Third Party & Independents Archives

Somewhere Between Smoke And Fire For Hillary

We were, and are being told by Hillary that she set up private email servers to conduct DOS business as a convenience. As more of her emails come dribbling out we are finding that convenience is only one reason for the outlawed servers. Recent emails are demonstrating the comingling of DOS and Clinton Foundation business and operations. What she really needed was a way to hide these communications from inquiring minds, the people/voters.

I think we can all agree that this comingling of gov't and private business is nothing new and both parties engage up to their eyebrows. But, what is new is to have it in black and white.

As with her FBI investigation Hillary will claim there is no quid pro quo or maybe that everybody does it, and so on - - - Just as she can't admit to misuse of classified information, she can't admit to comingling gov't and private business. That's understandable but, her ship is sunk, IMO..

It seems astoundingly amazing, strike that, sounds biggly amazing that the Clinton dynasty would be so elite and so arrogant as to try something like this. While most any barely astute person would realize that hackers are hacking anything that is digital with relative ease the Clintons were either willing to risk it all or, what was it Bernie said, " I could give a damn about your emails", and so on - - -

While this won't back off many Hillary voters I think it will embolden some Indies, some 3rd party folks and maybe a few disgruntled repubs to vote for Trump as a means of preventing Hillary from a win. Her base will stick with her to a man/woman and I still worry about Florida. Some 500k starving Porto Ricans have moved to Florida and may very well have been the calculus for a Hillary win. But, alas - - -

More emails to come over the next couple of months. I'm confident that, come Nov, Hillary will be on the ropes.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by Roy Ellis at August 10, 2016 2:01 PM
Comments
Comment #406710

When the e-mail conspiracy theory died at Comey’s conference, conservatives were devastated. They had been banking on that one for a year, and it turned out to be a big fat zero. Coming on top of the ignominious end of the Benghazi investigation, it was even rougher. I predicted the e-mnail CT would die hard.

This article is a good example.

When someone actually has proof of wrongdoing, an indictment, trial, or conviction, by all means, let me know.

Until then, I’m not interested in entertaining it. Party on, Garth.

Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2016 2:24 PM
Comment #406712
While this won’t back off many Hillary voters I think it will embolden some Indies, some 3rd party folks and maybe a few disgruntled repubs to vote for Trump as a means of preventing Hillary from a win.

Nothing in the world is going to embolden any Indies, 3rd party folks, and disgruntled repubs to vote for Drumpf. They’re all running away from him like he’s shouting out “UNCLEAN, UNCLEAN” wherever he goes. The flight from Drumpf has increased to such an extent that it looks like HRC45 will win in a landslide. The GOP is scrambling to save whatever scraps they can hold on to.

Posted by: oraoghaile at August 10, 2016 2:35 PM
Comment #406716

Not only do polls show voters are NOT moving towards Trump, they are really not moving towards the Libertarians or Greens either, which is something of a curiosity. For all the talk about the supposed voter dissatisfaction with Clinton and Trump, the fact is voters have been moving towards Clinton in a big way.

This is not surprising. First, HRC has the wind at her back. Obama is completing his presidency with some of the highest approval ratings ever. Right now, he is in the low 50’s, and that is a half-dozen points higher than when he won re-election in 2012. Second, HRC has a superb campaign organization. Regardless of the daily ins and outs, she is positioned to do the tough work of GOTV. It gives her a slim advantage in a close race, and a huge one if it is not close. Third, her strategy is superior. Having consolidated the Democratic base, the left, and the Sanders voters, HRC has been reaching out to the middle and disaffected Republicans. Finally, she is blessed with extremely weak opponents.

Again, it is a curios thing that the Libertarians seem to offer the best alternative, but because they lack a wind at their back in the form of Obama, the economy, and so on, they start with no momentum. Second, they have a shadow of the campaign which HRC has put together. Third, if they have any overarching strategy, it is a mystery. The moderates of the GOP should be easy pickings, yet the Libertarians cannot do better than high single digits/low double digits.

Trump is even worse shape. His campaign is a shambles, disorganized and barely even present in state after state. He depends on free press, yet routinely attacks the media. The idea seems to be to appeal only to a narrow base, to deepen already existing support, rather than broaden his appeal.

This will not work. Not even close.

Finally, Trump is a terrible candidate, and his message is horrible, such as it is.

The GOP seems to be resting its hopes on conspiracy theories, a Russian cyber attack, or an assassination attempt by 2nd amendment people. Not a very good strategy. In the meantime, Trump will attack the media and claim the election is rigged. What a mess of a candidate!

Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2016 4:33 PM
Comment #406717

My Leftie Pals seem to be surprised that tyrants and would-be dictators are loved by the populace at first, and despised when those they rule discover the price they pay.

Anyone paying attention knows that unchecked liberalism leads to socialism and perhaps worse ism’s.

We live on borrowed money, promise things we can’t deliver and blame the opposition and rich for both.

Mr. Looney Tunes brags about how fantastic our less than 1% growth in GDP is and…THE BEST WE CAN EXPECT FROM OBAMA AND HIS MINIONS.

Mr. LT also brags about how many have left the work force to make the unemployment number look great.

The Left admits that the number on government aide has never been greater and would like to see that number increase.

We will most likely experience even greater threats to our nation by the Left before the ship is righted by vote or by arms.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 10, 2016 5:17 PM
Comment #406719

“We will most likely experience even greater threats to our nation by the Left before the ship is righted by vote or by arms.”

Maybe your Russian buddies will help you.

And lest anyone forget, here is Royal Flush begging for foreign countries to engage in cyber warfare against Hillary Clinton:

“If any person, country or entity possess the missing Hillary emails I urge them to share now.” Comment 406400

Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2016 5:29 PM
Comment #406720

Mr. LT keeps being silly. That’s good…a silly person is easily defeated.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 10, 2016 5:44 PM
Comment #406721

“We will most likely experience even greater threats to our nation by the Left before the ship is righted by vote or by arms.”

If the vote does not go your way, you want to settle the matter with arms?

Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2016 6:12 PM
Comment #406723

Do you require a class in remedial reading and comprehension phx?

I wrote “greater threats to our nation”.

Given serious enough threats; undermining our Constitutional Rights, further usurpation of congressional duties by executive power, spending that greatly erodes the value of our currency, confiscation of middle class wealth by obscene taxes, assaults on religious liberty, refusing to keep our citizens safe from foreign or domestic violence, and more…for example, would legitimize the use of force by citizens to correct as envisioned by our Founders.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 10, 2016 6:41 PM
Comment #406724

Royal, at some point we may need a good revolution to get us straight.

Our problems started in 1886 with the corrupt SC of that era passing a law to give corporations some rights as humans.

Since humans die and corporations live on in perpetuity it’s not hard to understand how corporations and gov’t officials teamed up to give us rule by corpocracy/oligarchy.

So, now 1% owns 90%. How obscene is that? That in and of itself should push us to revolution. And, it will at some point.


The GOP has made an effort to hide their participation in corpocracy but the dems? Just look at the elite arrogance being demonstrated by Hill and Bill what with their comingling of business and gov’t, throwing national security to the wind in doing so.

Like my bottom line quote; we have the corpocracy we deserve. It is really the fault of the voters who have delivered us to this point. Like, I could not believe that Obama won in 08 and after 4 years of his crap I was totally blown away by his winning in 12.

Now folks are lining up to vote for a corrupt political dynasty but by now I am not surprised. Neither was I thrilled by the bland platforms proposed by the 16 GOP’ers.

At this time Trump is the closest thing we have to a revolution. At least we can call a time out and force the establishment to reconsider.

Maybe we will get a useful 3rd party going after Trumps 1st or 2nd term.

Otherwise - - -

Posted by: roy ellis at August 10, 2016 7:43 PM
Comment #406725

Roy,
Trump wants to LOWER corporate taxes.
Hillary Clinton does not.

Trump wants less regulation so American workers can compete with foreign ones by foregoing safety and environmental regulations. He wants lower wages. He said this quite clearly. He has switched his position on the minimum wage so many times, I have no idea what he says now.
Hillary Clinton favors regulations beneficial to American workers. She favors an increase in the minimum wage.

Trump wants to decrease taxes on the richest of the rich. He was very clear about this.
Hillary Clinton wants to increase taxes on the richest of the rich and Wall Street.

Trump wants to repeal Dodd-Frank.
Clinton wants to keep it.

It is a mystery how you can talk about the corporatism, yet favor Trump. Do you understand the difference between the candidates on corporate taxes, income taxes, regulation, Dodd-Frank, and the minimum wage?

Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2016 7:50 PM
Comment #406729
It is a mystery how you can talk about the corporatism, yet favor Trump. Do you understand the difference between the candidates on corporate taxes, income taxes, regulation, Dodd-Frank, and the minimum wage? Posted by: phx8 at August 10, 2016 7:50 PM

Drumpf is the essence of everything corporatist.

