0b 2.1
      16 March 2016 at 2:03 pm

      Yeah thanks, fixed typo.

    • joe90 2.2
      16 March 2016 at 2:43 pm

      How could US Republicans be so stupid

      .

      Gosh, that’s a hard one, alwyn, but perhaps the rump of the old south and those Reagan Democrats finally twigged.
      /

      This was always coming. The contempt dripping from Williamson’s writing, and from that pathetic appeal from alleged conservative “leaders” never was far from the minds of the Republican elites. They so easily distracted the “Reagan Democrats” with shiny-object social issues while shoving most of the nation’s wealth upwards that they almost can be forgiven for thinking that the tactic would work forever. I mean, it worked for George W. Bush, for god’s sake.

      http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a43042/republican-elites-turn-on-trump-supporters/

      This is absurd if you think of economic policy in pragmatic terms. But it is perfectly sensible if you think of economic policy as a moral framework built around the protection of natural economic rights. “They failed themselves,” Williamson sneers about poor whites. The marketplace hasn’t failed the white working class; the white working class has failed capitalism.

      http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/conservatives-to-white-working-class-drop-dead.html

    • Richard McGrath 2.3
      16 March 2016 at 9:19 pm

      Interesting, of late the media have been determined not to mention the guy coming second in the GOP race, Ted Cruz. Perhaps they think by shutting him out of the MSM news the voters will forget about him…

  3. Andre 3
    16 March 2016 at 2:07 pm

    Ohio and Florida are likely the two biggest swing states in November. They’ve gone pretty solidly for Clinton.

    • joe90 3.1
      16 March 2016 at 2:12 pm

      AP Politics Verified account
      ‏@AP_Politics

      BREAKING: Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic primary in Ohio. @AP race call at 8:38 p.m. EST. #Election2016 #APracecall

      https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/709901687893454848


      AP Politics Verified account
      ‏@AP_Politics

      BREAKING: Gov. John Kasich wins the Republican primary in Ohio. @AP race call at 8:54 p.m. EST. #Election2016 #APracecall

      https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/709905729872855040

      edit: Florida – 84% returned, Clinton leads 138 to 52

      • Sacha 3.1.1
        16 March 2016 at 3:40 pm

        Watch Repug party elites swing behind Kasich now.

        • alwyn 3.1.1.1
          16 March 2016 at 5:28 pm

          One can only hope so.
          At least Kasich is capable of being President. as is Clinton.
          Trump as the candidate, with a chance of winning should scare the bejesus out of everyone. The man is mad.

          • mikesh 3.1.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 10:09 am

            Trump at the moment has an outside chance of becoming president; but without his “political incorrectness” he would have no chance whatsoever, so perhaps much of it is for electoral purposes only.

    • AmaKiwi 3.2
      17 March 2016 at 12:12 am

      Andre

      This was a primary open only to democrats. There is no assurance Clinton will carry Florida against Trump or any Republican.

      • Andre 3.2.1
        17 March 2016 at 6:27 am

        Sure. But in the states that are likeliest to matter in November, the Democrat voters appear to be solidly behind their likely eventual nominee.

        I’d be really worried if Sanders had won solidly in all the swing states, but Clinton got the nomination because of strong support in the other states. Because then there would be a big risk enough swing state Sanders supporters would just stay home in November, tipping it to the Republican.

  4. joe90 4
    16 March 2016 at 2:23 pm

    Burn

    OhNoSheTwitnt ‏@OhNoSheTwitnt

    Breaking: Rubio aborts campaign

    OhNoSheTwitnt
    ‏@OhNoSheTwitnt

    Fitting that Marco Rubio aborted his campaign not because it was it was his choice but because some men decided for him.

    https://twitter.com/OhNoSheTwitnt/status/709905698516279297

  5. weka 5
    16 March 2016 at 3:21 pm

    I’m glad Rubio said this this week before he stepped aside (I wouldn’t call it an emotional tirade so much as a man speaking the truth when he doesn’t normally).

    http://www.upworthy.com/marco-rubios-emotional-tirade-against-donald-trump-is-required-viewing-for-every-voter?c=ufb1

    If you don’t want to listen to the protestors, there’s a conservative saying it. You’ve been warned America, but I guess that’s the point, it doesn’t matter, because the Trumpites support violence so long as you are on the right side.

    • Mike C 5.1
      16 March 2016 at 3:41 pm

      @Weka

      I love Donald Trump … and I am a Middle Right Voter.

      Thought that most of the folks around here would want Trump to become President of the United States … because he is against the TPPA?

      Oh that’s right … Hillary is also not backing it. LOL.

