OT. The Donald Trump (and Politics) Momentum Thread

[HarthorneWingo]

What do y'all think are the chances that Hillary actually gets indicted?

Very slim. From what I've read, the FBI will ask for an indictment but DOJ won't pursue charges against her. Still, if that happens, it'll almost be worse for her because it will reinforce Clinton-entitlement and inside political favors, etc.

I can't wait for the GOP Convention in Cleveland. I hope they let them bring guns like they've requested. Hee haw!!!!

Yeah, I feel like the chances are slim as well. Powerful people in this country are rarely held accountable or face any real consequences. I'll continue to hope for this indictment tho

Talk about an "October Surprise"!

[nykballa2k4]

I don't even think Trump gets the nomination to be honest with you. There's the clause that the GOP can invoke that pretty much changes all of the rules of a primary which pretty much ensures that they can nominate whoever they want. I could see the GOP nominating a lame duck pretty much losing the election for themselves and hoping they come back stronger in 4 years. This has been a disastrous election cycle for republicans. These are possibly 3 of the worst candidates I've seen in a while....

I like Kasich's ideas of attaching education to jobs... Who do you think are "good" republican candidates? If you had to make one in a lab, what would they look like?

Honestly i'm pretty moderate but, I tend to lean Republican on most of the "important" issues. I think the problem with the Republican party is that it currently is promoting extremism because of the way the parties have really been divided since Bush. It's why guys like Donald and Cruz are so succesful. Cruz is a staunch religious conservative and I just can't stand the look of him to be honest and his matter of fact my way or the highway style. It really turns me off. There's not even an attempt tthere to reach across the aisle. Donald is donald... he's out there trying to outsmart the dumb public with headline making statements to grab attention... I see right through it an dcan;t vote for a guy who preys on the uneducated to vote for him...kasich I think is solid but, as stupid as thi smay sound he doesn't have the deameanor of a president to me and I think his foreign policy is bad. he just seems out of his element talking about it. I thought Marco Rubio was solid and could be molded but, he just showed a lot of inexperience in debates and just in general. I liekd Romney 4 years ago a lot. I thought he was a solid "reach all" candidate but, he was never going to beat the Obama hype train... Right now the biggest thing the GOp has to get over is the media stigma that they are a party full of racists and dinosaurs... I don't know if they can ever get over it tbh. Outspoken millenials tend to be liberal and it's hard to overcome the constant bombardment on facebook and other platforms that paint republicans in a negative light/ I actually thought Rand paul was and still could be a good candidate because he's in tune with younger people but, his economic policies are a little extreme. Could hold him back... but, I think he's the kind of guy that the repubs need to get behind and start turning some of their older voting base slightly more liberal in certain areas or we will be stuck with dinosaurs and extremists who can't win general elections for a while... I mean it's been time to give up the abortion thing and admit global warming is at least a threat. These things aren't that important in terms of actual policy work for presidents but, it's the type of chit the media preys on and can only hurt you. Either turn it into a non topic or change your views on it... just my opinion as an inexperienced 23 year old though haha

I totally agree with the extremist angle. I think both sides, because of their primary system, push hard for the far ends of their spectrum and tbh it is quite annoying. Our government is nearing a dark time because everyone in office is so steadfast in their politics that they dont WANT to make deals. Compromise is a dirty work and synonymous with weakness now.

A Republican should be more like a Libertarian, and to me, I would make a moderate true republican due to my beliefs (let states make a lot of their own calls). for example: I am pro-choice, I think that a real republican who does not believe in government overbearing, should be permitting choice. Much like Trump in the 90's, if I could pick whether to abort or not to abort a child that I had conceived, I would probably want to keep it. However, I am a male so I really think it's none of my business. Once they start putting babies in our kind though... wonder how fast peoples opinions will change!! To me a male being pro-life is the same as a Caucasian being pro-slavery. You may stand to gain, but you are in no way impacted by the consequences.