Apparently, his kids have had to take his tweeter away. What’s next, Lithium? Thorazine? I used to enjoy listening to the news.

A friend of a friend told me that Julian Assange has been working for Drumpf all along. So people are saying that. You can broadcast it, because I said so. I’m outraged. Make it a headline. Then I’ll deny having said it.

Posted by: oraoghilie at August 10, 2016 8:43 PM
Comment #406731

Roy,foolish wishful thinking has been the conservative approach to Hilary for decades now. According to you guys she is, without a doubt, the most intelligent women in the world. She has committed so many serious crimes and ethics violations and yet has emerged without any criminal charges against her.

I know you like to believe it is because she somehow controls so many people in government she is untouchable. But this delusion just isn’t so. We have had 8 years of repub witch hunts, 20 plus years of conservative hit men and nothing, zippo zilch nada.

At what point in time do you guys throw in the towel and admit you have either been outsmarted by Hillary or you have been a victim of conservative movement leaders blowing smoke up your a**.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 11, 2016 12:35 AM
Comment #406736

More on Trump as the corporatist candidate:

Just look at his economic team! He selected 13 guys. Only three of them are actually economists. There are no women. No blacks. There are six guys named Steve. And most of them are hedge fund managers and banksters!

Meanwhile, yesterday Trump didn’t just jump the shark again, he dragged it out by its tail and waterboarded the poor thing.

“ISIS is honoring President Obama. He’s the founder of ISIS. He’s the founder of ISIS. He’s the founder. He founded ISIS. And I would say the co-founder would be crooked Hillary Clinton.”

Yeah. He said that. In a follow-up interview, Hugh Hewitt attempted to fix this:

HEWITT “I think you meant Obama created the vacuum that led to ISIS.”

TRUMP: “No, I meant he’s the founder of ISIS.”

Not only is that patently false, stupid, and insulting, it is dangerous as well. Somewhere out there his crazier supporters will actually believe this and act out violently.

Posted by: phx8 at August 11, 2016 12:13 PM
Comment #406737

oraoghilie, a friend of a friend? Are they the voices in your head?

Believing what you hear/make up without finding out if it’s true is called IGNORANCE!

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 11, 2016 12:16 PM
Comment #406739

I listened to Obama say he was giving support to people fighting in Syria. He gave them arms without finding out who they are and what their true motives were.

Thank God for partisan blinders, eh phx8? Without them you would have no political p o r n to get you off.

Did you notice how wrong you were about Brexit? AGAIN!

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 11, 2016 12:24 PM
Comment #406740

WW,
I have no idea what you are talking about, either in respect to Syria (we armed someone we should not have armed?) or Brexit.

The exchange rate for the pound is 1.30. It has not recovered. A weakened currency has a lot of bad side effects. Meanwhile, the British economy is nosing over into recession. It is probably already in one, but that does not become official until there are two consecutive quarters of negative growth.

Notice how the politicians supporting Brexit disappeared from public view? Boris Johnson refused to become P.M. The extreme right winger Farage (UKIP) resigned for supporting Brexit.

Did you know Putin and the Russians pushed for Brexit? They want to see the EU weakened, as well as western alliances in general.

Posted by: phx8 at August 11, 2016 1:05 PM
Comment #406741

phx wrote;

“Hillary Clinton favors regulations beneficial to American workers.

Hillary Clinton wants to increase taxes on the richest of the rich and Wall Street.”

Does anyone actually believe this nonsense? This liberal writer is so gullible.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 11, 2016 1:46 PM
Comment #406742
Not only is that patently false, stupid, and insulting, it is dangerous as well. Posted by: phx8 at August 11, 2016 12:13 PM

The question then becomes, why is the news media covering this nonsense and giving Drumpf the free publicity that he seeks? It’s like having The National Enquirer and worse stuck in our faces every day. It’s all just a big joke that Drumpf is playing: ” If I lose, it’s OK … I go back to a very good way of life”

RNC head Priebus told Drumpf that he would have been better off had he spent the days since the Republican convention at his Mar-a-Lago Club.

Posted by: oraoghaile at August 11, 2016 2:27 PM
Comment #406743

I find it interesting that those on the Right were unjustly called racists for not voting Obama.

To date, I don’t recall anyone writing that the Right is anti-woman for not liking Hillary. Apparently they understand why Hillary is held in such low esteem by us.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 11, 2016 2:30 PM
Comment #406744

I wonder what my Libbie and Socialist Pals think of this?