      So do Labour Party Voters support Clinton or Trump … because I am confused by the hypocrisy.

      • Andre 5.1.1
        16 March 2016 at 4:13 pm

        You’ll get along just fine with Colonial Viper.

        • Mike C 5.1.1.1
          16 March 2016 at 4:18 pm

          @Andre

          That’s fantastic !!!

          I don’t feel so alone in here anymore.

          Thanks for that.

          You have become my friend. (Smiley Face).

      • weka 5.1.2
        16 March 2016 at 4:34 pm

        What did you think of what Rubio was saying in the video?

        • Mike C 5.1.2.1
          16 March 2016 at 4:54 pm

          @Weka

          That it is a shame that the Republican Party Heirachy didn’t allow Rubio to speak his own mind previously … instead of all of the practiced media responses that Rubio has given to the Media prior to that.

          Rubio seemed almost normal in that video footage … and you have to wonder why he didn’t speak out like that much earlier?

          • weka 5.1.2.1.1
            16 March 2016 at 4:57 pm

            I think it’s obvious why he didn’t, but I was asking you what you thought about what he was saying about Trump.

            • Mike C 5.1.2.1.1.1
              16 March 2016 at 5:10 pm

              @Weka

              That what Rubio was saying about Trump could be true.

              Does that give you the answer you want and need?

              Because even though that video was about an hour long … and I only watched the start of it … that is the conclusion I came to in that short space of time.

              • weka …
                16 March 2016 at 6:09 pm

                The vid is 16 mins and no that doesn’t answer my question.

                • Mike C …
                  17 March 2016 at 8:44 am

                  @Weka

                  With all due respect … I gave you an answer that was my own personal view of what Rubio was saying about Trump.

                  Perhaps you could clarify your question further for me.

      • DoublePlusGood 5.1.3
        16 March 2016 at 4:36 pm

        If you love Donald Trump you cannot in any reasonable way be considered “Middle Right”.

        • Mike C 5.1.3.1
          16 March 2016 at 5:02 pm

          @DoublePlus

          I love “The Donald” and I have always been a Middle Right Voter … and … sometimes my personal Political views go to the Left.

          See if you can figure all of that out. LOL.

          • DoublePlusGood 5.1.3.1.1
            16 March 2016 at 10:52 pm

            All it really tells me is that your views are not consistent with each other and thus warrant you thinking critically about them more.

            • Mike C 5.1.3.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 8:51 am

              @DoublePlus

              So because I am a Centre Right Voter … I am not allowed to sometimes agree with the Lefts Political Policies … or like Donald Trump?

              I didn’t know that there was a Rule Book stating this to be so. LOL.

        • alwyn 5.1.3.2
          16 March 2016 at 5:39 pm

          Just remember the old (1964) parodies of Goldwater’s campaign slogan.
          They applies perfectly to Trump
          “In your heart you know he’s right, far right”
          or, and this really applies to Donald “In your guts, you know he’s nuts”

  6. Ad 6
    16 March 2016 at 5:10 pm

    Off you go Sanders.
    You’re just not going to make it.

    • weka 6.1
      16 March 2016 at 6:12 pm

      why do you care?

    • Olwyn 6.2
      16 March 2016 at 6:51 pm

      I don’t think you get it Ad. Primarily, Bernie leads a movement. If he gets the nomination, and then goes on to become president, the movement will be beside itself with joy. If he doesn’t, the movement will still be there, and hopefully still building and exerting its influence. People need hope, and whenever I see these dismissive remarks of yours, I feel personally affronted. It comes across as if you think that those the establishment can’t be bothered with should just give up.

      • weka 6.2.1
        16 March 2016 at 8:06 pm

        +1 Olwyn

        I don’t get it. I can understand someone supporting Clinton, but the antipathy towards Sanders from a leftie strikes a bum note.

        • North 6.2.1.1
          16 March 2016 at 8:56 pm

          If you look at Ad closely Ad’s always been like that. Almost like he/she doesn’t want Lefties to fuck up his/her ‘consumateness’ in whatever Ad thinks he/she is so consummate at. Can’t be bothered looking back but I’m thinking that Ad was just the same about Corbyn. Happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.

          Ad is Borat……ah ah ah sorry Borad.

        • North 6.2.1.2
          16 March 2016 at 9:06 pm

          Ad’s a Leftie maybe but he/she is a wahanui first……a big mouth who thinks the extent of the world is the extent of his/her cogitations. He/she is a boring oppressive fuck in my book. With a superiority complex hard. To be straight up.

          • Ad 6.2.1.2.1
            17 March 2016 at 7:47 am

            Just relax a little.