I think there are plenty of young republicans -- but in the north its cool to be liberal.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc3HiKQDPCQ[/youtube]

[nykballa2k4]

1992, just a thot but abortion rights is a big deal to most women and global warming is very much actual policy work of the president. if anything the whole planet could cook us to death pretty fast if carbon emisions are not controlled soon. it really is the # 1 issue on the planet and should be above all political party bs which is why repubs who did the climate denial thing are pos who deserve to be run out of office. the world doesnt have time for that petty lying. on this kind of issue your party has failed you so badly it is hard to imagine they can ever be taken seriously as a party overall. it will take one heck of a strong leader to pull them back together. the dems are full of corruption also but the chances of them acting on things that concern the fate of the planet are much higher than repubs who want to dismantle the EPA. who talks like that when you have lead in flint? its a messed up political system right now but the repubs are the biggest fukups

Lemme be honest with you: the climate issue is bigger than the president. Al Gore may have done more for the environment as a non-president than he could have in office. The private sector can really decide things. I do like what Obama has done with challenging companies to do better and hope it continues, but Tesla, for example, is probably the best shot America has at cleaning up its act. Meanwhile, we have to be very much concerned with China and their pollution rate.

[NBA Fan 1234]

There isn't enough Hillary talk in here, she most likely will be the next POTUS. I see her wiping Trump in the general election.

I actually think it's going to happen. Bernie is not going to beat Hillary in the primary (yay) and then it will come down to Trump / whoever the GOP gets behind if it's not Trump. So, two scenarios - 1) Trump 2) Other. If it's Trump, there is no doubt in my mind Hillary will win. If it's other, I still think odds are in Clinton's favor, but I can see it being a lot closer.

Been saying this from the beginning - Bloomberg should have run. If he had run, the presidential race would have been his to lose. I consider myself an independent because I'm all over the map on issues (much stronger military, pro choice, no guns, pro gay marriage, etc), but would have thrown my support 100% behind Bloomberg. As it stands, I think all the candidates are mediocre at best with them all erring on the side of just bad, so it's just the lesser of all evils - IMO, and I know I'm going to be in the minority, I think it's Clinton (even if she does give off an entitled aurora).

What do y'all think are the chances that Hillary actually gets indicted?

I think slim. I understand she used the government email for personal use, but the amount of publicity this is getting and a possible indictment is overkill - who the **** really cares (besides Bernie supporters and Republicans)? I don't think it's a big deal - give her a slap on the wrist and move on. Legal experts don't think she will get indicted either.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/21/law-professor-explains-why-hillary-clinton-wont/209438

[Fury]

There isn't enough Hillary talk in here, she most likely will be the next POTUS. I see her wiping Trump in the general election.

I actually think it's going to happen. Bernie is not going to beat Hillary in the primary (yay) and then it will come down to Trump / whoever the GOP gets behind if it's not Trump. So, two scenarios - 1) Trump 2) Other. If it's Trump, there is no doubt in my mind Hillary will win. If it's other, I still think odds are in Clinton's favor, but I can see it being a lot closer.

Been saying this from the beginning - Bloomberg should have run. If he had run, the presidential race would have been his to lose. I consider myself an independent because I'm all over the map on issues (much stronger military, pro choice, no guns, pro gay marriage, etc), but would have thrown my support 100% behind Bloomberg. As it stands, I think all the candidates are mediocre at best with them all erring on the side of just bad, so it's just the lesser of all evils - IMO, and I know I'm going to be in the minority, I think it's Clinton (even if she does give off an entitled aurora).

What do y'all think are the chances that Hillary actually gets indicted?

I think slim. I understand she used the government email for personal use, but the amount of publicity this is getting and a possible indictment is overkill - who the **** really cares (besides Bernie supporters and Republicans)? I don't think it's a big deal - give her a slap on the wrist and move on. Legal experts don't think she will get indicted either.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/21/law-professor-explains-why-hillary-clinton-wont/209438

Bloomberg is intriguing on some issues, but loses me on his support for free trade

[CJackson]

1992, just a thot but abortion rights is a big deal to most women and global warming is very much actual policy work of the president. if anything the whole planet could cook us to death pretty fast if carbon emisions are not controlled soon. it really is the # 1 issue on the planet and should be above all political party bs which is why repubs who did the climate denial thing are pos who deserve to be run out of office. the world doesnt have time for that petty lying. on this kind of issue your party has failed you so badly it is hard to imagine they can ever be taken seriously as a party overall. it will take one heck of a strong leader to pull them back together. the dems are full of corruption also but the chances of them acting on things that concern the fate of the planet are much higher than repubs who want to dismantle the EPA. who talks like that when you have lead in flint? its a messed up political system right now but the repubs are the biggest fukups