Muslim flight attendant sues airline over serving alcohol requirement

“According to the Michigan chapter Council on American-Islamic Relations, the lawsuit blames the airline for failing to provide Stanley “a reasonable religious accommodation and wrongfully suspending her from her employment.”

http://www.aol.com/article/2016/08/11/muslim-flight-attendant-sues-airline-over-serving-alcohol-requir/21449608/

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 11, 2016 2:39 PM
Comment #406745

What nonsense? It is a matter of record, whether we look at the Democratic party platform, Hillary Clinton’s platform, her campaign, or the speech on the economy she gave today.

None of this is a mystery. She is painfully specific about policies.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/11/pf/taxes/hillary-clinton-taxes/index.html

Posted by: phx8 at August 11, 2016 2:40 PM
Comment #406746

Poor phx…he can’t escape the pablum being fed to him despite how often he has been told it is steak.

Attention Democrats: Stop Promising Not to Raise Middle Class Taxes

“The Congressional Budget Office estimates that raising the top two marginal tax rates by 1 percent would bring in an extra $10 billion in revenue. Increasing the payroll tax cap on maximum taxable income from $113,700 to $177,500 and taxing capital gains as ordinary income would each bring in approximately $50 billion. A financial transaction tax would increase revenues by $18 billion. These four policies combined would increase revenue by 0.8 percent of GDP. That’s a substantial amount, but it’s nowhere near enough to reduce our long-term debt and fund liberal priorities.

That’s why it’s a mistake for Democrats to promise not to raise middle class taxes. If the Democratic presidential nominee makes that a campaign pledge in 2016, it’s going to limit what they can accomplish if they win the election. Winning elections isn’t very useful if you prevent yourself from governing along the way.”

https://newrepublic.com/article/118336/obamas-promise-not-raise-middle-class-taxes-makes-governing-harder

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 11, 2016 3:06 PM
Comment #406747

Poor phx…he can’t escape the pablum being fed to him despite how often he has been told it is steak.

Attention Democrats: Stop Promising Not to Raise Middle Class Taxes

“The Congressional Budget Office estimates that raising the top two marginal tax rates by 1 percent would bring in an extra $10 billion in revenue. Increasing the payroll tax cap on maximum taxable income from $113,700 to $177,500 and taxing capital gains as ordinary income would each bring in approximately $50 billion. A financial transaction tax would increase revenues by $18 billion. These four policies combined would increase revenue by 0.8 percent of GDP. That’s a substantial amount, but it’s nowhere near enough to reduce our long-term debt and fund liberal priorities.

That’s why it’s a mistake for Democrats to promise not to raise middle class taxes. If the Democratic presidential nominee makes that a campaign pledge in 2016, it’s going to limit what they can accomplish if they win the election. Winning elections isn’t very useful if you prevent yourself from governing along the way.”

https://newrepublic.com/article/118336/obamas-promise-not-raise-middle-class-taxes-makes-governing-harder

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 11, 2016 3:07 PM
Comment #406749

Will promises made by Hillary be kept unlike those made by Obama?

phx is a believer now and was a believer before. He was lied to then and is being lied to now.

In an October 2008 presidential debate with McCain, Obama said: “But there is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments. Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.”

Also in 2008, Obama said it was “unpatriotic” for the Bush administration to have added $4 trillion to the national debt in eight years.

From 2009 through 2012, President Obama presided over a $5 trillion increase to the U.S. national debt.

During the 2008 campaign, President Obama promised to “sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of [his] first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”

Obama initially stated that his plan would cost no more than $940 billion over a ten-year period. But a subsequent CBO report found that the actual cost to taxpayers would be $1.8 trillion.

During the campaign, Obama made “a firm pledge”: “No family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase – not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”

Obamacare, and the increased healthcare costs it imposes on people through the individual mandate as well as its higher costs in general, also constitutes a heavy tax on millions of middle-class people. Indeed the Supreme Court in 2012 definitively called it a tax.


Feb. 4, 2009 – Just sixteen days into his presidency, Obama signed into law a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco – a hike of 62 cents per pack. The median income of smokers is just over $36,000.
March 23, 2010 – Obama’s health care bill enacted two dozen new or higher taxes (at least seven of which violated his “firm pledge” on taxes), including:
— Individual Mandate Excise Tax
— Employer Mandate Excise Tax
— Small business 1099-MISC Information Reporting
— Surtax on Investment Income
— Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans
— Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax
— Medicine Cabinet Tax
— HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike
— Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax”
— Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers
— “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of Adjusted Gross Income
— Tax on Indoor Tanning Services
— Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage
— Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike
— Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals
— Tax on Innovator Drug Companies
— Tax on Health Insurers
— Biofuel “black liquor” tax hike
— Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”

During the campaign, Obama said that lobbyists “won’t work in my White House.” “They are not going to dominate my White House,” he said at a rally.