            People who dish it on Clinton should take a little gentle ribbing.

  7. Chooky 7
    16 March 2016 at 5:11 pm

    Interesting that the troops don’t have much faith in Hillary…and favour either Sanders or Trump

    ‘US troops divided between Trump and Sanders over military hotseat’

    https://www.rt.com/usa/335731-us-troops-divided-sanders-trump/

    “US troops are split between the ‘all guns blazing’ Republican Donald Trump and the anti-war Democrat Bernie Sanders on the issue of which presidential candidate should assume supreme control of the armed forces.
    While political commentators still debate whether foreign policy is seen as a major issue by regular US voters, the fact that somebody new in 2017 will have their finger on the button for war surely plays on the minds of the country’s military personnel.

    After all, it is these men and women – based in around 150 countries – that will be doing the hard yards on the battlefield…

  8. Wayne 8
    16 March 2016 at 5:21 pm

    Well, its increasingly looking like Clinton versus Trump.

    I don’t see any prospect of Sanders eclipsing Clinton. He would need around 65% in all of the upcoming primaries to beat her. That is not going to happen. In fact the reverse is more likely. As it becomes clearer that Clinton has an insuperable lead, Sanders support will drain away. As someone who supported Hillary Clinton in 2008, it is good to see that her time has now finally come.

    I have in fact been surprised that Sanders has done as well as he has. He has always seemed to me an improbable, and in my view a potentially dangerous (by this, I don’t mean he is reckless) President. But he would be isolationist and in my view the world would be much worse with an isolationist America.

    In fact this is the same charge that I would also level against Trump. His nativist, protectionist stance would be dangerous for the world. The last time it was tried, in the early 1930s with the imposition of protectionist tariffs, it turned the 1929 Wall Street crash into a world wide depression.

    Nevertheless Trump is likely to be the Republican nominee. He will go into the convention with probably 45%+ delegates. The next closest, Cruz I guess, will have less than 35%. It would be pretty hard to deny Trump the nomination in those circumstances.

    So all power to Hillary in November this year.

    • Ad 8.1
      16 March 2016 at 5:30 pm

      That’s the logic your felliw Republicans will have when they go through a super-mess convention, have a few ’68-style riots of their own, and figure it was Hillary all the way.

      Hillary will get it done.

    • Mike C 8.2
      16 March 2016 at 5:43 pm

      @Wayne

      What’s the story about the possibility that Hillary Clinton might be charged with an offense in the mean time prior to the actual Presidential Election?

      There has not been anything much said at all about Clintons alleged misdemonours in the media.

      So if she goes to prison after she perhaps gets elected as the President of the United States … then what happens next?

      • Phil 8.2.1
        16 March 2016 at 6:08 pm

        The VP becomes President.

        • Mike C 8.2.1.1
          16 March 2016 at 6:23 pm

          @Phil

          Yeap … but who is the Vice-President of the USA likely to be at this point in time if Clinton becomes President?

          Clinton doesn’t want Sanders as her Deputy … so who is she likely to pick right now?

          • North 8.2.1.1.1
            16 March 2016 at 7:24 pm

            I’m tripping now…….Bill ?

          • joe90 8.2.1.1.2
            16 March 2016 at 10:23 pm

            Julian Castro, I reckon.

          • AmaKiwi 8.2.1.1.3
            17 March 2016 at 12:34 am

            “Clinton doesn’t want Sanders as her Deputy” Really?

            That’s a very tough call to make. She might want Sanders inside the tent pissing out rather than outside the tent pissing in. Like Cheney and Biden, Sanders is too old for a White House run in 8 years, so she doesn’t have to worry about Sanders stabbing her in the back. She’d like to have his young first time voters.

            There are many reasons she might not want Sanders. But don’t rule him out. They have been amicable towards each other in the debates.

            Not even his close advisers imagined JFK would want Johnson as V-P. But he offered him the spot because JFK needed Johnson’s southern votes to win the White House.

            • Ad 8.2.1.1.3.1
              17 March 2016 at 7:51 am

              If it was West Wing season 7 Clinton would go for a southerner as well.

              Or California. Pelosi?

              Or if she wants real policy attack, Warren.

            • Phil 8.2.1.1.3.2
              17 March 2016 at 10:02 am

              In a ‘normal’ election season, I’d say the running-mate pick doesn’t matter much at all. But the enthusiasm of Sanders’ support might be a significant factor to consider in his favour.

              On the other hand, the VP is responsible for heading up the Senate (and has deciding vote in the event of a tie?). The 2016 senators up for re-election are those that were last elected in the 2010 republican ‘wave’ election and there is a good chance the senate could be tied (the Dems would need to win back four seats, which is an entirely realistic prospect).