Lemme be honest with you: the climate issue is bigger than the president. Al Gore may have done more for the environment as a non-president than he could have in office. The private sector can really decide things. I do like what Obama has done with challenging companies to do better and hope it continues, but Tesla, for example, is probably the best shot America has at cleaning up its act. Meanwhile, we have to be very much concerned with China and their pollution rate.

sure china is a big problem and dont forget india which had a massive increase in consuming and bad pollution controls so i agree the u.s. could clean up its act and those countries could still cook the planet. i do think it is going to happen but it looks like techies are really the only ones who can overcome it because philosophising wont get the job done. too much greed at the top. got to make clean tech too good to say no to and find a way to get away from burning carbons

[nykballa2k4]

1992, just a thot but abortion rights is a big deal to most women and global warming is very much actual policy work of the president. if anything the whole planet could cook us to death pretty fast if carbon emisions are not controlled soon. it really is the # 1 issue on the planet and should be above all political party bs which is why repubs who did the climate denial thing are pos who deserve to be run out of office. the world doesnt have time for that petty lying. on this kind of issue your party has failed you so badly it is hard to imagine they can ever be taken seriously as a party overall. it will take one heck of a strong leader to pull them back together. the dems are full of corruption also but the chances of them acting on things that concern the fate of the planet are much higher than repubs who want to dismantle the EPA. who talks like that when you have lead in flint? its a messed up political system right now but the repubs are the biggest fukups

Lemme be honest with you: the climate issue is bigger than the president. Al Gore may have done more for the environment as a non-president than he could have in office. The private sector can really decide things. I do like what Obama has done with challenging companies to do better and hope it continues, but Tesla, for example, is probably the best shot America has at cleaning up its act. Meanwhile, we have to be very much concerned with China and their pollution rate.

sure china is a big problem and dont forget india which had a massive increase in consuming and bad pollution controls so i agree the u.s. could clean up its act and those countries could still cook the planet. i do think it is going to happen but it looks like techies are really the only ones who can overcome it because philosophising wont get the job done. too much greed at the top. got to make clean tech too good to say no to and find a way to get away from burning carbons

As long as people keep buying things that are immoral, they will continue to happen: ie poor emission vehicles, "hard drugs," items created by unfair labor (sweatshop workers).

[Riot Randolph]

I like Kasich's ideas of attaching education to jobs... Who do you think are "good" republican candidates? If you had to make one in a lab, what would they look like?

Honestly i'm pretty moderate but, I tend to lean Republican on most of the "important" issues. I think the problem with the Republican party is that it currently is promoting extremism because of the way the parties have really been divided since Bush. It's why guys like Donald and Cruz are so succesful. Cruz is a staunch religious conservative and I just can't stand the look of him to be honest and his matter of fact my way or the highway style. It really turns me off. There's not even an attempt tthere to reach across the aisle. Donald is donald... he's out there trying to outsmart the dumb public with headline making statements to grab attention... I see right through it an dcan;t vote for a guy who preys on the uneducated to vote for him...kasich I think is solid but, as stupid as thi smay sound he doesn't have the deameanor of a president to me and I think his foreign policy is bad. he just seems out of his element talking about it. I thought Marco Rubio was solid and could be molded but, he just showed a lot of inexperience in debates and just in general. I liekd Romney 4 years ago a lot. I thought he was a solid "reach all" candidate but, he was never going to beat the Obama hype train... Right now the biggest thing the GOp has to get over is the media stigma that they are a party full of racists and dinosaurs... I don't know if they can ever get over it tbh. Outspoken millenials tend to be liberal and it's hard to overcome the constant bombardment on facebook and other platforms that paint republicans in a negative light/ I actually thought Rand paul was and still could be a good candidate because he's in tune with younger people but, his economic policies are a little extreme. Could hold him back... but, I think he's the kind of guy that the repubs need to get behind and start turning some of their older voting base slightly more liberal in certain areas or we will be stuck with dinosaurs and extremists who can't win general elections for a while... I mean it's been time to give up the abortion thing and admit global warming is at least a threat. These things aren't that important in terms of actual policy work for presidents but, it's the type of chit the media preys on and can only hurt you. Either turn it into a non topic or change your views on it... just my opinion as an inexperienced 23 year old though haha

I totally agree with the extremist angle. I think both sides, because of their primary system, push hard for the far ends of their spectrum and tbh it is quite annoying. Our government is nearing a dark time because everyone in office is so steadfast in their politics that they dont WANT to make deals. Compromise is a dirty work and synonymous with weakness now.

