[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[ukfan758]

It's being carried by CNN now.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-2016/index.html
Washington (CNN)The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee released a scathing statement Friday, calling on Hillary Clinton to "come clean" after the State Department released an email in which she asked an aide to send information on a non-secure system after attempts to send the document securely failed.

Sen. Chuck Grassley said the email, released at about 1:30 am Friday morning along with about 3,000 other emails from Clinton's State Department tenure, is "disturbing," and "appears to show the former Secretary of State instructing a subordinate to remove the headings from a classified document and send it to her in an unsecure manner."

Is this official or just CNN copying another outlet's article? If it is, this could be huge.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I wonder if there's a chance Bernie will run as an independent. This is probably his last kick at the cat.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I wonder if there's a chance Bernie will run as an independent. This is probably his last kick at the cat.

I think he's doing a lot better than most people see. Mainly because all the media cares about are Trump and Clinton and their f-ups. Other than that hiccup last month, he's been a hell of a lot cleaner than those two.

 

[DK]

Speaking of Bernie doing a lot better than most people see: http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...nders-makes-strong-showing-in-new-polls/?_r=0

The poll, carried out in Iowa by NBC, the Wall Street Journal and Marist, puts Clinton on 48%, only three points ahead of Sanders on 45%. The poll also puts Ted Cruz into the lead on 28% ahead of Trump on 24%. The opinion polls were carried out amongst likely voters in both the Republican and Democratic caucuses, with a margin of error of +/-5%.

 

[Dotini]

Is this official or just CNN copying another outlet's article? If it is, this could be huge.

Hillary in an interview denied a crime had occurred. And CBS and most mass media seemingly are temporizing and obfuscating, awaiting any louder public outcry. However you slice it, the issues of honesty and trustworthiness hang like ever-heavier millstones around her neck.
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/hillary-clinton-responds-to-latest-email-controversy/

Edit: Even more questions about the latest emails, now dragging in the NSA.
http://observer.com/2016/01/hillarys-emailgate-goes-nuclear/

 

[mustafur]

Once Iowa is done you get a clear picture, or close to it. Most times the favourite gets turned on their head.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Fox Business announced their Debate line up.

On the Kiddie Table:
Sen. Rand Paul
Carly Fiorina
Gov. Mike Huckabee
Sen. Rick Santorum

On the Adult Table:
Donald Trump
Sen. Ted Cruz
Sen. Marco Rubio
Ben Carson
Gov. Chris Christie
Gov. Jeb Bush
Gov. Jon Kasich

All but one is participating. Sen Paul is skipping the debate all together, putting more time and effort in Iowa and New Hampshire.

 

[Swagger897]

When is this debate?

 

[Sanji Himura]

When is this debate?

See OP. All of the debates and primaries are there.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Apparently Rand doesn't want to sit at the kiddie table:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...fox-business-network-debate.html?intcmp=hpbt4

 

[mustafur]

Am i the only one who sees exactly how the media manipulate who succeeds here.

 

[FoolKiller]

Am i the only one who sees exactly how the media manipulate who succeeds here.

No. I've predicted nominees for the last two presidential elections based purely on media activity.

This year is harder due to the wild cards throwing a curveball at the media.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Am i the only one who sees exactly how the media manipulate who succeeds here.

No, you are not the only one who sees how the media is trying to manipulate who succeeds.

I am sure everyone has seen these first two videos, I am just posting them as sources. Both videos are longer than they need to be for my purpose here.

1. Hillary Clinton claims that ISIS is using videos of Donald Trump as a recruiting tool.



2. Donald Trump Calls Hillary Clinton a liar.



3. A Different group makes a recruiting video using Donald Trump.



Notice, at about 1:06 in this news report, the reporter says "Hillary Clinton said ISIS would produce videos, using Trump's travel ban as a recruiting tool..."

sorry no YouTube link for this
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/al-s...ideo-featuring-donald-trump/story?id=36052185

Notice at around 1:18 the reporter says: "This is the first known instance of extremists using Trump's language to attract followers, although not by ISIS as Hillary Clinton predicted." The reporter goes on to say, "The Democratic front runner ignited a war of words with Trump, when she warned that his rhetoric would become recruiting fodder."