              If Clinton is president, she may want someone more compliant to the party line to head up the Seante.

              • Andre …
                17 March 2016 at 10:23 am

                Sanders also keeps his Senate seat until 2018 if he doesn’t become P or VP nominee. He replaced a Republican in 2007. There’s no guarantee Vermont would elect a Democrat to replace him.

                • Phil …
                  17 March 2016 at 11:01 am

                  If a sitting senator becomes P or VP, there is no vote to replace that individual. Instead, the Governor of Vermont has authority to appoint a replacement senator. The sitting (D) Governor is not standing for re-election.

                  Vermont leans strongly Democrat, so it’s unlikely the Republicans will pick up this senate seat through the back door.

    • Anne 8.3
      16 March 2016 at 6:48 pm

      Surprise me and come out and say it loud and clear Wayne. The thought of Donald Trump in the White House fills you with absolute horror.

      No diplomatic niceties – just a straight down the middle admission. Then I will know that both sides of the NZ political coin are as one on this frightening possibility.

      • Wayne 8.3.1
        16 March 2016 at 7:42 pm

        Anne,
        Not “absolute horror”, but I am clear in my support of Clinton above either Cruz or Trump. Having met her, she is real smart, has clear insight, has an international outlook, and has good and honourable intentions. However, I don’t have quite the fear of Trump as many on the left do. I suspect he would not be nearly as bad as many apprehend.
        But Hillary will be way better. Especially for New Zealand and the Asia/Pacific. And no doubt she will be hoping Obama gets TTP through on his watch, probably in the lame duck Nov to Jan session. That way it is done before she gets into the Whitehouse.

        • Anne 8.3.1.1
          16 March 2016 at 7:59 pm

          Can you not see the similarities between the modern day Trump rhetoric and the Hitler rhetoric of the 1930s? I’m far less convinced he would moderate his stance if he should gain the presidency. He may do so initially, but his megalomania is likely to ultimately increase in direct proportion to his increase in power.

          • Wayne 8.3.1.1.1
            17 March 2016 at 8:54 am

            Anne,

            The Hitler analogy should be reserved for the very worst. For instance Pol Pot, or Milosevic who both directly ordered the mass killing of tens of thousands of civilians. It is why the comparison has been made with ISIS, after they lined up thousands of people and machine gunned or beheaded them.

            Trump, might be boorish, loud mouthed and pugnacious, but he is not in the same realm.

            A better comparison is Berlusconi, or to take a New Zealand example, Muldoon. Neither were good for their respective countries. Maybe Hugo Chavez is also a comparison, but even that is probably going too far.

            As for Trum’ps megalomania, to the extent that it exists, the US political system, with its diverse sources of power and it checks and balances, would limit it. The US has a very robust democracy, and Trump cannot break it, even if he is the President.

            • crashcart 8.3.1.1.1.1
              17 March 2016 at 9:47 am

              I think you missed the point there Wayne. People are not comparing 1944 Hitler to Trump. It is the rhetoric he used when he was initially forming the Nazi Party. The xenophobic (then anti-semetic) statements. Inciting violence from his supporters against legitimate protestors.

              I doubt he would go full blow Hitler in the future but he seems to have read his play book on how to take power.

              • Wayne …
                17 March 2016 at 10:04 am

                Crashcart,

                Hitler is not the right comparison, and I had the 1930’s in mind, as well as the 1940’s, in my previous post.

                By the early 1930’s before he had become Chancellor, Hitler had tried the Munich putsch of 1923, he had written Mien Kampf, and there were the quasi -military Brownshirts, who used extreme violence (ie killed people).

                I am sticking with the Berlusconi comparison. To me it is by far the closest analogy to the Trump phenomena. It is also worth recalling that Muldoon personally punched protesters, and was quite proud of it.

              • Anne …
                17 March 2016 at 5:52 pm

                It is the rhetoric he used when he was initially forming the Nazi Party. The xenophobic (then anti-semetic) statements. Inciting violence from his supporters against legitimate protestors.

                Thanks crashcart. That is precisely what I meant. It’s interesting we have to dot every ‘i’ and cross every ‘t’ with these righties and yet the lefties are able to recognise the distinctions without any trouble. Something to do with open and closed mindsets perhaps?

        • North 8.3.1.2
          16 March 2016 at 8:49 pm

          Oh “Dr” what a spittling fuck you are…..there ya go…..”However, I don’t have quite the fear of Trump as many on the left do. I suspect he would not be nearly as bad as many apprehend.”

          A “suspect” which accommodates the likes of you to do the double-handed shake shake shake whatever the season. You are a piece of self-interested shit when it comes down to it Wayne.