A Republican should be more like a Libertarian, and to me, I would make a moderate true republican due to my beliefs (let states make a lot of their own calls). for example: I am pro-choice, I think that a real republican who does not believe in government overbearing, should be permitting choice. Much like Trump in the 90's, if I could pick whether to abort or not to abort a child that I had conceived, I would probably want to keep it. However, I am a male so I really think it's none of my business. Once they start putting babies in our kind though... wonder how fast peoples opinions will change!! To me a male being pro-life is the same as a Caucasian being pro-slavery. You may stand to gain, but you are in no way impacted by the consequences.

I think there are plenty of young republicans -- but in the north its cool to be liberal.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc3HiKQDPCQ[/youtube]

extremists are far more prevalent in the Republican Party...they take the scorched earth approach time after time again I hate people placing blame evenly on both parties...Obama has been filibustered on close to 600 bills...more than three times of the previously most filibustered president...

[machu46]

What do y'all think are the chances that Hillary actually gets indicted?

Under 5%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[machu46]

I saw on Twitter (haven't verified for myself) that Trump's odds of winning the nomination are now below 50% according to the betting markets


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nykballa2k4]

Honestly i'm pretty moderate but, I tend to lean Republican on most of the "important" issues. I think the problem with the Republican party is that it currently is promoting extremism because of the way the parties have really been divided since Bush. It's why guys like Donald and Cruz are so succesful. Cruz is a staunch religious conservative and I just can't stand the look of him to be honest and his matter of fact my way or the highway style. It really turns me off. There's not even an attempt tthere to reach across the aisle. Donald is donald... he's out there trying to outsmart the dumb public with headline making statements to grab attention... I see right through it an dcan;t vote for a guy who preys on the uneducated to vote for him...kasich I think is solid but, as stupid as thi smay sound he doesn't have the deameanor of a president to me and I think his foreign policy is bad. he just seems out of his element talking about it. I thought Marco Rubio was solid and could be molded but, he just showed a lot of inexperience in debates and just in general. I liekd Romney 4 years ago a lot. I thought he was a solid "reach all" candidate but, he was never going to beat the Obama hype train... Right now the biggest thing the GOp has to get over is the media stigma that they are a party full of racists and dinosaurs... I don't know if they can ever get over it tbh. Outspoken millenials tend to be liberal and it's hard to overcome the constant bombardment on facebook and other platforms that paint republicans in a negative light/ I actually thought Rand paul was and still could be a good candidate because he's in tune with younger people but, his economic policies are a little extreme. Could hold him back... but, I think he's the kind of guy that the repubs need to get behind and start turning some of their older voting base slightly more liberal in certain areas or we will be stuck with dinosaurs and extremists who can't win general elections for a while... I mean it's been time to give up the abortion thing and admit global warming is at least a threat. These things aren't that important in terms of actual policy work for presidents but, it's the type of chit the media preys on and can only hurt you. Either turn it into a non topic or change your views on it... just my opinion as an inexperienced 23 year old though haha

I totally agree with the extremist angle. I think both sides, because of their primary system, push hard for the far ends of their spectrum and tbh it is quite annoying. Our government is nearing a dark time because everyone in office is so steadfast in their politics that they dont WANT to make deals. Compromise is a dirty work and synonymous with weakness now.

A Republican should be more like a Libertarian, and to me, I would make a moderate true republican due to my beliefs (let states make a lot of their own calls). for example: I am pro-choice, I think that a real republican who does not believe in government overbearing, should be permitting choice. Much like Trump in the 90's, if I could pick whether to abort or not to abort a child that I had conceived, I would probably want to keep it. However, I am a male so I really think it's none of my business. Once they start putting babies in our kind though... wonder how fast peoples opinions will change!! To me a male being pro-life is the same as a Caucasian being pro-slavery. You may stand to gain, but you are in no way impacted by the consequences.

I think there are plenty of young republicans -- but in the north its cool to be liberal.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc3HiKQDPCQ[/youtube]

extremists are far more prevalent in the Republican Party...they take the scorched earth approach time after time again I hate people placing blame evenly on both parties...Obama has been filibustered on close to 600 bills...more than three times of the previously most filibustered president...