Obama broke this pledge immediately upon taking office in January 2009, when he nominated William Lynn as deputy to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. At the time, Lynn was a senior vice president at Raytheon, which has billions of dollars in Defense Department contracts. Obama’s transition office explained the decision: “Because Mr. Lynn came so highly recommended from experts across the political spectrum, the president-elect felt it was critical that he fill this position.” During his first two weeks in office, Obama nominated 17 lobbyists for Administration posts. There were many others after that. This source says that by January 2012, Obama had appointed nearly 100 lobbyists.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama spoke of the importance of maintaining “border security,” saying: “We can’t just have hundreds of thousands of people coming into the country without knowing who they are.”

In August 2011, President Obama issued an executive order to prevent potentially thousands of cases in federal immigration court from moving forward if they did not involve criminals or people with flagrant immigration violations.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1642


Posted by: Royal Flush at August 11, 2016 3:36 PM
Comment #406751

Royal, fair to say the globalists/corpocratists have lied to the voting public for a couple of hundred years. Has there ever been a president who has worked to carry out their nomination platform?

Hindsight is 20/20 and we can be sure that Hillary, if she is elected, will suddenly feel like she has shaped the TPP into something she can sign. But, right now she needs to be against it as Bernie supporters are against it and she needs their votes.

This is the reason i propose a new 3rd party w/a/dif/pol/att. Founded in rules that allow the membership to kick out a pol that doesn’t follow thru with what they said they would do. Not on every issue but for two or three major issues that a big majority endorse.

Otherwise — - -

Posted by: roy ellis at August 11, 2016 8:53 PM
Comment #406753
Will promises made by Hillary be kept unlike those made by Obama?

Royal, you fool, Obama has an excellent track record on promises kept. Wanna see how well repub Congressional leadership did during the Obama administration?


Posted by: j2t2 at August 11, 2016 9:32 PM
Comment #406757

Politifact? You believe Politifact? How gullible can you be?

And coming from USAToday! Geesh j2t2, you’d believe any rag as long as it suits your agenda, yes?

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 12, 2016 8:12 AM
Comment #406758

Weary, whats not to believe, an accurate reflection of the facts? You may have noticed the reference Royal used only gave part of the story? Well that would be “any rag as long as it suits your agenda”.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 12, 2016 8:30 AM
Comment #406760
Well that would be “any rag as long as it suits your agenda”. Posted by: j2t2 at August 12, 2016 8:30 AM

Some of the people can be fooled all of the time. Ask whoever is left of the “good Nazis”.

Posted by: oraoghilie at August 12, 2016 10:49 AM
Comment #406761

j2t2 writes; “Royal, you fool, Obama has an excellent track record on promises kept.”

LOL…except for all those broken promises I shared with you. Isn’t it odd that j2t2 doesn’t refute all the broken promises? He would rather shine a light on some promises that were kept.

I guess no liberal wants to address the article from New Republic I quoted. As far as I know, New Republic is a Left Wing publication.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 12, 2016 12:54 PM
Comment #406767

If it wasn’t for Bill Clinton we wouldn’t be in this mess. It’s all Clinton’s fault. If you disagree with that you must be a racist.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 12, 2016 3:47 PM
Comment #406778
LOL…except for all those broken promises I shared with you. Isn’t it odd that j2t2 doesn’t refute all the broken promises? He would rather shine a light on some promises that were kept.

Living up to the fool part of my comment I see, Royal. You choose to look at only the negative for Obama ignoring the fact that he made good on almost 75% of his promises! Further you try to convince us, erroneously, that there is a connection between Hillary and Obama on promises made despite the fact Obama has an excellent record on keeping election promises. How embarrassing this grasping at straws must be for you guys.

You also choose to ignore the fact that repub leaders in Congress have a worse record than Obama when it comes to keeping promises. Sorry if the facts have caused this charade to back fire on you though.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 12, 2016 7:31 PM
Comment #406785

The only thing Republicans did wrong was to let the Democratics destroy the country.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 13, 2016 7:19 AM
Post a comment