So ABC News would have us all believe that Hillary Clinton's lie about ISIS using videos of Donald Trump was just a prediction?


Let's not forget What Mrs. Clinton actually said: "They are going to people, showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims in order to recruit more radical jihadists."

Edit:

This might seem like a small thing, but we are spoon fed crap like this all of the time. ABC is one of the big three networks in the US and ABC News is one of the most respected news organizations in the country.

Emphasis added

 

[1241Penguin]

Can someone please explain to this Canadian what it means that so-and-so Republican candidate is leading in the Republican polls? Does this mean that this candidate still needs to win some sort of vote to lead their party before they get a chance at the general election?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Does this mean that this candidate still needs to win some sort of vote to lead their party before they get a chance at the general election?

In a nutshell, yes. We colonials still use the Westminster system, which is completely different.

 

[Touring Mars]

Can someone please explain to this Canadian what it means that so-and-so Republican candidate is leading in the Republican polls? Does this mean that this candidate still needs to win some sort of vote to lead their party before they get a chance at the general election?

Yes. Before the Presidential election, both the GOP (Republicans) and the Democrats need to nominate a candidate to run for President. Both parties hold elections in every state prior to the Presidential election called Primaries, and based on the results, they send delegates to take part in the party's 'National Convention' - basically a final election which decides the nominee for each party. But it is not simply the candidate with the most votes that wins the nomination. Each state and each party has different rules as to how many delegates each candidate gets from each state... some states are 'Winner Takes All', some are proportional to the vote, and some are a mixture of both. Each state sends a different number of delegates, and the winner is whoever gets 50% +1 of the total delegate count (1237 delegates, to be exact).

This handy article explains how the current GOP frontrunner Donald Trump can be so far ahead in the polls but still fail to win the GOP nomination.

 

[Dotini]

It looks like Hillary Clinton has one foot in her political grave and the other on a banana peel:

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/01/...i-expanding-its-investigation-hillary-clinton
The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email as secretary of state has reportedly unearthed a "treasure trove" of financial improprieties related to the Clinton Foundation, Judge Andrew Napolitano said on "The Kelly File" tonight.

Judge Napolitano explained that a source told him about a possible intersection of Clinton's work with the Foundation and State Department business, which may have violated public corruption laws.


"I have a source that says the FBI has a 'treasure trove' of financial documents showing financial improprieties, as well as a pattern of decisions by Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state and favorable treatment to the people for whom she made the decision, and then contributions to the Clinton Foundation," Judge Napolitano said.

He added that the State Department released two new emails over the weekend that reveal Clinton showed an intention to deviate from her obligation to keep secrets secure.

He said it's hard to believe that the FBI - in the age of terror, no less - would be expanding its investigation into Clinton if it was simply a wild goose chase.

 

[huskeR32]

It looks like Hillary Clinton has one foot in her political grave and the other on a banana peel:

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/01/...i-expanding-its-investigation-hillary-clinton
The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email as secretary of state has reportedly unearthed a "treasure trove" of financial improprieties related to the Clinton Foundation, Judge Andrew Napolitano said on "The Kelly File" tonight.

Judge Napolitano explained that a source told him about a possible intersection of Clinton's work with the Foundation and State Department business, which may have violated public corruption laws.


"I have a source that says the FBI has a 'treasure trove' of financial documents showing financial improprieties, as well as a pattern of decisions by Mrs. Clinton as secretary of state and favorable treatment to the people for whom she made the decision, and then contributions to the Clinton Foundation," Judge Napolitano said.

He added that the State Department released two new emails over the weekend that reveal Clinton showed an intention to deviate from her obligation to keep secrets secure.