"extreme" is a matter of perception. For example Bernie is CERTAINLY every bit as extreme as Trump or Cruz. Because of his popularity, Hillary has shifted some of her views to be more in line with Sanders supporters.

If I am a liberal, I probably watch news networks not named Fox much the way Jon Stewart does: I would not see liberal bias. Same viewer can CLEARLY see the conservative bias on Fox. News is sensationalist, so it makes sense in that genre. When it comes to the party's what we see are two sides that don't want to give each other inches because no one wants to be accused of being moderate (it seems). Certainly the insult on the Republican side is "you agree with Hillary" or "you voted for that Obama bill" both statements should not be insults! Similarly, when Bush was in office, the insult was to Democrats "you sound like you agree with Bush" or "you voted with Bush on..." It is politics. So I cannot agree that the republicans are more radical than the Dems.

[CJackson]

if it is not this election it will be a future election but america is going to elect a liberal president again. the younger generations will have greater influence. things that once could not get majority votes like gay rights have been moving more to the center for some time now. issues tied to the environment and social justice will gain momentum. the cracker mentality will still continue but not all of the kids from those families will wave confederate flags or be jesus voters like mom and dad

[CJackson]

I totally agree with the extremist angle. I think both sides, because of their primary system, push hard for the far ends of their spectrum and tbh it is quite annoying. Our government is nearing a dark time because everyone in office is so steadfast in their politics that they dont WANT to make deals. Compromise is a dirty work and synonymous with weakness now.

A Republican should be more like a Libertarian, and to me, I would make a moderate true republican due to my beliefs (let states make a lot of their own calls). for example: I am pro-choice, I think that a real republican who does not believe in government overbearing, should be permitting choice. Much like Trump in the 90's, if I could pick whether to abort or not to abort a child that I had conceived, I would probably want to keep it. However, I am a male so I really think it's none of my business. Once they start putting babies in our kind though... wonder how fast peoples opinions will change!! To me a male being pro-life is the same as a Caucasian being pro-slavery. You may stand to gain, but you are in no way impacted by the consequences.

I think there are plenty of young republicans -- but in the north its cool to be liberal.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc3HiKQDPCQ[/youtube]

extremists are far more prevalent in the Republican Party...they take the scorched earth approach time after time again I hate people placing blame evenly on both parties...Obama has been filibustered on close to 600 bills...more than three times of the previously most filibustered president...

"extreme" is a matter of perception. For example Bernie is CERTAINLY every bit as extreme as Trump or Cruz. Because of his popularity, Hillary has shifted some of her views to be more in line with Sanders supporters.

If I am a liberal, I probably watch news networks not named Fox much the way Jon Stewart does: I would not see liberal bias. Same viewer can CLEARLY see the conservative bias on Fox. News is sensationalist, so it makes sense in that genre. When it comes to the party's what we see are two sides that don't want to give each other inches because no one wants to be accused of being moderate (it seems). Certainly the insult on the Republican side is "you agree with Hillary" or "you voted for that Obama bill" both statements should not be insults! Similarly, when Bush was in office, the insult was to Democrats "you sound like you agree with Bush" or "you voted with Bush on..." It is politics. So I cannot agree that the republicans are more radical than the Dems.

the often complete unwillingness to compromise this past two presidential terms by the repub congress is the worst for many decades easily. they have been super petty to the point of shutting down federal operations and putting the country at great risk and still make that threat to shut down the govt. this extremism has not seen anything at all similar from the dem party in any of our lifetimes

[Riot Randolph]

extremists are far more prevalent in the Republican Party...they take the scorched earth approach time after time again I hate people placing blame evenly on both parties...Obama has been filibustered on close to 600 bills...more than three times of the previously most filibustered president...

"extreme" is a matter of perception. For example Bernie is CERTAINLY every bit as extreme as Trump or Cruz. Because of his popularity, Hillary has shifted some of her views to be more in line with Sanders supporters.