          • Sacha 8.3.1.2.1
            17 March 2016 at 9:23 pm

            Dr Mapp has a doctorate. Those quote marks make you look like an ass, not him. Best to attend to the argument, not the person.

        • DoublePlusGood 8.3.1.3
          16 March 2016 at 10:56 pm

          “an international outlook” – yes, one that involves destabilising countries so she can create more terrorists to fight. Not a very smart international outlook.

        • One Two 8.3.1.4
          16 March 2016 at 11:27 pm

          “has good and honourable intentions…”

          Everyone has different levels of development, awareness and intuition

          That one is at a particularly low level

        • AmaKiwi 8.3.1.5
          17 March 2016 at 12:36 am

          “I don’t have quite the fear of Trump as many on the left do. I suspect he would not be nearly as bad as many apprehend.”

          Wayne, can you translate that into German so I can look up which German politicians said that in 1933?

      • North 8.3.2
        16 March 2016 at 8:40 pm

        Call on “Dr” Wayne to come up with real shit ? And not have the Tory Monocle fixed firmly on the main chance Anne ? Silly you !

        It’s not for nought he’s called “Main Chance Wayne in Sun or Rain”. Wayne wouldn’t compromise the Faustian possibility of Ambassador Wayne presenting credentials at the Faustian Trump White House (no one else wanting it…..awwh maybe Potato Hekia.) All for the good of The World of course yeah yeah yeah……and continued bludging/junketing on ‘The Gubmint’……theirs and ours.

        C’mon Anne……thought you knew your bludging Tories better than that.

  9. Wayne 9
    16 March 2016 at 6:12 pm

    Mike C,

    Yes I have been reading that. But I don’t see it happening.

    From what I understand the State Department emails on her own account were classified retrospectively. It does not seem any truly secret emails were ever in her own email account. It seems that it was material that would be classified in NZ as “restricted”, which is the lowest classification level, and in many cases it is hard to see why it is classified at all.

    But in the US, who knows what some zealous prosecutor will do?

    But surely it is really only a technical offence, if one at all.

    • Mike C 9.1
      16 March 2016 at 6:32 pm

      @Wayne

      How would I know anything about “Presidential Legal Shit and Stuff”?

      The other Clinton came close to being impeached … so why is it so hard to imagine that this Clinton couldn’t possibly be impeached?

      It happened to Nixon.

      One thing I have learned in life … is to “Never Say Never”.

    • RedLogix 9.2
      17 March 2016 at 7:59 am

      The issue may not pivot on the exact classification of the emails. The mere fact that she was conducting public business on a private server seems to contravene all manner of law and protocol relating to official record keeping.

      Or to put it another way; I simply cannot think of an innocent explanation for it.

  10. gristle 10
    16 March 2016 at 7:10 pm

    Trump, Rubio, whoever. Look at how the election will be stolen. Focusing on the primaries allow all sorts of robbery to occur.

    In low income suburbs the number of polling stations can be as low 20% the number of polling stations in more affluent suburbs on a pro rata basis.

    500,000 voters are being wiped from the role as people with the same first and last name committed felonies or they are thought to have double voted even though addresses do middle names are different. Note not actually double voted. This of course is happening most in swing states.And they focus on people with non white sounding names.

    Vote on a Tuesday to make it inconvenient for working people.

    Gerrymandering of Congress seats to get a majority

    Permanent exclusion of ex prisoners from the electoral role.

    Trying to make 600,000 Peuto Recians to have to show proof of citizenship and voter enrollment to vote.

    Each State having a choice on how votes are to exercised. Mechanical devices (remember the hanging chad) other have ballots and others have computerized systems.

    Each state stacks their state’s electoral commission with their dominent party hacks.

    Look how the election can be stolen cause it happened with Bush.

  11. millsy 11
    16 March 2016 at 10:28 pm

    Hopefully Sanders lands a place in Hillary’s cabinet.

    Perhaps Housing and Urban Development. I heard he did great things with regards to that area when he was mayor of Burlington, VT?

    • aerobubble 11.1
      22 March 2016 at 12:03 pm

      The republician party is a party of smoke and mirrors, it could get away with it because growth from cheap oil kept allowing them to destroy as the market kept picking up or papering over the mess. Not anylonger. Trump rightly spied a party over extended in its bullshit, out of touch with its consumer and highly leveraged that anyone on the ticket got little oversight and a weight of yes men to push them on.
      The Republician was and is a ethically corrupt party on steroids. Trump is just exposing how idiotic it has become, necessity, Republican white males aren’t enough anymore to get them over the line.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.