He said it's hard to believe that the FBI - in the age of terror, no less - would be expanding its investigation into Clinton if it was simply a wild goose chase.

A Fox News contributor "ha(s) a source" who says it is "possible" that some of Clinton's previous dealings "may have been" illegal?

This is some hard-hitting stuff.

 

[Dotini]

A Fox News contributor "ha(s) a source" who says it is "possible" that some of Clinton's previous dealings "may have been" illegal?

This is some hard-hitting stuff.

Yes, even if the FBI concludes its investigation with a case, it would be up to the attorney general Loretta Lynch, an Obama appointee, to prosecute. So there are politics and ambiguity complicating the future, a whole series of "ifs".

 

[BobK]

First of all, I don't believe Lynch will prosecute. And if she does, I think it's likely Obama will pardon her. Admittedly a pardon may hurt her chances in the election. And if she is prosecuted, I'm pretty sure it'll drag out until well past the election before it sees the inside of a courtroom. And if not, well she'll be far from the first in this country to run a campaign from a jail cell.

 

[Sanji Himura]

First of all, I don't believe Lynch will prosecute. And if she does, I think it's likely Obama will pardon her. Admittedly a pardon may hurt her chances in the election. And if she is prosecuted, I'm pretty sure it'll drag out until well past the election before it sees the inside of a courtroom. And if not, well she'll be far from the first in this country to run a campaign from a jail cell.

Oh, I doubt that. If Edward Klein is to be believed, Obama has been sabotaging the Clinton 2016 campaign since 2012. I will say this though, Klein is not a Obama man, and none of his sources are named, but here it is in all of its corrupt glory:

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/0...from-ed-kleins-bombshell-new-book-blood-feud/

It's number 7 on the list.

 

[CodeRedR51]

http://www.msnbc.com/way-too-early/...attacks-increase-600982595544?cid=sm_fb_msnbc

Reeling her in, slowly but surely.

 

[mustafur]

Now all we need is Paul to get back on top on the Republican side and we might just have the most genuine Election in modern history.

 

[Dennisch]

http://www.msnbc.com/way-too-early/...attacks-increase-600982595544?cid=sm_fb_msnbc

Reeling her in, slowly but surely.

The culture shock if Bernie becomes PotUS. It might be a bigger one than if Trump wins.

 

[Swagger897]

The culture shock if Bernie becomes PotUS. It might be a bigger one than if Trump wins.

Well, I don't know if there would necessarily be that much of a culture shock....


Except for those who are die-hard, open gun totting, N***** calling, jack-*** Trump supporters, then yeah, maybe a little bit.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well, I don't know if there would necessarily be that much of a culture shock....

Except for those who are die-hard, open gun totting, N***** calling, jack-*** Trump supporters, then yeah, maybe a little bit.

I'm sure the commie, pinko, socialist, tree hugging, rich hating, kumbaya singing Bernie fans would be quite happy if he won.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I'm sure the commie, pinko, socialist, tree hugging, rich hating, kumbaya singing Bernie fans would be quite happy if he won.

You forgot ignorant.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'm sure the commie, pinko, socialist, tree hugging, rich hating, kumbaya singing Bernie fans would be quite happy if he won.

You forgot ignorant.

Stay classy. 👎

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Stay classy. 👎

There is nothing wrong with calling the ignorant, ignorant. I suppose I could call them uninformed, but it doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

I don't think Bernie Sanders would have half the support he does if his young followers understood socialism.

Free education is what many of them see. They just don't understand that nothing is free.

 

[CodeRedR51]

There is nothing wrong with calling the ignorant, ignorant. I suppose I could call them uninformed, but it doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

I don't think Bernie Sanders would have half the support he does if his young followers understood socialism.

Free education is what many of them see. They just don't understand that nothing is free.

We see a true run for presidency with no BS or a candidate with serious personal issues unlike the top two idiots getting all the attention in the media.