If I am a liberal, I probably watch news networks not named Fox much the way Jon Stewart does: I would not see liberal bias. Same viewer can CLEARLY see the conservative bias on Fox. News is sensationalist, so it makes sense in that genre. When it comes to the party's what we see are two sides that don't want to give each other inches because no one wants to be accused of being moderate (it seems). Certainly the insult on the Republican side is "you agree with Hillary" or "you voted for that Obama bill" both statements should not be insults! Similarly, when Bush was in office, the insult was to Democrats "you sound like you agree with Bush" or "you voted with Bush on..." It is politics. So I cannot agree that the republicans are more radical than the Dems.

the often complete unwillingness to compromise this past two presidential terms by the repub congress is the worst for many decades easily. they have been super petty to the point of shutting down federal operations and putting the country at great risk and still make that threat to shut down the govt. this extremism has not seen anything at all similar from the dem party in any of our lifetimes

thiier really is no comparison that's why repub like to engage in Symantec discussion...they filibustered causes they believed in...who would really filibuster first responders access to healthcare (zydroga)....nonsense

[nykballa2k4]

extremists are far more prevalent in the Republican Party...they take the scorched earth approach time after time again I hate people placing blame evenly on both parties...Obama has been filibustered on close to 600 bills...more than three times of the previously most filibustered president...

"extreme" is a matter of perception. For example Bernie is CERTAINLY every bit as extreme as Trump or Cruz. Because of his popularity, Hillary has shifted some of her views to be more in line with Sanders supporters.

If I am a liberal, I probably watch news networks not named Fox much the way Jon Stewart does: I would not see liberal bias. Same viewer can CLEARLY see the conservative bias on Fox. News is sensationalist, so it makes sense in that genre. When it comes to the party's what we see are two sides that don't want to give each other inches because no one wants to be accused of being moderate (it seems). Certainly the insult on the Republican side is "you agree with Hillary" or "you voted for that Obama bill" both statements should not be insults! Similarly, when Bush was in office, the insult was to Democrats "you sound like you agree with Bush" or "you voted with Bush on..." It is politics. So I cannot agree that the republicans are more radical than the Dems.

the often complete unwillingness to compromise this past two presidential terms by the repub congress is the worst for many decades easily. they have been super petty to the point of shutting down federal operations and putting the country at great risk and still make that threat to shut down the govt. this extremism has not seen anything at all similar from the dem party in any of our lifetimes

Any numbers to back that up? Or are you talking from your gut?
You are allowed to feel the way you do, but I feel like the government, on BOTH SIDES has been doing this for quite some time. Even the supreme court nomination debacle is a repeat of something the Dem's did. Obama's nomination was a great ploy, I don't think he would want it to go through, but he KNEW the republicans would say no anyway. good save-face move.

[nykballa2k4]

"extreme" is a matter of perception. For example Bernie is CERTAINLY every bit as extreme as Trump or Cruz. Because of his popularity, Hillary has shifted some of her views to be more in line with Sanders supporters.

If I am a liberal, I probably watch news networks not named Fox much the way Jon Stewart does: I would not see liberal bias. Same viewer can CLEARLY see the conservative bias on Fox. News is sensationalist, so it makes sense in that genre. When it comes to the party's what we see are two sides that don't want to give each other inches because no one wants to be accused of being moderate (it seems). Certainly the insult on the Republican side is "you agree with Hillary" or "you voted for that Obama bill" both statements should not be insults! Similarly, when Bush was in office, the insult was to Democrats "you sound like you agree with Bush" or "you voted with Bush on..." It is politics. So I cannot agree that the republicans are more radical than the Dems.

the often complete unwillingness to compromise this past two presidential terms by the repub congress is the worst for many decades easily. they have been super petty to the point of shutting down federal operations and putting the country at great risk and still make that threat to shut down the govt. this extremism has not seen anything at all similar from the dem party in any of our lifetimes

thiier really is no comparison that's why repub like to engage in Symantec discussion...they filibustered causes they believed in...who would really filibuster first responders access to healthcare (zydroga)....nonsense

- 1 for your stereotyping
+1 for the first responders bill.

[ToastinKP]

There isn't enough Hillary talk in here, she most likely will be the next POTUS. I see her wiping Trump in the general election.

I actually think it's going to happen. Bernie is not going to beat Hillary in the primary (yay) and then it will come down to Trump / whoever the GOP gets behind if it's not Trump. So, two scenarios - 1) Trump 2) Other. If it's Trump, there is no doubt in my mind Hillary will win. If it's other, I still think odds are in Clinton's favor, but I can see it being a lot closer.

Been saying this from the beginning - Bloomberg should have run. If he had run, the presidential race would have been his to lose. I consider myself an independent because I'm all over the map on issues (much stronger military, pro choice, no guns, pro gay marriage, etc), but would have thrown my support 100% behind Bloomberg. As it stands, I think all the candidates are mediocre at best with them all erring on the side of just bad, so it's just the lesser of all evils - IMO, and I know I'm going to be in the minority, I think it's Clinton (even if she does give off an entitled aurora).

What do y'all think are the chances that Hillary actually gets indicted?

I think slim. I understand she used the government email for personal use, but the amount of publicity this is getting and a possible indictment is overkill - who the **** really cares (besides Bernie supporters and Republicans)? I don't think it's a big deal - give her a slap on the wrist and move on. Legal experts don't think she will get indicted either.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/21/law-professor-explains-why-hillary-clinton-wont/209438

Media matters is run by David Brock............... Hillary used a private server to bypass FOIA requests because she did not want her solicitations for the Clinton Foundation and other matters to come to light.

[ToastinKP]

What do y'all think are the chances that Hillary actually gets indicted?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-pappalardo/hillary-email-probe-could_b_9579826.html

Here are some things that need to be understood regarding this email probe based on what has been reported. The LA Times recently reported that interviews are being arranged for the FBI to speak to HRC associates. This infers that all the preliminary investigation into this matter has been done.

The fact that subpoenas for interviews have been submitted and that one of HRC’s aides has been granted immunity means a grand jury exists to approve of the immunity and interviews.

Weeks ago it was revealed that Bryan Pagliano, the person granted immunity failed to inform his employers at the State Deptartment that while in their employ he was also employed by HRC to manage her private email server. Persons who have been US prosecutors with knowledge of the laws regarding the Clinton server have stated that it was unlawful of Pagliano to not inform his government employers he was also privately working for Secretary Clinton.

That he knew he was in violation because of this would be a strong motivation to cooperate with the FBI investigation. The crux of the case against HRC according to knowledgeable people of these laws have stated that the very existence of her private email server was a violation of law regarding national security.

We know Clinton never used the .gov email account that was created for her. It is very important to understand that HRC as Secretary of State was one of ten members of the government that had the authority to make a document classified. Like all government employees at this level, HRC signed a document that clearly states she is responsible and accountable for information that is classified regardless of when it is given the status of classified. This cuts through the smokescreen of the defense that documents that went through HRC’s private server were later identified as classified and that is all she had done. She was expected by way of law to know which material by its inherent nature was deemed worthy of this classification. We know that at least 22 of her emails were not only classified but identified as SAP. Special Access Programs (SAP) are considered “highly classified” documents. It appears quite likely she broke national security laws during her time as Secretary of State.

[mg]

I've come to the conclusion HRC is the choice of the establishment. She is the corporatist NWO choice. There is little difference between GOPelites and DNC elites. GOP elites would rather see the status quo in Hillary over Trump.

On each side of the aisle we do see candidates that were anti-TPP, anti-Iraq war, self funders (Sanders and Trump). Neither of those guys have the blessing of the elites of their party. They would both have huge issues trying to get their agenda passed thru the senate or house. I would still like to see at least one of them on the ballot in November to give American voters a real choice. In my mind the establishment vs grass roots is a bigger war than Dem vs Republican. Unfortunately the globalists have been winning for a long time and I have my doubts either Trump or Sanders will make it past the vipers in their own parties.

[nykballa2k4]

I've come to the conclusion HRC is the choice of the establishment. She is the corporatist NWO choice. There is little difference between GOPelites and DNC elites. GOP elites would rather see the status quo in Hillary over Trump.

On each side of the aisle we do see candidates that were anti-TPP, anti-Iraq war, self funders (Sanders and Trump). Neither of those guys have the blessing of the elites of their party. They would both have huge issues trying to get their agenda passed thru the senate or house. I would still like to see at least one of them on the ballot in November to give American voters a real choice. In my mind the establishment vs grass roots is a bigger war than Dem vs Republican. Unfortunately the globalists have been winning for a long time and I have my doubts either Trump or Sanders will make it past the vipers in their own parties.

The system is a little sdrawkcabssa. In order to create a legitimate new party, it is important to find a cluster of like-minded states and have several members of whatever new brand of political ideology, run for various STATE positions. It appears that the only way for a non-party or independent to hold office is when you have guys like Liberman and Bloomberg change parties after becoming the status quo in their area.